All American Asphalt Webinar -Where Do the Candidates Stand on This Issue?

  • October 31, 2020, 10:30 am America/Los_Angeles

On Thursday, October 29, Non-Toxic Neighborhoods along with the Stop Toxic Asphalt Pollutants in Irvine groups held a webinar to ask our Irvine Mayoral, City Council, and California State Assembly AD 68 candidates questions regarding All American Asphalt. The moderator for the event was Thomas Linzey, Senior Counsel for the Center for Democratic and Environmental Rights. Two candidates declined the invitation: Christina Shea and Mike Carroll. Candidate for City Council Mark Newgent did not attend the webinar but offered to do a video.

For background on this issue, please read, City of Irvine Fails to Address Health Hazards to Luxury Home Residents by All American Asphalt. To watch the event:

Panelists in Attendance (alpha order):

City Council Candidate Larry Agran
City Council Candidate Laura Bratton
Candidate for State Assembly District 68 Assemblymember Dr. Steven Choi
Mayoral Candidate Katherine Daigle
Candidate for State Assembly District 68 Councilwoman Melissa Fox
City Council Candidate Dylan Green
City Council Candidate Diana Jiang
City Council Candidate Lauren Johnson-Norris
Mayoral Candidate Councilmember Farrah Khan
City Council Candidate Tammy Kim
City Council Candidate Carrie O’Malley
City Council Candidate John Park

Yes/No Questions: 

  1. Did you know there was an asphalt plant located in Irvine next to Orchard Hills?
  2. Should the city have analyzed independent, peer reviewed safety and pollution studies and satisfied safety criteria prior to approving the development of communities near the asphalt plant?
  3. Is it the city’s responsibility to have instituted safeguards to ensure public health and quality of life on an ongoing basis?
  4. Should the city establish ongoing, independent, and transparent analysis of the emissions, such as air and water sampling, and institute a continuous review of public complaints?
  5. Should All American Asphalt and the Irvine Company share responsibility with the city in developing comprehensive air monitoring and exposure characterization followed by taking appropriate actions to ensure that the facility eliminate or control emissions that could cause adverse health effects and nuisance odors?
  6. Should any plan for community air monitoring developed by the “responsible parties” be reviewed in advance by independent experts?
  7. In light of the years long public outcry, would you continue to approve development of communities near the asphalt plant?
  8. Is the primary mission of the City of Irvine to protect its residents?
  9. This week’s Silverado fire threatened thousands of Irvine residents and their homes, not only with potential devastating fire destruction but also with toxic air pollution, and it highlights the potential increased risk All American Asphalt presents with the explosive danger of its toxic asphalt fumes.  Should the city undertake a comprehensive appraisal of the asphalt plant’s increased fire risk in a Preservation/Open Space area near residential areas and take appropriate action?
  10. Do you support the permanent relocation of the All American Asphalt plant?
  11. Is your political campaign sponsored by corporate entities, such as the Irvine Company or Five Points, or by individuals who may represent or have a vested interest in any corporation?
  12. Do you think The Irvine Company and the home builders should be held liable for not fully disclosing All American Asphalt and its potential negative effects on health and quality of life to home buyers prior to 2019?
  13. Until the public nuisance and health hazards presented by All American Asphalt are resolved, should builders suspend the construction of new homes in the vicinity of the asphalt plant?
  14. Do you think developers and home builders should also share responsibility for resolving the issue presented by All American Asphalt since they advertised a family friendly, safe and idyllic environment for future residents to enjoy?
  15. Should the city demand that South Coast Air Quality Management District install effective equipment surrounding the plant within the abutting communities to monitor and analyze the air quality and to accurately record and report violations?
  16. In light of the ineffective measures taken by South Coast Air Quality Management District, should Irvine take proactive actions to protect its residents?
  17. Should there be a scientifically predetermined safe distance between a residential area and an asphalt plant?
  18. Would you move your family to a home or allow your children to go to a school within 3 miles of an asphalt plant?
  19. Do you believe an asphalt plant can safely coexist with communities?
  20. Since its approval by the county, All American Asphalt has undergone some unpermitted expansion.  Should these unauthorized sections be shut down and permanently removed?
  21. Will the solution to the public health hazards and public nuisance presented by All American Asphalt be a top priority, and will you dedicate yourself to the health and well-being of Irvine residents.

Long Answer Question: 

The failure to disclose the proximity of this asphalt plant and the resultant adverse impact on the health and quality of life for our entire community are unacceptable.  If elected, how would you address the decision to allow the construction of homes and schools in such close proximity to an asphalt plant, the selling of homes to unsuspecting buyers without full disclosure, and, most importantly, the adverse effects on the community’s health and well-being?  What actions will you and the city take to protect not only the residents’ health and quality of life but also the residents’ property value?

Contributors:
Non-Toxic Neighborhoods
Stop Toxic Asphalt Pollutants