Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Mohr stated that if San Francisco doesn't create that facility and we annex the <br />property, then we become prohibited from creating a new facility or if we do, we have to pay <br />twice. She felt that if we asked for less capacity, she would like an option of recycling. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver stated that EBDA has the pipe and if LAVWMA uses less than the <br />requested capacity, it will reduce our operating costs, but that the pipe in the ground will need <br />eventual replacement so LAVWMA must pay its contribution towards that amount. EBDA also <br />wants to control the amount of growth that will take place in the Valley and the impacts it can <br />have on Hayward. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum stated that most of the costs are fixed. Buy-in costs are fixed. Once there is <br />an agreement with Hayward, those costs will be fixed. There won't be significant operating cost <br />adjustments because the incentives for Re still exist for water reuse that financially make it <br />attractive. It is fundamentally a growth limitation issue and that is where the deterrent lies. <br />Reuse cannot be used by the LAVWMA member agencies directly to increase capacity. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver felt the people of Pleasanton and Livermore have to agree on this. If we <br />want a deal with EBDA, he felt this was the best agreement, even though it isn't locked in <br />concrete and could be reopened later. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mayor Tarver, and seconded by Ms. Dennis, (1) that the Council <br />reconfirm the previous direction given to its LAVWMA representatives concerning the proposed <br />counter-proposal to EBDA and the proposal to Hayward; (2) that the Council does not support <br />the proposed modification to the counter-proposal as suggested by DSRSD; and (3) that the <br />following changes to the counter-proposal are acceptable: interest begins to accrue July 1, 1995 <br />rather than January 1, 2000 and the repayment period extends through 2030. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers Dennis, Michelotti, Pico, and Mayor Tarver <br />NOES: Councilmember Mohr <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />7. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico made a proposal to consider initiating the General Plan amendment for the <br />Del Prado site on the 6/20/95 agenda. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Pico, and seconded by Ms. Michelotti, to consider the initiation <br />of a General Plan amendment for the Del Prado site on the 6/20/95 agenda. <br /> <br />06/06/95 25 <br /> <br /> <br />