Loading...
Minutes 1986/04/08 ,... Roll Call r'l61 ) " I ',. L_ I April 8 t 1986 Special Joint Meeting of Gilroy and Morgan Hill Councils GilroYt California The Special Joint Gilroy/Morgan Hill Council Meeting was called to order in the Gilroy City Council Chamberst 7351 Rosanna Streett GilroYt Californiat at 7:09 p.m. Mayor Hughan led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Present: Gilroy Councilmembers: Sharon A. Albertt Donald F. Gaget Paul V. Kloeckert Larry Mussallemt Daniel D. Palmerleet Pete Valdezt Jr. and Roberta H. Hughan. Present: Morgan Hill Councilmembers: Dean FlorYt J. Robert Foster and Lorraine Barke. Absent: William H. Brown and Neil Heiman. (Councilmember Willaim H. Brown entered and took a seat at the Council table following Roll Call.) Also present: City Administrator Protempore Cecil A. Reinsch and City Manager Fred Mortensen. Heard from Mr. Michael Hogant President and principal in charge of the project of the EIR for Earth Metricst who prepared the EIR. 5262 Long-term STP Mayor Barke noted that any official action by the City of Morgan Hill would have to be taken at Morgan Hill in their jurisdiction at their next regular meeting. Mr. Hogan continued his presentation, thanking both Cities' staffs for their cooperation in preparation of the EIR for the long-term Sewer Treatment Plant. He noted that the Draft EIR has been circulated; the comment period has been closed; all the comments that were received within that period have been responded to in a Final EIR. He further noted that the Final EIR has been prepared in full, responsive to all comments received, written and oral; therefore, before Councils is a Final Environmental Impact Report as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act. He noted that it is their opinion that the Final Environmental Impact Report accomplishes all of the missions as set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines thereto. "H~ ..... He further explained the format of the Report because of the complexity of the document and the number of commentors. All the comments have been published verbatim in Volume 2. Volume 1 is the Draft EIR. Volume 2 sets forth all of the comments received, verbatim. Each comment is given a number in the margin and this number is followed through with the responses that are given point by point, and the re- numbering of the response is given with the light number in the margin to allow one to follow the comment to response. In addition, where there is any text change to the draft, the comment number is used as a locator or signal in the margin. The comment number is placed in the margin where the comment applies to the text. Any deletion between draft and final, the deletion will be noted by mark-outs, so the text can be read before and after. If there is an insert, there is a symbol in the draft that means there is an insert of text and you can look to the appropriate place in the Final EIR and find that insert. The aim of this is that you can follow through index by comment. He noted that there were a number of alternatives that were looked at in the Environmental Impact Report which are summarized as follows: Land Disposal; Surface Discharge to pajaro with advanced treatment; SO is the Ocean Discharge with secondary treatment; SL is the Winter pajaro Discharge and Summer Land Disposal; LD is Land Disposal with underdrain discharge; and NP No Project. All alternatives were analyzed in the EIR. All of the alternatives represent some significant impacts to environment, including the No Project alternative. not one clear alternative which is environmentally all others. ..- the There is superior to He further noted that Chris Cain, Montgomery Engineers, is also present to respond with additional detail on the project and Joe Edney, from Earth Metrics, available for responses to technical matters, and Andy Faber, Counsel to the Project, available to respond to procedural matters. He inquired whether Councils desired additional information regarding the project and the EIR, noting that the main objective tonight is the consideration of the certifiability of the Final Environmental Impact Report. He introduced Mr. Andy Faber who commented on procedural matters. f'P',...... Heard from Mr. Andy Faber, noting that this is a Joint Public Meeting and noticed for the sole topic only of discussing whether or not Councils wish to certify that the Environmental Impact Report was completed in accordance with the dictates of the California Environmental Quality Act. He further noted because the notice is limited to that topic, it is not appropriate to disuss the merits of the individual proposals or to get into the various alternatives, except insofar as Councils may be interested in the issue of whether they are adequately treated according to law in the document itself. He further noted that the action each Council takes has to be taken separately as the Gilroy City Council and the Morgan Hill City Council. (Morgan Hill to vote again within their City Limits.) - 5263 Mayor Barke inquired if a vote could be taken as a Joint Council with official action, i.e., Morgan Hill City Council to be taken in their own jurisdiction. Mr. Faber answered in the affirmative, further noting that each Council's vote must be taken separately. Councilman Brown inquired why the EIR is not certifi- able in its present form. 