As president of No Oil Inc., I have come to know James Garner and Ted Danson as dedicated environmentalists who care about the future of California's Coast as a natural resource to be enjoyed by California residents and non-residents alike. Phyllis Genovese's letter, misstating Garner's and Danson's remarks was, therefore, very disturbing.
Neither Ted Danson nor James Garner stated that the Occidental project involves drilling on the beach or in Santa Monica Bay. What they did say is that the oil field (of between 60 to 100 wells) proposed by Occidental, would be in the midst of active earthquake faults, and on a known, and active, landslide, which has evidenced slide activity as recently as 1986, killed one person, and destroyed the Pacific Coast Highway in 1958, and which has been labeled the "riskiest site in Los Angeles" by the president of the Los Angeles Planning Commission.
In addition Garner and Danson stated that, in their opinion, an oil field in Pacific Palisades, adjacent to the Will Rogers State Beach would lead to oil wells in the Santa Monica Bay.
As president of No Oil Inc., I appreciate both Garner and Danson's support and concur in their analysis. No Oil has long argued that the proposed Pacific Palisades site is unsafe and would lead to drilling in the Santa Monica Bay. The position that the site is dangerous has been supported by: rulings from the state Supreme Court and the Superior Court, as well as rulings against the project by both the City Planning Commission and zoning administrator. The position that an Occidental oil field adjacent to the Bay is perceived by oil interests as a prelude to opening the bay to oil interests, is supported by both Occidental's original submissions and the current federal Administration's interest in the bay as an oil field.
No Oil has, for the past 20 years, been fighting Occidental over oil in Pacific Palisades. During those years, it has become apparent that Occidental, and its supporters will manipulate facts wherever possible to gain an advantage. The misstatements by Genovese of both Garner and Danson's remarks is yet another sorry example of said manipulation.
ROBERT H. SULNICK