Oakland loses appeal on coal ban

[alp227]

Source: East Bay Times

A judge’s ruling striking down Oakland’s ban on transporting coal through the city was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday.

In an opinion issued Tuesday, two of three judges on the panel upheld a lower court’s finding that the city breached its contract with a developer by attempting to block shipments of coal through a bulk terminal under construction at the former Oakland Army Base.

The coal controversy dates back to 2015, when Oakland officials first learned about a deal with Utah coal companies to haul their product by rail to Oakland to be shipped overseas. After months of community outrage, the City Council in July 2016 voted to prohibit the storing and handling of coal within city limits. The unanimous vote was directly aimed at developer Phil Tagami’s $250 million bulk terminal, located on the outer harbor near the Bay Bridge Toll Plaza.

Tagami, CEO of Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal, filed a federal suit in December 2016, claiming the council ordinance violated his 2013 agreement with the city to develop the land.

Read more: https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2020/05/26/oakland-loses-appeal-on-coal-ban/

---

Full decision: City of Oakland v. BP plc

The majority decision came from federal judges Kenneth K. Lee (Trump nominee) and Carlos T. Bea (GW Bush nominee), while the dissent was from Lawrence L. Piersol (Clinton nominee).

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Interstate Commerce case. Instead they should have made possession illegal.

That would have corralled more laws into enforcement.

[pecosbob]

2. Then tax the shipments locally at such an exorbitant rate that it becomes unprofitable

The practice will cause fairly severe environmental impact on the immediate area and so the creator of the hazard should rightfully pay restitution for that damage.

[former9thward]

4. Your proposal would lose twice in court.

First, the city can't put what is effectively a restriction on interstate commerce. Second, Oakland is not the immediate area of any environmental impact and so can't impose fees on the basis.

[pecosbob]

5. The transhipment of coal from the terminal will befoul the entire area of the terminal

I'm not talking about when the coal is burnt. I lived near a coke processing plant and it's filthy and gets everywhere.

[The Mouth]

3. This is exactly the thing the Interstate Commerce clause was written for

CA is dead wrong on this, constitutional law.