'WiIIIiMIIi Mr. Faber noted that a lot of legal issues have been raised in the course of preparation of the EIR; there's been public input at every stage. A lot of the public input has consisted of rather legalistic type of public input; people questioning the process, questioning the adequacy of alternatives; questioning the adequacy of analysis at different levels. Many of the comments received are similarly legalistic in tone and raise specific questions. All of those questions have been dealt with and dealt with satisfactorily, and that doesn't mean that the EIR can't be challenged and doesn't mean that it is or is not a perfect document, but all of the issues that have been raised, they have attempted to deal with. In the process of preparing the EIR legal issues have been on everyone's mind because of the ever-present threats that have come in from various sources. As far as he knows, the EIR does, in fact, comply with CEQA. He further noted that there is always a possibility of a lawsuit; there is always a possibility of some technical problem somewhere along the line, or some judgment call that wasn't correct, but as far as they know, they do believe it is adequate. Councilman Kloecker noted that several of the comments raised a point about the environmentally superior recommendation and he does not feel confident that that was legally handled or satisfied. .... Mr. Faber noted that there were several specific comments on that subject and several specific responses in the EIR in the responses to comments that now appear in the Final EIR, and the conclusion that they came to is that because the No Project alternative is not clearly environmentally superior, there is no need to designate one of the other alternatives as the environmentally superior alternative. He noted that the EIR consultants who prepared the EIR found that the No Project alternative also had significant impacts and that it could not be deemed to be superior to all of the other alternatives; based on that there was, in Counsel's judgment, no legal requirement to choose an environmentally superior alternative from among the others. Councilman Kloecker noted that because there were six alternatives, it seemed to him that the law indicated that an environmentally superior alternative had to be chosen out of those six. - Mr. Faber stated that if the No Project Alternative had been better than the other five, then a best alternative has to be selected among the other five. He stated that the consultants found that all of the projects had different impacts; and based on that finding there is not a legal requirement that you actually select among either the five or all six which one is best. He further noted that Councils could select one project and do it because you believe it is the best project, but the EIR is not required to do so. Councilman Palmerlee asked Mr. Faber to explain what a program EIR is and what decision Councils will have to make after an individual alternative is selected, whether further environmental review is necessary at that point. Mr. Faber stated that, basically, a program EIR is an EIR that begins at a level of detail that is appropriate for this kind of action where you're deciding among alternatives but you're not necessarily deciding exactly where, for example, a certain thing will go or where a pipeline or 5264 exactly which piece of property is involved in a surface discharge, or whatever. The next stage of that is a Project EIR. In other words, once an alternative is selected there will then have to be further analysis to determine whether, in fact, this document is adequate to actually go ahead and build the project, and it may be, depending on the alternative, that, in fact, it is adequate and the issue, of course, is whether it addresses all of the environmental impacts associated with the specific project in sufficient detail to satisfy the requirements of an EIR for that project. Depending on what is selected and depending on some additional information that will probably have to be produced, that judgment will have to be made. He noted that most likely, additional environmental work will be required. It may be a supplemental type EIR; it may be a fairly detailed EIR, depending on the project and various factors surrounding the exact project. Mr. Faber further noted that they believe that this EIR is adequate for this level of choosing among the alternatives. He stated that it is clear, and this EIR does spell out, that further environmental work may be necessary. He noted that a number of the commentors criticized that. Their comment to that was that this is the reasonably possible thing to do at this stage, and believe that the way that this was performed is an adequate way to do it. Depending on the alternative chosen and depending on some precise engineering that will be associated with that, there may well be further environmental work which would be necessary but, hopefully, would not be of a scope commensurate with this one. Mr. Faber stated, in terms of decision making, how to decide the further EIR work, and after this meeting CEQArequires, if you decide to do a project, then you must do several things. You must further certify that you have reviewed and considered the EIR. Typically, what is expected to happen is there would be a public hearing on a project and at that hearing or meeting, Councils would review and consider the EIR as issues that would bear on the selection of the project, of a specific alternative, and then in the resolution that is decided to approve any of the projects, if Councils decided to do that, Councils would certify that they have reviewed