Loading...
Minutes 1986/04/22 Roll Call 5271 Special Joint Meeting Gilroy/Morgan Hill Councils April 22. 1986 The Special Joint Gilroy/Morgan Hill City Council Meeting was called to order in the Gilroy City Council Chambers. 7351 Rosanna Street. Gilroy. California, at 7:35 p.m. Mayor Hughan led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Present: Gilroy Councilmembers: Donald F. Gage. Paul V. Kloecker, Larry Mussallem. Daniel D. Palmerlee. Pete Valdez. Jr. and Roberta H. Hughan. Absent: Councilmember: Sharon A. Albert. 5272 Long-term Wastewater Management Plan Present: Morgan Hill Councilmembers: William H. Brown, Dean Flory, J. Robert Foster and Lorraine Barke. Absent: Coun- cilmember: Neil Heiman. Also present: City Administrator Jay Baksa (Gilroy) and City Manager Fred Mortensen (Morgan Hill). Mayor Hughan stated that the Special Meeting was called for a Public Hearing to consider the adoption of a Long-term Wastewater Management Plan for the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. She noted that the two City Councils acting independent- ly have certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Long-term Wastewater Management Plan of the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill and are now proceeding to consider which alternative will be chosen. She noted that this Public Hearing was scheduled to solicit testimony for those present in the audience and by correspondence received in order to hear opinions of the different alternatives. ~ ..... Mayor Hughan noted receipt of Resolution No. 1677 from the City of Soledad supporting the establishment of a Marine Sanctuary for Monterey Bay and the prohibition of discharges into Monterey Bay by jurisdictions and agencies outside the AMBAG Region. Mayor Hughan noted receipt of a letter from the City of Santa Cruz dated April 18, 1986; City of Monterey dated April 17, 1986. Mayor Hughan opened the Public Hearing for public testimony. Mr. Sam Karas, Chairman of the Monterey Board of Super- visors, addressed the Councils, presented and read a letter from the City of Carmel objecting to discharges into Montoerey Bay. Supervisor Karas further stated that the Monterey County Board of Supervisors reaffirms their strong opposition to dumping of sewage either directly or indirectly into Monterey Bay. He noted that their decision was based upon a rational appraisal of the Alternatives. He noted that the protection of Monterey Bay is essential to the economic well-being of commercial fishing and tourist industries; the home of the world-famous Aquarium, as well as other outstanding marine research and educational facilities; the Monterey Bay is rich in a variety of fish species, shell fish and other wonderful marine life. Because of these important concerns, the Board of Supervisors of Monterey County wish to inform the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill, that any alternative selected that directly or indirectly results in dumping sewage into Monterey Bay will prompt them to initiate legal proceedings to halt any attempt to proceed. He noted that as elected officials, millions of dollars are about to be committed for a project that will forever alter the character of Gilroy and Morgan Hill; effects on traffic, water and other infrastrucuters will be irreversible, yet no where in the Plan, in his opinion, is there any consideration that allows the citizens of the respec- tive cities, the right to decide what alternatives they wish to implement. He stated that any proposal of this magnitude that will affect future generations and transform both cities into possible urban sprawl, in his opinion, should be decided at the ballot box; in a democracy, the public must be made a part of any significant decision; only then can due process be best served. He noted that in recent years, elected bodies have yielded to the pressures of outside developers and other special interest groups. He noted that they overlook the concerns of the community as a whole. He requested that the Councils consider their positions very carefully before deciding on any plans. .....''''~ - ...",,,"'*' ....... Ms. Ruth Vreeland, City Councilmember of Monterey, addressed the Councils and expressed their concern regarding the proposed Long-term Wastewater Management Plan that ~)273 - the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill are considering. She noted that the City of Monterey feels that three of the five alternatives for the proposed Waste Management Plan pose serious potential environmental impacts to Monterey Bay and the surrounding communities. She noted that these three alternatives, Surface Discharge to pajaro River; Ocean Discharge; and Winter Pajaro River Discharge, can be eliminated from discussion in the Wastewater Management Plan, and that other alternatives can be explored. She stated that they feel that these alternatives would seriously threaten the delicate acqua system in Monterey Bay. She noted that in the past years, ocean outfall lines have resulted in closure of many of Monterey beaches, due to the outfall pollution and pollutants. She noted that today this problem has been eliminated through active monitoring and appropriate wastewater treatment methods. She stated that the addition of a major ocean outfall line, such as proposed by the alternative (the Ocean Discharge Plan) would aggravate an otherwise delicately balanced situation to an undetermined degree. To emphasize a delicate balance in Monterey Bay, AMBAG and the City of Monterey have submitted letters to Congressman Leon Panetta, Senator Henry Mello and to Assemblyman Sam Farr, requesting that legislation be enacted to designate Monterey Bay as a Marine Sanctuary. She noted that in response to their concerns, Assemblyman Farr and Assemblyman Seastrand have authored two Bills, AB 3804 which help them establish a marine sanctuary, and AB 3805 which would require the Regional Water Pollution Control Board to do a study to assess the cummulative impacts that would be effected by the Plan from Gilroy and Morgan Hill. She noted that they were presented in February and are in action plan now in Sacramento. The City of Monterey strongly urges the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill to solve the wastewater treatment problems within their own resources and not tax the whole Region. Other Alternatives which can be explored might include, but not be limited to, connection of Morgan Hill into the San Jose-Santa Clara Wastewater Treatment Plant to eliminate their flow in the Gilroy Treatment Plant, construc- tion of Morgan Hilll's own treatment plant facility and/or curtailing what appears to be an ambitious growth program which generates the need for additional capacity in Gilroy and Morgan Hill areas. She noted that economic pressures for development could ultimately result in some growth within the service area, as stated in Page 2.4-27 of the EIR, and does not really negate nor justify the pursuit of such an ambitious growth plan in the Morgan Hill and Gilroy area which could have significant environmental impacts on Monterey Bay. She noted that the City of Monterey Bay strongly urges the Cities to consider these other alternatives in their deliberations. She noted that it is their hope that a best alternative will be chosen for a Long-term Wastewater Management Plan which could be helpful to all. ...... - (Councilwoman Albert entered at 7:49 p.m.and took her seat at the Council table.) - Mr. Walter Wong, Director of Environmental Health, Monterey County, addressed the Councils and noted that the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Long-term Wastewater Management Plan, Cities of Gilroy/Morgan Hill, Volume I, Text Volume II - Comments and Response, is inadequate and incom- plete; thus the selection of any alternative to discharge directly or indirectly into Monterey Bay is inappropriate at this time. The issues raised at the December 14, 1985, Hearing and written comments submitted have not been adequately responded to for the following reasons: 1) The EIR fails to provide information on Monterey Bay circulation and tidal currents and its relationship to dilution and transportation of contaminates; the Final EIR responds, concludes that dilution would be adequate at the initial discharge point but fails to provide supporting data or scientific information to support this conclusion. It also concludes that the discharge meets Ocean Plan requirements, but fails to recognize that the Ocean Plan only includes maximum allowable limits for twenty-three ... 5274 chemicals and contains no maximum allowable level for primary toxic chemical pollutants and other chemicals; 2) The EIR fails to provide information analysis on wastewater constituents mixing with Monterey Bay and pajaro River water and synergistic reactions. The Final EIR response fails to address this issue completely; 3) The EIR fails to provide chemical analysis of influent, effluent and sludge and its affect on human, plant, fish and marine life. Also, it fails to provide information of the cumulative impact on Monterey Bay or pajaro River resulting from discharge of this wastewater. The Final EIR response only provides chemical analysis for influent, effluent for the following dates: December 27, 1985, January 24, 1985, February 6, 1985, February 6, 1986, and February 15, 1986. Three samples per year is not an adequate testing frequency. The results show that some toxic chemicals in the sewage effluent exceed water quality standards for toxic chemicals. This has serious health implications because these chemicals will percolate into the groundwater through discharge in the Pajaro River or contaminate recreational areas near shore waters of Monterey Bay. Some of the examples where high concentration of toxic chemicals found in the Gilroy-Morgan Hill treated sewage are as follows: tetrachloro-ethylene, 9 parts per billion, where the maximum allowable concentration is 4 parts per million, or exceeds by 225%; nitrothyldimethyla- mine 50 parts per million with maximum allowable concentration is one part per billion, or exceeds by 5000%; phenol 6.5 parts per billion with maximum allowable concentration is one part per billion, or exceeds by 650%. So these are already existing in your sewage in Gilroy-Morgan Hill. There were no test results for sludge, nor was any information provided on toxicity effects on human, fish, plant and marine life in the Final EIR; 4) The EIR fails to provide oceanographic studies and data for location of this in the pajaro River discharge. The Final EIR fails to address this issue; 5) The EIR fails to provide recent water quality analysis in Monterey Bay or pajaro River at the discharge points. The Final EIR fails to address this issue. The EIR fails to provide detailed information on a pretreatment program of toxic wastes of Gilroy-Morgan HIll. The Final EIR does not include the items requested concerning the toxic material pretreatment program of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. It fails to provide a list of all the existing facilities storing and/or producing hazardous waste. AB 2185 (Waters) or Section 2550 to 25521 of the California Health and Safety Code mandates this information as public right-to-know information. Also, the type of toxic materials of each of these businesses should have been provided. Other information requested was the number of businesses being registered and inspected; the number of businesses that provide pretreatment and those that do not; the number of businesses that have been monitoring programs and the number that do not; the number of violations; the number enforcement and compliances and a frequency of inspection and monitoring; 7) The EIR fails to address the financial liability--who pays for damages from contamination of groundwater, recreational, fish and life. The Final EIR fails to address this issue. The EIR fails to recognize that four of the five alternatives are required to comply with Monterey County Coastal Plan, the General Plan and requirements to obtain a health permit. The Final EIR fails to address this issue correctly. For the foregoing reasons, you are in no position to select any project alternative which could cause your sewage, directly or indirectly, to deposit in Monterey Bay. Monterey County has spent over one hundred million dollars of federal, state and local money to clear Monterey Bay of sewage pollution and in this effort, have eliminated eight sewage outfalls in Monterey Bay. He noted that they believe the sewage alternatives that deposit effluent in Monterey Bay would not only defeat their efforts, but would cause hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to the Bay environment for which Gilroy and Morgan Hill Councils and Cities will be responsible. They have not considered the effect of Gilroy and Morgan Hill Cities taking of personal and real property in Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties. He also noted that previous mention that the EIR has been certified should recognize that no public comments were received during the certification of the EIR. .-..- ...... ~ ...... ~ "',,~.. f)?75 ,_.... l_ - Dr. James Hughes, Vice Mayor of Pacific Grove, addressed the Councils and presented a resolution passed by his Council on March 5, 1986, with backup information included. He noted that he is a 20 year member of Pacific Grove City Council, on the Coastal Commission for 8 1/2 years,and served on AMBAG for 7 1/2 years, which has bearing on his statements to be made. He noted that his remarks will be in the political and planning realm, rather than environmental. He noted that Monterey Bay communities are discharging into the Monterey Bay and have been involved with this matter for 20 years. He noted that AMBAG Study was a 3 year study and he was president the year the study began, and it referred to 176 alternatives which were all studied, and they were ordered to do a certain alternative based upon the carrying load of their area which is planned into it; not only their area, but the fact that they are a tourist area and have a large influx of population on weekends and during the summer months, especially. The choice that they had was ordered as to where and how and under what criteria they were going to be allowed to do it. It was designed for the Monterey Bay area only, basically the AMBAG Region of Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. It was not anticipated that the alternatives that were chosen would reach out beyond those areas. It also includes a five year reclamation study called the Merrissa Project which looks at irrigation of crops for human consumption from the reclaimed water of this project. It also would be used for irrigation and groundwater recharge, cutting down a lot of the effluent also going into the Bay. He noted that their area is greatly concerned and the reason is that the Bay is a vital part of their economy; fishing is one of the reasons, tourism and recreation - is a tourism and recreation destination for a good part of the State and from allover the United States and world. It is also a research and educational area. There's such institutions as U.C., Santa Cruz; Hawkins Marine Lab; the Naval Post Graduate School, Moss Landing Marine Lab; the Monterey Bay Aquarium and Granite Creek Lab. All are vitally interested in keeping the quality of Monterey Bay to a certain level so that these institutions can flourish and operate. The reason that they are concerned in these areas is because they are the ones that lose; if some- thing happens to that Bay, you lose it in the pocketbooks. They saw that when their beaches were posted. They had a serious cutback of people coming to their area and were very concerned, and that's why they have been working to address that. They are worried about losing control. If they start having discharges into Monterey Bay from outside the area, it is very difficult to pin-point where the problems are. He noted that if there are problems in Monterey Bay now, they know where to look and who to blame; they can find the areas and they can address them. But if they start expanding out beyond the areas, they are going to have a difficult time finding out what the cumulative impact is, where it's coming from and how to address it. Finally, the Basin Plan, which was done by Brown and Caldwell, was designed with Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties in mind and no other areas. He noted that the time has come in California where each area and each basin has to address their own problems. They can't be looking to export their problems to another area any longer. His reasons are based upon 20 years ago, Monterey Bay was being looked at by the San Francisco region for a pipeline to their area to also take care of some of their problems and through the years, recently the Fresno area and the Central Valley area have considered discharging into Monterey Bay. And the Delta gets somewhat of the same talk when they talk about Kesterson, to discharge to Monterey Bay or discharging it into the Delta. He noted that we have to begin keeping the problems in-house. He believes that is a very sound principal, in the fact that it has a great bearing on the decisions they make and these Councils make, because if you have to live with the impacts which you create, it makes you a little more creative in what is decided, because you know that you have to live with the good and the bad; every good thing creates some bad things and if you have to live with both of them, it will make your planning a little more creative. He noted that they have been working for 20 years to solve this problem and it is just about solved; spent close to one hundred thirty to one hundred fifty ~"'.... ....... 5276 million dollars and they don't like to see anything happen to upset the balance. They wish the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill good luck in their deliberations and hope that the problems will be solved in-house and not send them to Monterey Bay. Ms. Judy pennycook, North Monterey County resident, residing in Elkhorn, addressed the Councils. She noted that for too long people have decided that the best solution for sewage disposal is to put it in somebody else's backyard. She noted here amazement that the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill have the gall to entertain a proposal that suggests Monterey be a home for their wastes. She noted that the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan HIll would choose to reek environmental havoc with such a delicate section of the California coast. She noted that in Monterey County they look to tourism, fishing industry, marine lab research and ~lkhorn Estuary and Sanctuary as an integral part of their community. She noted that the Monterey County community will not allow the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill to use their bay as a sewer disposal. She further noted that if there is not room to properly dispose of the waste, Gilroy and Morgan Hill should not be expanding. She re- quested that Monterey County's needs be viewed as well as this Council. Mayor Barke noted that Mr. pennycook made a state- ment that he believed that the City of Morgan Hill was growing by 300% and that she checked with Councilmember Bill Brown, CPA, and confirmed her belief that the City of Morgan Hill is growing by 3.4% annually. Gary Patton, Chairperson of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, addressed the Council and stated that if Gilroy and Morgan Hill have sewage to dispose of, that ways are found to dispose of it in the Gilroy and Morgan Hill area and not dispose of it in their county for them to deal with. He further noted that if there are toxic wastes to dispose of and they are pretreated and planned to be disposed of in Monterey Bay, to look elsewhere. He stated that they do not think it fair and neighborly to use the Monterey Bay as a receiving pond for the industries of Santa Clara County. He stated that they do not believe the EIR was good; they have mailed in their comments; they have appeared. He further stated a major decision is being made here as elected officials of Gilroy and Morgan Hill Cities and a decision which will affect the entirety of southern Santa Clara County; the formative decision of the future of Santa Clara County in the southern part of Santa Clara County. He is surprised that no one from that area has spoken at this hearing. He noted a couple of aspects of the the Wastewater Management Plan are: where you might discharge wastewaters produced and what kind of wastewaters are you planning for and how much are you planning for? He stated that he comes here as a tourist and enjoys it here; grew up in northern Santa Clara County; his family moved out of there when the mass of industrialization of northern Santa Clara County led to traffic jams, air pollution, and the increase in crime and taxes, and general deterioration of community character that is well known. He noted that this is a nice area - garlic fields and small farms that would be eliminated if this proposed Wastewater Management Plan was adopted. He noted that many in Santa Cruz County are trying to control and manage growth to protect agricultural lands which have been paved over everywhere in north Santa Clara County; to preserve air quality; to try to keep their communities and their character somewhat the way it is as growth inevitably comes and to try to minimize and reduce that. He noted that they would say that here is a plan that goes far beyond the needs, for the present population in terms of sewage, and that is financed in a very interesting way. He notes that the financing in the proposed plan is extraordinary and as a government official for 12 years, he doesn't know of any other sewer improvement project that has no federal or state assist- ance because the people benefitting from it are going to pay for it with assessments. He further noted that the people who .... .... ... ....... -. ...... r.; ') 7 '7 'w L. ~~ who are going to benefit from it now are those that own nowt the rawt largely agricultural lands that are going to be converted into industriest so when this plan is put into operationt you are going to not only permit the industrializa- tion of Santa Clara CountYt you're going to mandate itt because you will owe a lot of money and the bill will be paid by the assessments on the land and the land will only be able to support the assessments if the industries are developed. He further noted that what's being talked about here is the basic transformation of southern Santa Clara Coiunty into something much like northern Santa Clara County and the extenson of Silicon Valley south. He further noted that he is well awaret as well as these Councilst of how important it is to industrial development that this plan proceed. He further states that he is testifying as a citizen who likes this areat comes to the Garlic Festivalt who likes to see it the way it is; that he believes that the Counc~ls should think seriously about keeping it the way it is and this plan will fundamentally change it for the worse. He stated that they do not like the fact that on behalf of industrYt as a trustee for industrial developmentt the Councils should require the developers to pay the full cost to take care of their waste products in their own area as opposed to shipping it cheaper to somewhere else and letting it degrade their environment and their economy and put them at risk. He stated that they are going to fight that. -- - In conclusiont if the Councils really want to deal with their waste products and expand them in the way that he believes is so inappropriatet he would suggest to really seriously think about choosing one of the alternatives that doesn't get yourself into one of a majort knock-down drag-out fight with every jurisdiction in the Monterey Bay are and two counties who are prepared to go to the mat with you; who will take you through the permit process insofar as they can; who will sue you and who will probably come over here and start making speeches on a regular basis like the one he is making tonight. In other wordst he noted one way to stop this is to get the people concerned about what it really means to them. He suggested that the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill take care of their plans in such a way that doesn't pick a fight that they are not likely to win. He further stated that that's his evaluation of the fight that the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill are about to pick if sewage is disposed to their Bay. ,~ Marc del Pierot Board of Supervisorst Monterey CountYt addressed the Councils and noted that in some of his comments he would be representing the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollu- tion Control District and other comments representing his constituents of the First Supervisoral District as well as other members of the Board of Supervisors. Regarding the Air Pollution Control District's behalft preliminary comments---- were sent in in regard to the Draft