Criminal
Dec. 1, 2016
SoCalGas pleads guilty to misdemeanor in emotionally charged hearing over Porter Ranch
Southern California Gas Co. pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor charge Tuesday during an emotional hearing related to the Porter Ranch leak.
Daily Journal Staff Writer
SANTA CLARITA — After hearing emotional pleas from victims and impassioned arguments from intervening plaintiffs' attorneys seeking restitution, a judge Tuesday accepted an agreement in which Southern California Gas Company pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor charge related to the 2015 gas leak at Porter Ranch.
Calling the ordeal a "hideously complex situation," Superior Court Judge Alan S. Rosenfield declined to second-guess a deal between the Los Angeles County district attorney's office and SoCalGas that did not include victim restitution.
The utility company pleaded guilty to failing to timely report the natural gas leak when it occurred. More than 2,000 households were displaced as a result of a pipe leaking methane.
Per the agreement, Rosenfield ordered the company to spend about $4 million to upgrade its infrastructure, including $75,000 in fines, and dismissed the remaining three misdemeanor counts.
The money will be spent by the utility to install new methane monitoring systems, revise policies, conduct training, hire and maintain six full-time employees for monitoring gas leak devices, and pay the Los Angeles County Fire Department for its costs in responding to the accident. People v. Southern California Gas Company, 6SC00433 (L.A. Super Ct., filed Feb. 2, 2016).
Prior to the sentencing, an army of plaintiffs' attorneys representing the more than 7,000 victims involved in civil litigation against the utility argued that sickened residents — many of whom reported being afflicted with bloody coughs and nausea — were entitled to compensation.
Brian Panish of Panish Shea & Boyle LLP, who represents many of the victims, said the state "bargained away the victims' right to restitution."
In making his decision, Rosenfield said the prosecutor controls the charges and dictates the terms of the plea agreement, adding the court has more leniency in probation cases. However, probation was not part of the agreement, he said. "The people have not abused their discretion," said Rosenfield, referring to the district attorney's office.
Plaintiffs' attorneys argued that the prosecutors could have ordered restitution under count four, disseminating toxins into the air, but that charge was dismissed under the agreement.
SoCalGas attorneys said restitution could not be ordered under the convicting charge because it did not apply directly to the victims in the case, but rather to the timing of the reported leak. "They are not victims under count one," said SoCalGas attorney Manuel A. Abascal of Latham & Watkins. "You can't have restitution imposed on dismissed counts."
Long Beach attorney Brentford Ferreira, who represents victims, said the judge could have put SoCalGas on probation by making a finding that two counts the company was charged with — the emissions and failure to report emissions — were "transactionally related."
"The sentence you hand down with no amount of restitution will be unconstitutional and illegal," he told the judge.
Prosecutor Yael Massry, who handles environmental crimes, responded to the criticism by categorizing the terms of the agreement as restitution. "This plea serves the interests of justice and the public at large," said Massry.
Massry said penalties are typically small regarding environmental crimes while the concern for public safety is large.
Calling the judge's ruling a "legal technicality," plaintiffs' attorney R. Rex Parris of Lancaster reconciled the decision by saying the criminal justice system has not dealt with an issue so massive, where there are thousands of victims. "This is a multi-billion dollar company and they should be the last people to be given breaks," he said.
justin_kloczko@dailyjournal.com
Justin Kloczko
justin_kloczko@dailyjournal.com
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com