and considered the EIR in making that conclusion. Councils would also have to make certain very specific findings. For example, with respect to significant environ- mental impacts of the chosen project, a finding would have to be made that they either have been mitigated or by specific design changes of specific mitigation measures or in the alternative that there are certain overriding considerations that allow you to go forward with it even if they are not mitigatible. Councilman Foster asked that in this EIR Councils would certify a specific project has been mitigated or wouldn't they have to focus the EIR? Andy Faber stated that based on this EIR, Councils can select among these alternatives if desired. In selecting among the alternatives to the extent that environmental impacts of the alternatives are analyzed in this Report and mitigation measures proposed, which they are extensively, and Councils would want to in a Resolution, spell out those environmental effects and mitigation measures. That would be subject to being redone, if a further environmental impact report is necessary. Councilman Foster noted that Councils are then narrowing the focus and can question at that point if they feel that they want additional information. Councilman Kloecker noted that at the meeting where the selections of alternative is made, Councils would then determine that they want to see additional information or want an EIR on certain aspects of that alternative. ]: ~ ...." ~ ....., - ... - Final EIR - ... 5265 Mr. Faber noted that he does not anticicpate that that would be a decision to be made at that time, but rather at that time Councils would select an alternative and as a result of the chosen alternative, the Staff would have to decide whether in fact additional work, when additional engineering is done, what the schedule would be and how the decision will be made on further environmental work. This is not something that can be chosen at this time. Mayor Hughan noted that there has been surfficient opportunities for public input both through the letters and at several meetings. Andy Faber verfied same noting that CEQA does have certain requirements for public input that both cities have met; there is no requirement, at this stage, which is considering the Final Environmental Impact Report. Comments and letters received are testiment to the fact that sufficient public input has been received. Councilman Gage, representing the Joint Powers Sewer Advisory Committee, noted that they received presentation from Earth Metrics and also from James Montgomery Engineers and the Committee recommends certification by both Councils. He noted that some items were questioned and same are in the revision sheets now before Councils to be included in the EIR, and when the EIR is finalized that a Final Draft would be prepared to incorporate any of these corrections or working changes and this final copy would be the document to be distributed. Mayor Hughan asked if there were any Councilmembers tonight with concerns of wording or ideas that are in the EIR to be changed or any comments about the EIR. There were no comments from any Councilmember. Mayor Barke asked the Morgan Hill City Council if they are prepared to make a decision in Morgan Hill at their next Council Meeting. Morgan Hill City Council took an unofficial vote that they are in agreement and prepared to make a decision at their next Council Meeting. Mayor Hughan requested Gilroy Councilmembers take official action at this time. Motion was made by Councilman Gage seconded by Councilman Kloecker and carried by the following Roll Call Vote that the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. Ayes: Councilmembers: Albert, Gage, Kloecker, Mussallem, Palmerlee, Valdez and Hughan. Discussion was had in regard to the next Joint Council Meeting. Mayor Hughan requested that same be scheduled for April 22, 1986. Councilman Palmerlee inquired if said meeting would be an official Public Hearing again. Mr. Andy Faber noted that at a meeting when Councils decide to select an Alternative, at that meeting Councils must certify that they have reviewed and considered the EIR. Whether that meeting has to be a public hearing is a separate question. He does not believe that it has to be a public hearing. CEQA would not require it. Councilman Palmerlee inquires if said meeting could be formally open to public input if Councils so chose. Mr. Faber answers to the affirmative and noted that it could be noticed as a public hearing as well; and even in a non-public hearing Councils would be free to take public input. Mayor Hughan requested Councils to decide whether they wished to take public input at that meeting or not. 5266 .. Mayor Hughan requested Councils to decide whether they w~shed to take public input at that meeting or not. Councilman Brown stated that the meeting should be noticed as a public hearing. Councilman Kloecker inquired if this next meeting is to discuss it or decide it. It was noted that the next meeting would be to discuss it and if a public hearing is scheduled that same would be continued until a decision is made. Council set the next Joint Special Council Meeting for Tuesday, April 22, 1986, at 7:30 p.m., to be noticed as a public hearing and concurred by Morgan Hill Council that same be held in the Gilroy Council Chambers at 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California. Meeting was adjourned at 7:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted~ ~--;;..~ / City Clerk