EIR and requests for additional information to be providedt and to this datet no response received regarding said correspondence. On behalf of both the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District as well as the Monterey County Board of Supervisorst the Draft EIR was not made available to themt even though requested. The copy obligated to utilize in preparation of comments this eveningt were obliged to use a copy that they spent $60 to reprint from a copy procured from one of the Gilroy/Morgan Hill Council- members. He further noted that this does not meet the intent of the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. He noted that he will be bearing the consequences of the Citiesof Gilroy/Morgan Hill's decision because he is the Supervisor for North Monterey County. He further noted that anything that is discharged north of or about the Monterey County-Santa Cruz County line travels in a southerly fashion down and is washed upon the coast of North Monterey County. He commented on two issues. He noted that two alternatives being consideredt discharging into the river and discharging directly into the ocean. River Discharge..allusions have been made in the EIR document that indicate that on-site discharge or dis- charge of waste in Santa Clara County would pose a serious health threat to the residents of the areat primarily - 5278 because of concern of groundwater contamination. He noted that the threat to public health of local constituents and residents is no greater and no less than the threat to the public health of his constituents who reside in the pajaro Valley who will be the unwilling and unwelcome recipients of the contaminants pro- posed to be discharged into the pajaro River. He noted that the pajaro River serves as a recharge mechanism for the aquifers that are tapped into by both the City of Watsonville as well as the pajaro Community Service District for the provision of groundwater for potable purposes in the pajaro Valley. He noted that the proposal to discharge waste into that River will in fact, because of hydrology tests that have been conducted by the Monterey County Flood Control and Water Cconservation District and also by the U.S.G.S., will in fact contribute to the contamination of groundwater aquifers in the pajaro Valley. He questioned if any consideration by the Cities of Gilroy/Morgan Hill consultant in regard to this issue has taken place. He was not able to discover any comprehensive analysis of this issue. He noted that the Federal Government through the Department of Interior and the National Oceano- graphic and Atmospheric Administration as well as the State of California and a number of educational institutions have literally spent millions of dollars establishing the Elkhorn Slough Estuary Sanctuary. He further noted that this Sanctuary is immediately downstream wherever this proposed plan proposes to discharge, regardless of whether it is an ocean discharge or discharge into the Pajaro River. He further noted that this Estuary Sancturary is an issue involving the State of Califor- nia as well as the Federal Government. He suggested that the Cities of Gilroy/Morgan Hill's constituents might be somewhat concerned if they would have to bear the burden of a law suit by not only those less than accommodating governmental agencies within Santa Cruz and Monterey County, but also by the State of California and the Federal Government in the interest of protecting what they have seen fit to establish as an estuary sanctuary for permanent preservation. He noted that not only would the Cities be challenging the governmental agencies but also to the non-profit resource type of organization that proliferates in Monterey County as well as Santa Cruz County. He further suggested that this type of action should be considered very closely and carefully by the respective Councils prior to any decision being made. Mr. Del Piero noted that he reviewed correspondence from the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District to the Cities of Gilroy/Morgan Hill requesting comments in regard to the questions asked during the environmental review process. He further noted that he understands that this is not a hearing on the EIR but this has a direct bearing on the Councils' ability to competently, rationally and intelligently be able to render a decision; without adequate information it is difficult for anyone to argue that a decision of that magnitude can be made correctly or intelligently. He noted that the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, pursuant to a number of studies conducted over the last three years, has discovered that there is a significant problem in terms of air pollution transport into the Monterey Bay Region. He noted that the Monterey Bay Region is the only region in the State of California that has attained federal air quality standards. He noted that in the EIR it does not address how you are going to guarantee that the icnreased air pollution from your development is not going to compromise that air quality standard that has been achieved by their district. Additionally, he noted that they have very definitive studies indicating the transport from the Santa Clara Valley from the Santa Clara County Air Polluition District is in fact contaminating their air quality and is in fact one of the primary problems for them not being able to attain air quality standards that have been established at the federal level until this past year. He noted that without that information it will be very difficult for an informed decision to be made as to the alternatives wished to be pursued. ..... ....J --- .... ~ ....... 5279 ..... He further noted that he recently met with two representatives of the City Councils of Gilroy and Morgan HIll in regard to this matter and comments were made by both representatives that there was serious concern that in event that an action was not taken now pursuant to some of the land use plans that you havet that developers would exercise influence over the state legis- lature that they would in fact find legislative remedies to cure whatever opposition that might be generated in the Monterey Bay region to the dumping of this type of effluent into Monterey Bay. He noted that that may be the case and may be tried; howevert the fact that he has now raised the issue it will cause any state legislator to be very worried about introducing such legislation becauset it will be very apparent that the legislator who does do that will have been bought by the very development interests that are proposing to provide for the financial mechanism that will allow for the construc- tion of this project. He noted that he questions whether or nott given those circumstancest and given the nature of politi- cianst whether or not anyone is going to wish to bear that burden. He noted that additionallYt in as muich as the issue has been raised nowt it will be continued to be raised by other individuals so that the option of going to Sacramento and getting a cure to a problem created by those nasty locals in Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties may nott in factt be a viable alternative for those development interests that apparently your representatives are so concerned about. He further noted that he does not relish being here at this hearing; his con- stituents do not relish the idea of having to worry about the proposal that is being considered. He further noted that he believes that it would be most prudent for your combined bodies to seriously consider alternatives other than direct or indirect discharge into Monterey Bay. He respectfully re- quested that other alternatives be seriously considered. He noted that no one in Monterey or Santa Cruz Counties is interested in getting actively involved in litigation with their neighbors to the north; they are not interested in having to spend the money necessary to file a lawsuit and become involved in the litigation that will be necessary to stop a proposal to discharge into Monterey BaYt but they will and the option of litigation is very much alive. He further requested that the Councils seriously consider whether or not the treasuries of Morgan Hill and GilroYt the tax dollars that the citizens are payingt the tax dollars that the Councils are responsible fort are best spent fighting lawsuits that he feels Gilroy