Oakland council votes to block coal-shipping plan

Hoping for more high paying jobs, Oakland resident Gregory Nash counter protests against those trying to bar coal from being shipped through Oakland before City Council meeting on Monday, June 27, 2016. Hoping for more high paying jobs, Oakland resident Gregory Nash counter protests against those trying to bar coal from being shipped through Oakland before City Council meeting on Monday, June 27, 2016. Photo: Scott Strazzante, The Chronicle Photo: Scott Strazzante, The Chronicle Image 1 of / 13 Caption Close Oakland council votes to block coal-shipping plan 1 / 13 Back to Gallery

The Oakland City Council voted unanimously Monday to block the handling and storage of coal in Oakland, effectively halting a developer’s controversial plan to ship coal from the port.

Hundreds of people crowded City Hall — and demonstrated outside — as seven council members weighed the proposal by Mayor Libby Schaaf and Councilman Dan Kalb to bar coal and petroleum coke from Oakland. Schaaf and Kalb advocated for their measure by arguing that these fossil fuels pollute the air and pose serious risks to workers and nearby residents. Councilwoman Desley Brooks was absent for the vote.

The new ordinance, which requires a second vote to be made final, would thwart Oakland developer Phil Tagami’s plan to export coal from a terminal near the east end of the Bay Bridge. It’s become the focus of a heated political debate, infuriating environmentalists and labor leaders but garnering support from some West Oakland residents who say it would create vital jobs.

“If a person doesn’t have a job, it’s going to affect their health — they can’t get the right kind of medical (care) they need for their families,” said Pastor Kevin Barnes of Abyssinian Missionary Baptist Church, denouncing the proposed legislation before the meeting.

Dueling demonstrators outside City Hall chanted, some waving red “No Coal Exports” signs while others demanded that the council support a project that could bring thousands of jobs to West Oakland.

The council chambers filled up quickly and an additional four rooms were opened up to accommodate residents. Dozens of people spoke at the public hearing, among them Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates and state Senate candidate Nancy Skinner, who both support the ban.

Josie Camacho, head of the Alameda County Labor Council, decried recent mailers sent by a shadowy pro-coal group called Jobs 4 Oakland. The mailers played on West Oakland residents’ economic desperation, Camacho said, by claiming the council would eliminate 6,500 union jobs by barring coal.

“We will not be threatened by the bogus jobs claim,” Camacho said at the hearing.

Assistant City Administrator Claudia Cappio initially pushed for a coal ban in a staff report published Friday afternoon. It cited a study by Oakland’s hired environmental consultant, ESA, which said that fugitive coal dust can damage vital organs, cause cancer and stunt children’s growth.

Developer’s caution

Tagami has said that any coal ban could stymie and perhaps derail his Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal project, which the city approved in a development deal three years ago. The shipping terminal is a key piece of a larger 130-acre development that Tagami’s company, California Capital & Investment Group, has undertaken at the long-defunct Oakland Army Base.

Concerns about the project surfaced in 2014, after Tagami’s shipping operator, Terminal Logistics Solutions, entered talks with four coal-mining counties in Utah. Leaders of those counties promised to invest $53 million in the Oakland terminal, on the guarantee that Utah coal would be exported from Oakland.

In March of this year, Utah’s Legislature approved the deal.

Although Oakland’s political leadership overwhelmingly supports the coal ban, some church and community groups have accused the city of trying to hamper a development that could produce high-paying construction and shipping jobs in a part of the city that desperately needs them.

‘A false choice’

Schaaf and several council members said they don’t buy that argument.

“I believe that ‘jobs versus the environment’ is a false choice,” said Councilman Abel Guillén, who has adamantly opposed the coal-shipping plan.

“All of us want the overall Army Base project to continue and flourish,” Kalb said. “We’re even OK with having a private terminal on city property,” Kalb said.

On the day of the hearing, Tagami’s attorney sent the city a letter saying that any coal ban would violate the 2013 development deal that gave California Capital & Investment Group the right to build the bulk terminal.

Gregory McConnell, a longstanding Oakland lobbyist who represents the terminal project, said that in approving the ban, the council could subject the city to hundreds of millions of dollars in legal liability.

“This is not going to end tonight,” he said.

Rachel Swan is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: rswan@sfchronicle.com

Twitter: @rachelswan