Santa Barbara County approves ban on new onshore oil and gas wells in 3–2 vote

The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors voted 3–2 on Sept. 15 to adopt Phase 1 amendments to the Land Use and Development Code and the Coastal Zoning Ordinance that would prohibit drilling new onshore oil and gas wells in the county.

Supporters framed the narrow Phase 1 action as a lawful first step toward protecting public health and meeting the county’s 2030 Climate Action Plan goals. Tara Ranjifo, senior attorney with the Environmental Defense Center, told the board the ordinance is “lawful, defensible and a necessary first step” and cited state authority allowing local limits on oil and gas development. Pasha Madavi, a UCSB researcher, said his survey found roughly 65% countywide support for banning new wells and presented modeling that phasing out operations could reduce mortality‑related costs and climate damages.

Opponents said the prohibition could harm local jobs, raise takings and compensation risks for mineral owners and shift emissions and spill risks elsewhere. Eric Eisenhammer, public affairs director for an organization representing mineral and royalty owners, said royalty income supports families and warned that owners could be harmed. Jeff Jennings of the Pacific Legal Foundation argued the measure raises “serious constitutional concerns” and urged the board to vote no.

Board members pressed staff for details. Planner Corina Martin and other county staff said Phase 1 is limited to preventing new wells and determined to be categorically exempt under CEQA; staff said an amortization study and environmental impact report for existing operations are on a separate Phase 2 track that could take about three years. Staff also confirmed that, as of Sept. 2025, CalGEM records showed about 1,039 active onshore wells and 1,221 idle wells in county jurisdiction.

Supervisor Hartman moved to adopt staff recommendations; Supervisor Lee seconded. Roll call was: Hartman Aye, Lavinino No, Lee Aye, Capes Aye, Chair Nelson No. The motion passed 3–2. The board directed staff to submit coastal ordinance changes and the coastal land use plan amendment to the California Coastal Commission for review and certification.

The county will proceed with Phase 2, which staff said will include an amortization analysis, a budget process to fund an environmental document, and a study of investment‑backed expectations and potential legal exposure. County Counsel and staff repeatedly told the board they did not complete the Phase 2 analyses prior to the Phase 1 decision.

The board returned from closed session with no reportable action and adjourned until Sept. 22.