City plans lawsuit if plant goes forward

<p>In the days before Tuesday’s 3-2 straw vote by county supervisors denying a controversial asphalt plant, the City Council notified project opponents and the county that a yes vote would result in a lawsuit.</p><!-- Nothing to do. The paragraph has already been output --><p>In letters to the county and attorneys for project opponents last week, Petaluma Mayor Pamela Torliatt said the city “stands ready” to challenge the project in court.</p><p>“We have instructed our legal counsel to be prepared to file a complaint on behalf of the city if the project is approved,” Torliatt wrote in a letter to attorneys for the Petaluma River Council, an environmental group that opposes the asphalt plant.</p><p>Headed by former City councilman David Keller, the Petaluma River Council has contemplated its own suit against the county if the plant is ultimately approved, and Torliatt’s letter indicated the city could decide to join in that lawsuit.</p><p>A letter from the river council’s attorney to the city said the organization would “fully litigate” the matter on its own, indicating that should keep Petaluma’s costs minimal if the city joined in the suit.</p><p>County supervisors on Tuesday tentatively indicated they would vote 3-2 to deny the project at a July 21 meeting, though a proposal to approve the project based on stricter conditions may also be considered.</p><p>The basis of the city’s complaint is a 13-page letter sent to county supervisors last week, in which the city outlines its concerns about the Dutra Group’s proposed asphalt plant and concrete recycling facility south of Petaluma.</p><p>The project, between the Petaluma Boulevard South off-ramp of Highway 101 and the Petaluma River, sparked heavy criticism in part due to its location across from wetlands at Shollenberger Park.</p><p>The site is outside of city limits but within the city’s urban growth boundary, prompting Petaluma and other communities to urge the county to respect local cities’ wishes for future development in such cases.</p><p>In its letter to supervisors, the city criticized the environmental review and decision-making process the county followed in readying the proposed project for a final vote.</p><p>Among other concerns, the city said the county did not allow adequate time for public review of the plant’s impacts on greenhouse gas emissions and barge traffic.</p><p>The EIR for the project did not fully consider alternatives for the project that would create fewer “significant” impacts and should be re-issued for comments, the city’s letter also said.</p><p>Alternative plans for the project considered in the EIR include eliminating the concrete recycling area and shifting the barge-offloading area to a privately owned parcel southeast of the project site.</p><p>The city contends that the alternative plans would meet most of Dutra’s objectives in building the plant.</p><p>“So long as the alternatives are feasible, the county cannot approve the proposed project,” the city’s letter said.</p><p>The Dutra Group declined to comment on the city’s legal threat.</p><p>Torliatt said council members unanimously decided to submit the comments in closed-door sessions with their attorney. She praised Tuesday’s decision by supervisors.</p><p>“The city of Petaluma is cautiously optimistic that the straw vote of 3-2 will prevail on July 21,” Torliatt said. “I hope that the supervisors understood the concerns of the Petaluma-area residents and the entire county’s vision for tourism, economic development and our health.”</p><p>(Contact Corey Young at corey.young@arguscourier.com)</p>