and Morgan Hill will not win. .... - -- -~ Mr. Bill pennycookt North Monterey County residentt addressed the Councils and noted he attended D.C. at Irvine and has a degree in Civil Engineering and his professor had a lot of input in designing the sewerwater system for the City of Irvine and for a great time they treated their water for re-use and did away for the need of shipping it out to the ocean; they irrigatedt watered their landscapet they used it in industrial washing processest etc. and contends that those things are feasible here. He confirmed that the only regret that they had about that system was that the Irvine area outgrew it and have now outgrown room for the effluent. He further noted that now the Councils have the opportunity that this doesn't occur here; to plan your communities with wisdom and the trust given to the Councils by the citizens' votes. He noted that the communities should be looked at in design and plan with the idea that we're not the last generation. And prove to the world that man's wisdom has evolved to meet the problems of his shrinking environment. - David Pendergrasst Mayor of Sand CitYt addressed the Councils and presented a letter from his City against the alternative of discharging seewage disposal into Monterey Bay. He noted that they have been watching the situation for a very long time and requests the Cities specifically not choose any alternative that would include Monterey Bay. He noted that he has served on the Regional Agency of the Monterey Bay Area Pollution Agency for over 8 years and the multi-million dollar decisions they had to maket mandated by EPAt he never waivered 5280 in his decisions; solved their problem, but does not believe that sewage disposal into Monterey Bay is the decision that the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan HIll should make and is not best for them and requests that this not be done. He noted that the EIR does not satisfactorily address the serious ramification of potential pollution that would be devastating to the Monterey Bay and the communities that rim the Bay area. He requested that the Cities take serious consideration of their protests from their area received in letters and major representation this evening, and not choose the alternatives that would include emptying into the ocean your sewage disposal. He further noted that if the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill fail to listen to the protests that are being heard tonight, he is certain that his City (member of AMBAG) that the Monterey Bay AMBAG communities Will be forced to take a much forceful and stronger defensive against you. Ms. Penny Lockhart, resident of Gilroy, addressed the Councils noting that she has been following this issue for several years. She inquires why some form of tertiary treatment is not being pursued and not included in the five alternatives. She noted that she was told that the people that are financing this project, which is the developers, do not want to pay this extra cost; they don't want to be forced to install a tertiary treatment system that may give them addi- tional cost and liability. She noted that it is her opinion there are five alternatives, one which is complete land disposal and is absolutely out because you can't continue to pollute the groundwater; four other alternatives, all of which involve some form of opposistion from members of Monterey, and in her opinion, these alternatives are also not viable solutions because no one wants to spend money and time fighting the cities to the south who are going to fight in the courts, legislature, come here and talk against the solutions that we want to our citizens. She noted that she does not believe there is a good alternative. She suggested that the Cities request another report on tertiary treatment; but unless a report is seen on the cost one cannot know how expensive is too expensive. She further noted that she was told that when the freeway was constructed there was a very large pipe put under the freeway so later that Morgan Hill or the County wanted to connect to the sewer systrem, that it could. She suggested that if a larger treatment plant is used that does tertiary treatment why can't the County areas that are on septic tanks, pay to be connected to the sewer system for additonal revenue. She further noted that she has also been informed that there is also pipe up to Tree Haven and Western Tree Nursery; if sewage is excellently treated why can't a lake be created in the Uvas Park Preserve? Why can't the water be used that will be acceptable that will not be wastewater that we will not have to beg somebody to take. She suggests that the Cities create a resource that will be valuable in the future and that can be used. Investigate the possibility of creating something worth- while rather than something to fight about. Mayor Hughan noted that she did write Ms. Lockhart a letter explaining that three of these alternatives are tertiary treated water, and noted that drinking water is beyond tertiary treatment. Mr. Howard Harris water geologist and consultant from Hollister, addressed the Councils with 40 years of experience, representing San Benito County Water Conservation and Flood Control District; the San Benito County Farm Bureau and San Benito County Board of Supervisors. He noted that they are interested in the statement in the EIR that said significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposal is implemented. He recommended that the water be looked at as a resource and not wasted out to the Bay. He noted that San Benito County would like the water if treated properly. He noted particular concerns in San Benito County are that the recharge of some of their north county water comes from the .... - -- .... .... ~.. 5281 .... Llagas Creek,estimated at approximatley 3,000 feet per year. The top 60 feet of water contains approximately 1700 parts per million of sodium; deeper aquifers contain approximately 60 or 70 parts per million. Over the years, the Bolsa area has been concentrated with sodium. They would recommend that the water be treated for re-use; the present design of the treatment plant is not sufficient to justify discharge into their area or into the pajaro. They would like to see the money that would be spent on a pipeline used for a better treatment plant and then they would like to have the water. He stated that there should be strict enforcement of industrial wastes prohibited from discharging into the sewer and disposed of in another manner. He noted that water is a resource and should be kept out of the Bay; if put into the pajaro or into the Bay, you would be spreading toxins. He further noted that pajaro River is one of the routes that is assumed will be taken to Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties, using the natural channel; but if contaminated by industrial wastes and organic solvents, insecticides, etc., this is going to be extremely objectionable to the Water Districts. He again stated that the water should be viewed as a resource, cleaned up so it will be acceptable. .... Councilman Foster inquired of the sodium levels exist- ing in actual groundwater. What would be the acceptable sodium level as an outfall from a sewer plant? Mr. Harris noted that if the level could be kept belo 70 parts per mjillion be believes they would accept it. He further noted that he has had very great difficulty determining the sodium analysis (from Gilroy). - Ms. Sheila Baldridge, President of the Monterey Chapter of the American Crustacean Society, supporting research and education on marine mammals, particularly whales and dolphins and they are very much concerned about the health of Monterey Bay. She stated that they support a sanctuary status for Monterey Bay and very much oppose the dumping of wastewater from other watersheds into the Monterey Bay. - Ms. Jo Stallard, resident of Pacific Grove, addressed the Council stating that theEIR is grossly inadequate and is opposed to the transfer of wastewater from the Gilroy-Morgan Hill area to the Monterey Bay; the damage to the Bay's ecology is too great to even consider such action. She stated that in time past wastewater was discharged in lakes and rivers and we now know the harm this can cause. She noted in the Wastewater Alterlnatives Plan for Gilroy-Morgan HIll it states that the growth projection