Laserfiche WebLink
opinion is clearly that this is a good settlement. He underscored the geographic waste <br />limitation is only achievable through an agreement like this because of previous Supreme <br />Court decisions. The community monitor is an unprecedented step. He addressed the <br />two issues raised by Ms. Cabanne. Regarding the need to track trucks, he said that in all <br />significant cases, Waste Management is already tracking trucks by license number, truck, <br />type of material, etc. Regarding enforcement, he agrees it is needed, but the Agreement <br />provides for enforcement. The community monitor is specifically empowered by in the <br />Agreement that any time there is reason to believe there is substantial non-compliance <br />with environmental laws or the permit, the applicable regulatory agency would be <br />informed and it would proceed with action. The County has permit authority to impose <br />fines, enjoin activities and to bring criminal charges, if necessary. In addition to all that, <br />because there is an agreement there would also be action on breach of the contract. He <br />believed there were enough enforcement mechanisms to make sure this landfill is <br />operated a safely and responsibly as it can. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala referred to the Giants incident and asked how many calls and meetings <br />did it take before anything actually happened. What gives this monitor more power to get <br />action when in the past the County could not get action. <br /> <br /> Mr. Orr referred to a new state law on the Governor's desk that would call for a <br />public hearing any time there is a proposed declassification of a hazardous material to a <br />lower category. In the agreement, there is a provisions that there must be a public <br />hearing in the County before any decision is made by the Department of Toxic <br />Substances Control, so the County can influence the Department. The community <br />monitor will be closely scrutinizing what comes to the site. Without someone on site, <br />things can slip by. In the Giants situation there was much discussion about who removes <br />the material, who pays for it, and where does it go. With this agreement, those <br />discussions will occur before the material gets to the landfill. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala asked what will happen to the Giants. <br /> <br /> Mr. Orr did not know. He assumed there would be further litigation. The <br />important thing is that what comes into this facility is controlled and that kind of incident <br />does not happen again. <br /> <br /> David Tam, 1616 Harkon Street, Berkeley, concurred with others in thanking <br />Council for its proactiveness in this matter. Thanks to the efforts of many citizens, <br />including Ms. Cabanne, it will not be possible for the creation of regional megafills <br />within metropolitan areas. As a long time advocate for recycling, he feels that cheap <br />landfills are the enemy of recycling and source reduction. He urged Council to approve <br />this settlement and move forward with the process. It was a long series of negotiations <br />and many of the items were put forth by Ms. Cabanne, who continues to raise valid <br />questions. When the Northern California Recycling Association next meets, it will <br />consider her two conditions. His recommendation is to go ahead with the settlement. <br />Finally, he hoped that the additional funds for open space would help Pleasanton in its <br />pursuits. <br /> <br /> 38 09/20/99 <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />