The Aliso Canyon CAG has been finalized

Source: Author

Before I get started on updating the public, I need to disclose that the information below represents my own views -- Dr. Mike Kaiser -- one of the CAG members serving presently on the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study.

Over the last few months, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has been coordinating the formation of the Community Advisory Group (CAG).  The function of the group will be to serve as a conduit of information both to and from the community regarding the Health Study from the largest Natural Gas blowout in history from the Aliso Canyon Gas Facility located in Porter Ranch (California).



Specifically, determine why the public had symptoms and illnesses after the clean-up (i.e., inspection by LA DPH of the region) which are not supported by science.  Science on which the Department of Public Health had available regarding natural gas storage facilities and blowouts.



The Los Angeles Department of Public Health has funds which were appropriated from the lawsuit with Southern California Gas and the government.  Of the total award of $113 million, $25 million was set aside for a Health Study to be conducted under the purview of LA DPH.  The history and background can be found by clicking here.  In addition to the formation of the Scientific Oversight Committee, LA DPH sought out to have a Community Advisory Group (CAG) to increase the transparency of the health study.  Therefore, the formation of the CAG was realized to fulfill this role.

First CAG Meeting: August 29th

The first official CAG meeting with all 19 members (chosen from the San Fernando Valley) met on August 29th at Granada Hills Charter High School.  Los Angeles Department of Public Health hired a facilitator (i.e. third party negotiator) to run the meeting.  The meeting was open to the public.  This same rule applies to all future meetings -- all meetings are open to the public. In addition, meeting minutes were taken along with audio and distributed to the CAG which is available by clicking here.

With that being said, not all public participants will be able to speak/participate in all topics -- due to time limitations and operational constraints.  Hence the need to have a Community Advisory Group to represent the community at large.  As noted above, the comments/meeting business will be reported on this blog site -- and all views/opinions are my own -- Dr. Mike Kaiser.



The meeting on August 29th started off with an introduction from LA DPH.  LA DPH (Los Angeles Department of Public Health in short) distributed guideline materials at the first meeting.  The materials can be found as attachments on the following link at the bottom of the page -- click here.  On the same page, the charter for the CAG can also be found.  The overall goal of the CAG is to serve as a conduit to and from the public to the Scientific oversight Committee for the Health Study on the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Blowout.

Tensions Run High

After introductions by all 19 members, the facilitator invited members of LA DPH to come up and give introductions to the CAG.  Shown above is a picture of the 19 members of the CAG at the meeting.  Tensions ran high at this meeting due to past relationships between the community and Porter Ranch/Chatsworth community members.



Why were tensions running high?



The manner in which LA DPH handled the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Blowout is a major point of contention.  Porter Ranch community member and reporter Patty Glueck has provided a thorough background from the community perspective (Read Here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4).  More will be reported on the relationship between the Los Angeles Department of Public Health and the Porter Ranch community members.



After introductions were finished between members of the CAG and Department of Public Health, the overview of the study and function of the CAG ensued.  Members of the CAG presented concerns about past mistrusts and relationship problems between the CAG and LA DPH.  The process took time to ensure that the current Health Study was not going to have the same (style) elements of past dealings between the CAG and LA DPH.  Mandi Bane took good notes on this section which can be found by clicking here.

Challenges and Solutions for CAG

The final part of the August 29th meeting was a participation activity with CAG members.  Each member was given an assortment of 'post-it' notes to list 'Challenges' and 'Opportunities' for the current Health Study.  The results are shown in two images below.



Opportunities:  

Challenges:

The opportunities and challenges were summarized by Mandi Bane below:

CAG members were provided 10 minutes to identify communications opportunities and challenges.

These were noted on Post-Its, which were then provided to the Facilitator for categorization (Complete listing of note contents is attached). Feedback included:

• Challenges

o Difficulty engaging people due to:

▪ Time passed since the Disaster

▪ Apathy

▪ Distrust in Public Health and other agencies

▪ Political agendas

▪ Sheer size of the impacted community

▪ Language and other accessibility issues

o Technical complexity of the issues

o Need for accurate data

o Need to understand and implement community concerns and ideas

The Facilitator then focused on the challenge of trust. CAG members were invited to participate in a round-robin discussion of trust. Feedback from CAG members included:

• Listening to the members of the public in the room on this (the Facilitator agreed to do this after CAG members had spoken first).

• Summary from CAG members:

o Statement there is a lack of trust in Public Health, especially by those involved in community activist groups.

o Statement there is a concern that CAG members will be seen as extensions of Public Health.

o Statement it is unlikely that the public will want to be involved, including as test subjects.

o Suggestion a ‘mea culpa’ is required from Public Health and the CAG and its members must be independent, separate to this.

o Suggestion all concerns communicated by the public to Public Health must be acknowledged, logged and shared with the CAG.

o Statement of continued concern over number and voting weight of independent members of the SOC.

o Suggestion for a truth and reconciliation process over changing goal posts (e.g. state Maximum Contaminant Levels versus federal Maximum Contaminant Levels).

o Suggestion for clarification on how this process will be different than others.

o Suggestion that all members read a draft CAG Charter prepared by some CAG members.

o Statement there is a need to significantly improve transparency.

o Identification of factual errors in background materials.

o Suggestion that an acknowledgment needs to be made that not enough was done and that people have valid health concerns.

o Suggestion that for the CAG to work, some issues need to be moved on from.

o Statement that there is insufficient information about the HRS and the CAG.

o Suggestion that all data should be publicly accessible (e.g. chemical compositions and concentrations).

o Statement that people buying homes should have been made aware of potential dangers from the Facility (pre-disaster).

The raw feedback from the CAG from the first meeting can be found by clicking here.  The above information summarized the first official CAG meeting on August 29th.  Stay tuned for future meetings and updates on the Aliso Canyon Health Study.



CAG Meeting #1 Documents and Proceedings:

1) Agenda

2) Minutes

3) Audio  -- Note: LA DPH has removed audio temporarily.  Link may not work.

4) Raw Feedback

5) Documents