for that area by the year 2008 will be between 219 and 670%; if the problem of wastewater treatment cannot be solved sensibly, how can such growth be contemplated, especially industrial growth with its additional toxic wastes disposal problems. She stated that growth, either residential or commercial, is not right, but consequences must be considered. She stated that all pollution problems should be solved where they are created. ~ Mr. Paul Eastman, President of Monterey Peninsula Audubon Society, addressed the Council, presented and read a resolution supporting the establishment of a marine sanctuary for Monterey Bay and prohibition of discharge into Monterey Bay by jurisdictions and agencies outside this region. He stated to destroy one of the world's best marine sanctuaries by planning to discharge sewage and/or treated effluent into their water, would literally destroy Monterey Bay and eventually spread to the beautiful coastal area. They are doing everything to dispose of their own sewage in far superior ways. He stated that they will do all within their power to prevent the disposal of any sewage or treated effluent into their water. The cumulative effect of sewage will destroy the marine life, the kelp beds and otters and cause irrevocable damage to all. Gilroy-Morgan HIll and all other areas must learn to treat their own sewage at the source; to dispose of it with the present plan or proposed plan is merely postponing the solution necessary for a major and increasing problem. -- 5282 Mr. Bruce Buel, General Manager of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, addressed the Councils and expressed their strong concern of any of the Monterey Bay discharge alternatives that are considered in the proposed Plan. He noted that his District wishes to add their agreement to the statements and sentiments presented that they do oppose discharge of effluent as it is currently considered to Monterey Bay. He stated that Monterey Peninsula has already spent up to 70 million dollars to take care of the outfalls discharging into Monterey Bay and do not want to see those expenditures circumnavigated by the addition of new effluent that would create or re-create the problems that they sought to solve by expending their funds. He stated that his District commented earlier on the scoping of the EIR and were very disappointed with the level of anlysis in the EIR and concerned with the certification of the Final EIR. He stated that they do not feel that the FInal EIR provides enough information to make an informed and intelligent decision. Specifically, they are concerned that the Final EIR does not provide sufficient information on the potential impacts to the ecology of Monterey Bay and strongly feel that those impacts need to be better analyzed before an alternative can be rationally selected. Mayor Hughan noted that when an alternative is chosen, a focused EIR may be required. Craig Hawkinson, resident of Santa Cruz County and graduate student at Moss Landing Marine Labs in Monterey County, addressed the Councils and noted that in recent years, the issue of off-shore oil development has raised opposition in both Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties; opposition based on an attempt to protect and preserve the waters along the coast lines of both of those counties which include Monterey Bay. He stated that they feel it is very important to preserve the health of those waters. He stated that the residents of those two counties will not stand by and allow those waters degraded by pollution being pumped in from the neighbors to the north. Mark Silberstein, Researchers and Education Programs on the Elkhorn Slough in Monterey Bay, addressed the Councils and stated that Monterey Bay has not yet been granted sanctuary but the Elkhorn Slough, south of the pajaro has been granted sanctuary. Acreage around said Slough is part of a National Estuary Sanctuary or in public trust either as State Park land or as refuges and private conservation tracts. He stated his concern that the proximity of the pajaro and the potential risks of Monterey Bay outfall would potentially affect the Elkhorn Slough consisting of hundreds of fish and other wild- life. Considering the amount of effort spent to protect the Slough and preserve it in its present state, it would be i1l- advised, at this time, to propose an outfall, actually have wastewater dumped into Monterey Bay. Ms. Faith Stoddard, Secretary-Manager of Gavilan Water Conservation District, addressed the Councils and presented and read a letter from said District. Mr. Tom Swarzmann, veternarian of North Monterey County, addressed the Councils and stated that the Cities should ask rather than tell that the wastewaters are going to be discharged. Opposed to the plans that will put them in Monterey Bay. He further noted that he suggests do not under- estimate public opposition by residents of the greater Monterey Bay area. Mayor Hughan a noted that mention was made that Mr. Swarzmann was not aware of said hearing; hearings were held in Monterey-Seaside area and the public has been notified. Mr. Doug Quitan, representing the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, addressed the Councils to enhance Supervisor del Piero's statements. He noted that in 1980 there was a Transport Study conducted by SRI; in that study there were two corridors of transport found significant to impact the North Central Air Basin. To quantify that Study - ..... ~ - ....... [087 ,J L ,) - he noted that there is an effort that involves the Bay Area Air Quality Maintenance Districtt Lawrence Livermore Labst the Air Resources Board of the State and the staff of his district. Said study is supposed to be completed towards the end of next year. The area of most concern is the Santa Clara Valley. Growth in this area is of concern in that it directly impacts Hollister. One of the problems in the Draft EIR was to emphasize the ozone readings in Gilroy. (A photo chemical pollutant that is formed from other precurser pollutantst primarily hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxides.) Hydrocarbons directly related to population in use of gasoline which would be the primary source in this area; nitrogen oxides primarily a combustion pollutantt related mostly to the automobile; both related to growth in this area; related to impacting Hollister which is currently experiencing violations of the State and Air Quality standards. Because Hollister is in the jurisdiction of this Districtt they are currently viewing a plan to achieve that standard as required to do in the California Health & Safety Code. Growth should be looked at in this EIR and elsewhere in Santa Clara Valley; the impact to Hollister and San Benito County as well as the remainder of the North Central Coast Air Basin; unfairly influenced by growth in this area without receiving the proper planning. ... Mayor Hughan noted that she represents the County of Santa Clara on the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and is familiar with said Study; also is a member of the Air Resources Board representing the District. '~'-C.''''' Ms. Lorna Moffettt Carmelt addressed the Councils and noted that the Montoerey Bay is their birthing place; where oxygen and food is evolved. Another Yosemite by the Sea. All the great universities are aware that this area is the paradise and must be preserved. She stated that Gilroy-Morgan Hill is a messenger for all. Said area is one of the most beautiful places in the world; citizens have managed to preserve its greatness and beauty and that's why the whole world wants to be there. - Mayor Hughan declared a recess at 9:12 p.m. At 9:26 p.m.t Mayor Hughan called the meeting to order and requested Walter Wong to explain the ordinance adopted in Monterey County and the provisions of same having to do with wastewater. - Mr. Walter Wong addressed the Councils noting that these are amendments to the Coastal Plan as well as the General Plans and requires the following: Anyone proposing to dis- charge in Monterey Bay as well as expand an existing discharge in Monterey BaYt either directly or indirectlYt would be required to obtain a permit from the Health Department. Before obtaining said permit they would be required to do the follow- ing (this would be in addition to the State of California) what it's proposing must be proven that