CCMIN051998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Roush said what will happen is that under the conditional use permit Waste Management will pay a regional fee based on truck traffic in the am and pm peak period. That money will go into the TVTC fees and be allocated accordingly. Mr. Pico said there is no difference if the lawsuit is settled, won or lost. The regional fee will still be there. Daryl Mueller, 3290 Dyer Road, Livermore, said his property borders the landfill. Being a neighbor of the landfill, this is the third or fourth permitting process he has witnessed. The issues that concerned him the most are never dealt with and mitigations are not dealt with or mitigated some other way that does not solve the problem. There is one source of drinking water that comes out of the ground. The Bethany Reservoir is addressed but not the water for the people that live next to the landfill. The residents have asked for a contingency fund for the water or pollution. In the agreement on page 20 it states that the Alameda County Waste Management Authority will be held exempt should a liability exist. He said that the truck traffic has escalated over the years since the Waste Management took it over. He did not even know a landfill was out there until 1990. The landfill now has expanded past the point where it is manageable. For the past three years mud has been dragged out onto the roadways and no one is concerned about it. He said he has written Mr. Richards regarding the fact that the dump is operating in violation of its CUP. If something as visible as this is being allowed to happen then he wondered what is happening behind the scene. Donna Cabanne, 4086 Loch Lomand, Livermore, urged Council not to approve the settlement agreement. She felt the revised settlement is a sell out. Agreeing to these terms is not a compromise it is a complete cave in. The project is too big and would bring in garbage from four counties and beyond. Already the Altamont is one of the largest dumps in northern California. Waste Management Authority is not giving up anything. The subsequent 40 million is contingent upon several conditions that have not been met. The new deal has a yearly cap of 2.16 million which includes all of Alameda, San Francisco and some of Contra Costa County and beyond over the next twenty five years. Cushioned into this is an 8 million capacity ton reserved for Contra Costa County. She asked why this cushion was being built in when Contra Costa County had Keller Canyon. Worse yet, any unused portion of this cap can be banked by the garbage company for use in any other year up to 2.6 million. She felt a reduction from 2.9 to 2.6 was a meaningless reduction. This cap is permanent and any capacity saved through recycling will be sold to outside jurisdictions. As a teacher she is outraged that the children are being taught to be efficient recyclers while any reserve is being given to outside entities. If this agreement is signed there will be enormous environmental and political fall out. With this permanent cap, no matter what is done over the next twenty-five years, every inch of space will be sold to other counties. She said this cap has nothing to do with the County's needs. It guarantees huge garbage imports for the next twenty-five years. She urged Council not to settle unless a provision is added that imports would be terminated if federal law gives communities the right to prohibit garbage import. There are very few benefits with this agreement. The garbage is coming here because other counties have a business tax. The twenty-five cent fee is Pleasanton City Council 32 05/19/98 Minutes