On the morning of Dec. 2, people quickly filled the folding chairs at the Avila Beach Community Center. Neighbors stood shoulder-to-shoulder along the walls. Some brought notebooks, others arrived with pamphlets, printouts, or posters.
Fourteen days earlier, the Port San Luis Harbor District Commission postponed discussion of a $3 million state grant after more than 80 people overflowed the boardroom. This time, at a larger venue, the turnout grew.
The grant—awarded through the California Energy Commission’s Offshore Wind Waterfront Facility Improvement Program—would fund planning and feasibility work for a potential offshore wind operations and maintenance terminal, should floating wind farms eventually be built off the Central Coast.
“The district applied for the grant in order to learn more about this opportunity,” Harbor Director Will Friedman told New Times. “It is not a commitment to move forward. It would give us resources to study feasibility, see what it would look like physically, what the impact might be, and what the benefit could be.”
Over the course of two hours, 52 of the nearly 100 community members took the microphone; 34 expressed support, 14 opposed the grant, and four offered alternative ideas, the Harbor Commission said.
Some attendees argued that even early planning could open the door to industrialization of the harbor. Several speakers warned that accepting the grant would signal support for transforming a small-scale recreational port into an industrialized one.
“People don’t want industrialized ports here. … That’s not what the Central Coast is for,” one community member said.
“As climate impacts intensify, it’s important that our region has responsibly explored opportunities for clean and renewable energy,” another said.
Harbor commissioners ultimately opted to defer accepting the grant, citing two ongoing county-led feasibility studies as a reason to wait. A county feasibility assessment approved in 2024 hasn’t yet been completed but will be released to the public once finished, commissioners explained.
Harbor Commission President Drew Brandy said the delay allows for a full review of the findings.
“We decided to go with the postponement so we could hear from the county of San Luis Obispo on what their studies will show to the public,” Brandy said.
Some local environmental organizations present at the meeting, including the SLO Climate Coalition, argued that delaying the grant slows progress at a critical time for climate and economic planning. Susan Callery, SLO Climate Coalition’s offshore wind coordinator, told New Times that research and planning are essential to preparing the region for a clean energy future.
“2024 was the warmest year on record. … We need a mix of renewables to be able to replace fossil fuels,” Callery said. “I’m a grandmother of two, and I’m fighting for their futures. A lot of us at SLO Climate Coalition have kids, and we just want a healthy planet for them.”
Callery cited support from national environmental organizations such as the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, the Surfrider Foundation, the Ocean Conservancy, and the National Wildlife Federation. She dismissed claims that offshore wind energy threatens whales, pointing instead to climate-driven warming and toxic algal blooms as major causes of marine mortality.
“There’s no evidence offshore wind kills whales,” she said. “We do know that the warming of the ocean and what’s winding up in the ocean, like our carbon dioxide emission, are killing sea life.”
Callery also highlighted the impending closure of Diablo Canyon Power Plant, the county’s largest employer and a key electricity source.
“Diablo will not last forever. Offshore wind could help fill that gap and bring long-term jobs. We need to know whether it’s viable, and that requires research,” she said.
The discussion comes nearly a year after President Donald Trump issued a memorandum temporarily withdrawing the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing and ordering a pause on new or renewed federal approvals for wind projects in January 2025.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) confirmed that the directive applies to California’s offshore wind leases, including those off Morro Bay.
According to BOEM, the memorandum “directs agencies to temporarily hold on issuing new or renewed approvals, rights of way, permits, leases, or loans for offshore wind projects pending a review of federal wind leasing and permitting practices, which applies to the five existing offshore wind leases off the coast of California.”
The order doesn’t cancel existing leases but freezes federal permitting until the review concludes, creating a layer of uncertainty for local planning and port infrastructure.
U.S. Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Santa Barbara) said that the federal policy does not affect the state-funded California Energy Commission grant under discussion at Port San Luis.
“The Trump administration’s decision to kneecap offshore wind will hurt our country’s energy sector and the thousands of jobs it supports,” Carbajal told New Times. “Undermining alternative energy not only hurts American workers and businesses, it hands the future of clean energy to global competitors like China. This is an ‘America Last’ policy approach.”
The California Energy Commission said that the grant awarded to Port San Luis stands independently from federal actions.
“The Waterfront Facility Improvement Program grants are state funded and not part of a federal program or use federal funding. We acknowledge there are uncertainties based on current federal opposition,” the Energy Commission told New Times in an email.
California’s offshore wind leases were the first deep-water offshore wind leases auctioned in the Pacific region. The five leases—three off Morro Bay and two off Humboldt County—cover a combined total of 583 square miles and could host multiple floating wind farms.
Because the Pacific waters off the Central Coast are deep, floating turbines anchored to the sea floor are required, along with new infrastructure such as undersea cables, offshore and onshore substations, and operations and maintenance facilities like the one being discussed for Port San Luis.
The proposed projects aim to contribute to state and federal renewable energy goals. According to the California Energy Commission, California plans to generate 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2045.
Whether Port San Luis is a viable site for an operations and maintenance port remains unknown. The pending grant could fund early research to answer that question.
The SLO Climate Coalition emphasized that understanding feasibility, environmental constraints, and community concerns before committing to construction is critical.
Callery stressed that offshore wind could complement existing renewable energy sources and help the region prepare for an eventual transition from fossil fuels.
“Even if it doesn’t happen immediately, it’s going to happen eventually,” she said. “We know that energy demand is increasing. Offshore wind can be part of the solution but we need to know whether it’s viable and environmentally responsible.”
The Harbor District plans to reconsider the $3 million California Energy Commission grant once the county feasibility studies are released. Harbor commissioners have not yet scheduled their next meeting. ∆
Reach Staff Writer Chloë Hodge at chodge@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Dec 11-18, 2025.
What happens now that Clean Energy Terminals has backed out of its agreement with the Port?
Carbajal is living in fantasyland. The majority of his constituents, those who are not paid lobbyists that show up at these public meetings to support offshore wind, are against industrialization of Port San Luis, Morro Bay and Cambria.
Rooftop solar and battery storage are much cleaner and cheaper than industrializing the ocean. This is just another PG&E supported project that keeps electricity expensive and threatens the environment.