it is not toxic material and would not harm the Monterey Bay: 1) Three years of monitoring records identifying the existing characteristics of the waste- water discharge. Particular areas of concern include toxic chemicalst inorganict heavy metalst bacteria and other indica- tors described as threats to the health and safety of coastal waters; 2) Provide a comprehensive projection of prospective wastewaters both quantitative and qualitive characteristics that must be specifically identified. The specific figures for indicators identified in A must be included in projections; 3) Provide a comprehensive monitoring plan for testing waste- waterst indicators identify A; 4) Before discharging in the oceant oceanographic studies required before a health permit is granted. Also concerned with whether Monterey Bay can take more wastewater. He stated that he would require that the Cities' representatives go out on a boat and actually take samples of the Bay to establish a background of the place where itis proposed to dispose of wastewaters. He noted that they L) f) 8 Ll. '.. L. f would not accept another's historical data. He further noted that toxicity studies would be required to determine the impacts of proposed wastewater discharges on marine life and recreational use of coastal waters. Identify and analyze methods of wastewater disposal to include hydrologic studies of applicants' groundwater basin to determine the water quality problems in that areat if on-site disposal would have an adverse effect on groundwater quality. Would expect Cities to view the groundwater areas to determine if own onsite can be handled and for own protection determine what can be taken into own groundwater. All data would be reviewed and if shown that the wastewater can be discharged without a problemt then permit would be issued and could proceed. Suggested that this be done one year before even consider applying for a permit. Mayor Hughan asked if there was anyone further in the audience wishing to speak on the matter. Mr. Dennis Batest consultant of Dennis Bates Associ- atest addressed the Councils noting his involvement in the process for the past two years both as part of a Citizens Group viewing the alternatives and involved with a local projectt stating the need for moving ahead with a decision. He noted that Gilroy and Morgan Hill are facing decisions regarding normal growth necessary for the Cities to proceed forward. These decisions have to be made now in regard to the decisions that would reflect the growth plans approved. He further referred to the EIR and noted that most of the questions tonight have been addressed in the EIR and issues raised are reflected in the EIR; others have indicated there's going to be damage to the Monterey Bay as a result of the several alterna- tives which directly or indirectly discharge effluent into the Bay. In the EIRt the level of treatment that would be provided would be at a high level for both the pajaro or the Ocean Discharget direct pipeline. Important to keep in mindt the level of treatment would be equal to if not greater than the level of treatment that's currently being provided and by the Monterey Bay communities. He stated that some 43tOOOtOOO gallons is currently being deposited in the Monterey BaYt but some is only primary treatment by these very same communities present this eveningt testifying before this Council. He urged that there should not be a double standard applied - a standard for Monterey Bay communities that is different from that of other communities. He stated that the resource is a shared resource and does not solely belong to the Monterey Bay communitiest but in fact belongs to others who make up the State of California. Ample information has been provided for the Councils to make a decision. Mr. Jim Schillingt developert addressed the Councils in defense of developers and noted htat they really don't pay for things; as a developer they don't have any money. When they create something they do it in such way by renting or selling which are eventually passed on the consumer. The consumer is ultimately the one who pays. This is a community decision. He further noted the economic impact - no decision will have an effect on both communities. Commercial and industrial construction is being curtailed. In Morgan Hillt they are restricted to 3% yearly growth rate which is mandated by Measure E process; 200 approximate homes to construct; $30tOOOtOOO of residential construction per year plus equiva- lent amount of commercial and industrialt another $30tOOOtOOO- $60tOOO,000 per year and if Gilroy were included about $150,000,00 to $180,000,000 per year in construction for both communitiest which is a significant impact on the economy. Developers will not suffer; they will look for communities throughout the area that will need housest industries, etc. Someone has to make the decision that housing, schools, businesst etc. must proceed. He further stated that the water quality proposed to be discharged in Monterey Bay is basically higher than what is presently being discharged by the Monterey Bay communities. He noted that it is possible that the level of treatment by the present Monterey Bay communities might - - ...... .... ..... ..- r;085 ...... L_ " have to be reviewed. He stated that the present Gilroy-Morgan Hill Treatment Plant can treat 12.2 mgd in 99 out of 100 years in the existing plant; the only problem is the 1 year or 100 year storm, when that takes place during that roughly one-week period. All that is necessary is to get the Monterey Bay communities to agree that they allow discharge into the pajaro in a highly diluted form for that one week only. .~ Mr. Kenneth Demit, Manager of the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, addressed the Councils, stated that there is no primary effluent from Monterey County being discharged into Monterey Bay. He noted that they operate five treatment plants; one is an advanced primary, a little less than secondary, in addition now under construction is a $50,000,000 treatment plant and standards will be even lower when this treatment plant is completed. One hundred percent of the time they will be discharging secondary effluent, not ocean plan as spoken to in Gilroy's EIR. In addition to that they have accomplished all that Mr. Wong has required and have satisfied the County, the Regional Board and the State that discharges are satisfactory to the Bay. - Councilman Mussallem inquired about Salinas' effluent. Mr. Demit stated that the City of Salinas has two treatment plants. He noted that until Monterey County's treatment plant is completed, one of their treatment plants discharges to the Salinas River; the main plant discharges in Monterey County's outfall to the ocean. ~'fO." Linda Callon, attorney for the Cities of Gilroy/Morgan Hill Project, addressed the Councils and noted for the record that many of the concerns addressed tonight regarding the EIR were responded to and the comments that were asked to be ad- dressed, were addressed in the EIR. Specifically, some of the issues raised, the superior alternative, the environmentally superior alternative, Counsel has directed that same is not required under CEQA; that only if the No Project Alternative had been the superior environmental alternative, would Councils' be required to choose another alternative as superior alternative. She noted that this response was written in the Final EIR. She noted that the comments that Supervisor DelPiero made as to both the Monterey Board of Supervisors and the Air Pollution District, said letters are in the Final EIR and the response to the comments from those letters are in the Final EIR. She noted that as to the other issues raised, no new information was brought to Councils regarding the environ- mental effects. She noted that the Councils are required under CEQA and that it has been done on their behalf, that there's a reasoned analysis in response to comments. The Councils have reviewed the EIR and have looked at the responses to comments. In terms of Councils' choice of a project, now that the EIR has been certified, Councils will want to listen to the facts brought forth by various speakers; Councils will want to have Staff reports brought back by your own experts; you will need proposed findings, given which Alternative if you come to consensus on one or two