If you’ve been following the local saga of oil company Sable Offshore Corp., you know that it’s now become part of the current federal administration’s larger step backwards from renewables and advanced manufacturing to old-school extraction and fossil fuel production. This Santa Barbara story includes a serious pipeline spill, a permitting applicant ignoring state and local regulators, intrusion by the Trump Administration, the courts, California’s Attorney General, and the threat of barging crude oil directly from offshore platforms on the Central Coast to refineries in Los Angeles or elsewhere.
Santa Barbara County has historically been oil country. It featured the world’s first offshore oil wells in Summerland in 1896, and the area has seen extensive onshore oil development. But things changed dramatically after the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill dumped 4 million gallons into the ocean—the largest marine spill in the U.S. to that point—and ushered in the modern environmental movement.
Fast forward more than 55 years and in May of 2025, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, supported by local environmental groups, voted to initiate a plan to prohibit new oil and gas drilling and phase out existing oil and gas operations within the county. The county took this action as a response to global climate change and to create a template for other oil-producing jurisdictions looking to do the same. In addition to prohibiting new oil and gas development, the county is looking to sunset 1,030 active wells producing 2.7 million barrels of oil annually.
The potential impact of the plan is surely not lost on Exxon Mobil, which previously owned three local offshore platforms and transported oil via a pipeline which ruptured in 2015, releasing over 100,000 gallons of crude oil. It was “curious” that ExxonMobil then sold these offshore assets to Sable, a Houston-based company, for $643 million, with ExxonMobil financing 97% of the sale. This writer assumes that by this “sale”, big oil created a “stalking horse” entity, assuming it would have an easier time running the California regulatory gauntlet.
It did not!
The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors twice denied Sable’s attempts to transfer the necessary permits to restart the ‘Santa Ynez Unit’, as the 3 local offshore platforms, pipeline complex, and onshore Las Flores processing facility are collectively known. The Supervisors cited Sable’s “lack of diligence” in failing to notify agencies of repair work on the defective pipeline. The Santa Barbara County District Attorney also filed 21 criminal charges against Sable for allegedly discharging pollutants into local waterways during repair work. Last September, Sable submitted the required Request for Approval of Restart Plans to the California Office of the State Fire Marshal, which found there were still outstanding steps relating to fire risk before it could approve use of the pipeline. Additionally, the California Coastal Commission imposed a record-breaking $18 million fine on Sable for conducting unauthorized repair work on the Las Flores pipeline, including excavation without authorization, despite multiple cease and desist orders.
Sable, rather than proceed with the repairs required by California authorities, turned to the Trump Administration’s federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), which predictably granted the company authorization to restart the pipeline without completing the repairs required by California regulators. The approval by PHMSA is an attempt to usurp state and local laws by the federal government. PHMSA justified its decision based on interstate commerce and the country’s emergency need for oil. The pipeline never leaves the Central Coast, and the United States is the world’s largest producer of oil.
Sable’s turning to the Trump Administration prompted California’s Attorney General to file a lawsuit in the 9th Circuit, alleging PHMSA orders illegally assert exclusive jurisdiction over California onshore oil pipelines. In other words, California is calling out the Trump Administration’s attempts to federalize control of the golden state’s pipelines.
Regardless of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals initially denying a request from environmental groups to stay the restart of Sable’s operations, the 9th Circuit scheduled a full hearing on the matter for February 27. One of Sable’s more recent moves has now been threatening to barge crude oil directly from its offshore platforms to refineries potentially out of state. Such a play will hardly endear Sable to a community that has experienced oil spills that have devastated local coastline, wildlife, and ecosystems.
There’s a long way to go. What all of us need to understand is that oil production and its impacts on climate change will continue to be an issue on the Central Coast. Those of us who understand climate change as an existential threat must continue to support climate change measures, including opposing both the restart of the pipeline and re-start of local offshore oil development.
