Russell Kicks Off Race With Swipe at Two Projects

Chastened by the voters of her district, Los Angeles City Council President Pat Russell emerged from the woodshed Wednesday decked out in a pair of running shoes and a brand new attitude as she announced her opposition to two large and controversial industrial projects, the Angeles Pipeline and the Lancer trash-to-energy plant.

Her 17-year political career jeopardized by a reputation for insensitivity to neighborhood and environmental interests, Russell is trying to bounce back from a dismal 42% performance in the 6th Council District primary two weeks ago. Facing a June 2 runoff with challenger Ruth Galanter, Russell must persuade a dubious electorate that in becoming a City Hall power she has not become more preoccupied with brokering development deals than with answering phone calls from anxious constituents.

Shortcomings Blamed

Russell blamed her poor showing in the primary on a poorly run campaign and on her own political shortcomings.

“We did not get our story out. . . . I’m awfully oriented to doing the day-to-day job and not saying, ‘Oh gee, this is what I’ve done.’

“I’m sort of shy about that. . . . I feel pretty bad about it,” she said of the primary.

But the 63-year-old Russell appeared ebullient and battle ready Wednesday as she kicked off her runoff campaign flanked by friends, family and a new team of pricey political consultants who have been urging her to head into the runoff with the same verve that carried her through the recent Los Angeles Marathon.

In opposing the pipeline, which would carry 330,000 gallons of oil a day beneath the city from Sylmar to South Los Angeles, Russell was coming out against a project that has aroused a number of neighborhood groups and drawn fire from several other council members but would not traverse her district unless the route of the proposed 30-inch pipeline were moved west.

‘Disrupt Traffic’

“Construction of the pipeline would disrupt traffic, pose toxic dangers and create potential flammable hazards in our city at a time that we are working diligently to decrease that category of hazards from our earthquake-prone region,” Russell said.

Russell said she hoped that rejection of the pipeline would be followed by the removal of all local oil refineries, which she described as “the single largest source of air pollution in the basin.” The councilwoman’s position on the pipeline stands in marked contrast to her vote three years ago in favor of one of the city’s most bitterly disputed oil-related projects--Occidental Petroleum Corp.’s drilling in Pacific Palisades. That project, which also would require the construction of pipelines, is being fought for the same reasons Russell gave for opposing the Angeles Pipeline.

Asked about the consistency of her stands on the two projects, Russell said Wednesday that it did not make sense to spare Pacific Palisades when the city has approved oil drilling operations in many other areas of the city. But she said that approving the Angeles Pipeline would set an undesirable precedent, allowing the city to become a conduit for oil produced elsewhere.

Russell also argued that her rejection of the Lancer trash-to-energy plant proposed for South-Central Los Angeles--east of her district--did not run counter to previous positions taken on Lancer. While she did vote for preliminary approval of Lancer, she said she took action last fall to postpone a final vote until studies of health and environmental effects could be completed.

Concern Over Emissions

The huge waste-recovery facility, one of three planned for the city, is opposed by a number of neighborhood and environmental groups mainly because of studies revealing cancer-causing emissions in the exhaust of similar plants in other parts of the country.

“The recent conclusion of the initial studies of the Lancer project has convinced me that there are too many uncertainties about the level of pollutants to impose that burden on one neighborhood,” Russell said.

There was no hint that Russell was headed in a new direction when it came to a discussion of growth and development in the 6th District, the issues that the primary turned on and that could decide her fate in June.

Russell said she simply will try to be more persuasive as she reiterates to voters her argument that without her efforts, the development planned for the district would be far greater.

As a result of her negotiations with developers, she said, “we have some very good projects in the district.”