alternatives. Councils' obligation under CEQA is to look at the environmental effects which have been presented. Councils are required before approving the project to substantially mitigate those effects if possible; if those effects cannot be mitigated, under CEQA, Councils as the decision maker are to balance the benefits of the proposed project against the unavoidable environmental effects and if the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the environmental risks, Councils may still approve that project. Those are issues that will have to be considered as the Councils move through this process with another hearing or two before coming to a determination. - - - Mayor Hughan responded to the idea that Councils are going to deliberately, or want to, or expect to pollute the Bay. She stated that Councils care as well and have no intention to pollute the Bay and requested the Cities' consul- tant to demonstrate that concerns are taken into account that concerns have been addressed and will continue to do so as a decision is made. 5?86 Mr. Christopher Cain, James Montgomery Engineers, addressed the Councils noting that several years ago studies were made in order to propose wastewater alternatives for the communities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. He stated that the problem faced was where to put the water after it was treated. It was necessary to consider the capacity of the groundwater basin that would not admit much more percolation. They had to pay attention to groundwater quality. They were and are subject to surface discharge prohibitions listed in the Basin Plan. The whole arrangement of the studies that have occurred over the last several years have focused on disposal with treatment being a by-product. The disposal alternatives that have been identified include Land Disposal that would involve spray irrigation of crops in dedicated land disposal areas, on hillside areas, on either side of Santa Clara Valley; the water would seep into the ground, part of it would evaporate, the reaminder would enter the groundwater basin under normally what is considered to be the drinking water aquifer of southern Santa Clara and San Benito County. Most of the concerns surrounding this alternative have focused on drinking water. Other options involve Surface Discharge. In one case Surface Discharge would be to Llagas Creek and the pajaro River; the Pajaro River was designated as a better location than several smaller streams such as Llagas Creek. One alternative was set for discharge there, with the proviso that advanced treatment is utilized. The only material that has caused difficulty is the sodium. In going to the Ocean Discharge they have found that the ocean levels of salt, sodium chloride, are signifi- cantly above those in wastewater and then the main treatment problem is eliminated. He noted that this alternative was originally thought to be cost prohibitive because of the distance to the ocean and the fact that it was assumed that it would have to pumped over the hill. When it was pointed out that water runs downhill along the pajaro, the economics changed-this came into the picture. Under the regulations of the Regional Board and under the guidelines of the Basin Plan, this looked like under the environmental, the most acceptable alternative. The last two alternatives here combine the Surface Discharge to Pajaro and the Land Disposal option with the intent of mitigating their respective impacts. In this case, Winter pajaro Discharge, Summer Land Disposal gives the benefit of dilution. He further noted that the pajaro River runs dry in the summertime; all the wastewater we would put in it would be the river. The typical pajaro TDS level might be in excess of a thousand milligrams per liter and a very small amount of one mgd flow. Ultimately, this option might involve putting 15 mgd of treated wastewater with a TDS level of 600 into a river which had a TDS of 1000. This would decrease the TDS level of the river and be a benefit. However, treated waste- water is treated wastewater. To avoid that, Land Disposal would be utilized in the summer when the groundwater basin can accept it from a hydraulic point of view and put the water in the River when there are winter flows to dilute it. The final option other than No Project involves using Land Disposal with the use of underdrains to pullout the over-saturated ground- water underneath the treatment and percolation ponds and then allow that to go down Llagas Creek and pajaro River, with con- straints that would be not only treatment in the treatment plant but there would be treatment on the land; all the water that would enter the river would have passed through the soil matrix first and then in addition there would be dilution with natural groundwater which would be mixed with wastewater. Finally, the No Project Alternative was evaluated in the EIR. The No Project Alternative from a Wastewater Management point of view is no wastewater management. In the EIR, the consult- ants that prepared that document explored several different scenarios for the sorts of things that would happen and typically what that amounts to is some slowing of growth and a tendency to move toward alternatives such as Land Disposal on a fragmented and relatively uncontrolled basis with poorer control by regulatory agencies such as the Regional Board; therefore, the No Project Alternative is not necessarily a decision relative to growth as much as a decision relative to ....... lol.",P. - ~""... - r-087 ,) t_ whether Gilroy-Morgan Hill choose to manage wastewater or choose not to manage wastewater. He further explained the treatment process for each alternative selected to protect receiving water quality as follows: Alternative L SP SO SL LD Treatment 75% Removal of N. DaB, TSS 95% Removal of N, P, BOD, TSS 90% Removalof BOD, TSS Same as SP (Winter) + L (Summer) Same as L plus Iron Removal - He noted that the treatment plants are tailored to the needs of the disposal. They are tailored to treat the particu- lar pollutants that are identified as a problem. Pollutants that have previously been mentioned this evening include toxics; toxics are addressed in a pretreatment program. Mr. Wong had mentioned that there are several compounds that have been found in wastewaters in Gilroy, for example, tetrachlora ethylene, PCB, believed to come from some dry cleaners and the City has a very active program of going after those dry cleaners to eliminate that particular compound. The Cities of Gilroy, Morgan Hill, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Salinas, San Jose, Palo Alto, all of the communities in this whole area are addressing the toxic problem in the same way, that is treatment to remove same from the wastewater before it ever gets to the treatment plant; therefore, these treatment plants would not have to address those specific compounds. He further explained diagrams graphically showing Land Disposal, disposal sites in the final selection process, etc. He further explained the following Cost Comparison Chart: -- (In Million Dollars) Initial 1988 20 Year Alt. Capital o & M Present Worth L $48 $1.1 $104 Wl"'l'tlt SP 33 1.6 99.9 SO 61 0.7 92.3 - SL 38 1.5 101 LD 36 0.98 89.2 He further explained the objective was to implement a Wastewater Management System for Gilroy and MorganHIll that meets the following long-term goals: Cost-effective; Accept- able to regulatory agencies; Minimal in environmental impacts; and acceptable to consensus of community. Mayor Hughan stated that it is her impression that the Councils would prefer to adjourn this meeting and proceed to decision-making discussions at the next meeting of the two City Councils which is scheduled for April 29, 1986. Mayor Barke stated the City of Morgan Hill Council does not wish to make any decision on the matter at this meeting. Councils agreed that the next meeting be scheduled for 7:00 p.m. Mayor Hughan suggested that the Councilmembers tentatively schedule May 6 and 13 for additional meetings. ,- Mayor Hughan thanked all those for attending and input and assures everyone that they do care and will take into con- sideration everything presented this evening. She adjourned the meeting and continued the Public Hearing to Tuesday, April 29, at 7:00 p.m. in the Gilroy City Council Chambers. (IO:2~".h7.) - i ii Respectfully submitted, Jd~k~ .~~