Since 2015<\/a>, Oaklnd residents have opposed<\/a> the proposed coal terminal in West Oakland because of its potential environmental and health risks.\u00a0<\/p>\n They said said that the project would affect the health of people in West Oakland who already are dealing with industrial pollution from sources such as warehouses, a recycling plant and a cereal factory, as well as diesel trucks going through residential areas to the Port of Oakland. Others expressed concern about exposure to fugitive dust, or tiny airborne particles, from open-air stockpiles next to a windy waterfront.<\/p>\n Many of them said these facilities were a by-product of discriminatory zoning and redlining policies, which largely impact Black and brown communities.\u00a0<\/p>\n Margaret Gordon, a West Oakland resident and co-founder of the West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project, said in testimony<\/a> at the California State Assembly that the coal terminal will add to cumulative impacts that will harm future generations.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cI have 17 grandchildren and a great-granddaughter,\u201d Gordon said in the meeting. \u201cI want them to have the resiliency and the skills to deal with all these issues in the future, because it\u2019s not going to go away. I\u2019m just hoping that through this EIR, you all see our plight of constant issues and concerns that come back.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Opponents of the law say it unfairly targets OBOT and opens a legal precedent that may send bad signals to investors.\u00a0<\/p>\n Horacio Gonzalez, who represents the California Business Roundtable, said at the Assembly that the bill may deter investment in the state\u2019s \u201cgood movements ecosystem\u201d \u2013 a part of port operations that facilitates the buying and selling of goods between markets.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n OBOT has gone through a robust CEQA process, Gonzalez said in his testimony<\/a>. and \u201cobtained all the relevant approvals.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Colin O\u2019Brien, senior attorney at the nonprofit environmental law organization Earthjustice, said the project has not been subject to detailed evaluation. He added that an EIR will create more opportunities for scrutiny through public comment periods, which could push agencies and developers to implement more robust mitigation plans.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n He, alongside other supporters of the law, many of whom are members of the \u201cNo Coal in Oakland\u201d coalition, said the project still needs to complete extensive permitting: around 76 permits across 20 different agencies.<\/p>\n They also said the full extent of environmental risks from coal operations was not included in the project\u2019s initial EIR.\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"Port](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/image-1024x581.jpeg\")
Port of Oakland in West Oakland (All photos by Mary Mijares)<\/p>\n