More than two weeks after a judge denied a suit to stop the Dutra Asphalt Plant across the Petaluma River from Shollenberger Park, eyes are on the City of Petaluma as it considers whether or not to join in an appeal.
Meanwhile, citizens and members of the non-profits that have long opposed the plant said they believe they have grounds to appeal Judge Ren?Chouteau's decision, while The Dutra Group maintained it's time to finally move forward.
To date, there's been no construction on the 38-acre plant proposed at Haystack Landing, just outside Petaluma's city limits, after a coalition of local non-profits, individuals and the city of Petaluma sued to stop it. They argued that the County and Dutra failed to adequately address health and environmental concerns. During the litigation, Dutra agreed to provide a 30-day notice if it intended to break ground.
But Dutra spokeswoman Aimi Dutra said that the company now plans to move quickly through the remaining steps to begin construction and hopes to be up and running in late 2012 or early 2013.
"It is time to move forward and that is what we intend to do," she said, arguing that the project had been thoroughly vetted at multiple levels, including an "extensive" EIR process, modifications to address community concerns, the planning commission's approval, the board of supervisors' approval, and most recently Judge Chouteau's decision.
At the same time, groups like the Petaluma River Council, Moms for Clean Air and others are "seriously considering" an appeal and hoping that the city of Petaluma will choose to join them.
"It's highly likely we'll go ahead with the appeal," said David Keller of the Petaluma River Council and a party to the suit that was denied. "There's a number of pieces we feel (the judge) got dead wrong."
Keller and Sheri Chlebowski of Moms for Clean Air argued that the city has an important symbolic role to play in an appeal, in addition to the fact that it's already invested time and money in rehabilitating the wetlands across from the proposed plant - efforts that could be lost if the plant goes in, they said.
"We're hoping the city does its due diligence in protecting its investment and continues to stay the course," Keller said.
The city has 60 days from when Judge Chouteau's decision is entered in the court to decide whether or not it will join in an appeal. The Council discussed the issue in closed session at its Monday meeting, drawing more than an hour's worth of impassioned public comment.
The council didn't make a decision, but rather asked its lawyers to analyze Judge Chouteau's decision for grounds for appeal. It's expected to hear a report on the subject at its next meeting.
Councilmembers reported getting hundreds and in some cases more than a thousand letters, calls and e-mails on the subject, many taking the shape of a form letter from the website change.org.
Councilmembers seemed overwhelmed and impressed by the response. Correspondences arrived both in favor of and opposing an appeal.
In the Argus-Courier's online poll last week, 65.8 percent of respondents said they disagreed with Judge Chouteau's decision, while 65.7 percent said they thought they city should participate in the appeal.
"When you get this kind of volume of response," said Mayor David Glass in an interview prior to the city council meeting, "you need to show that you did everything you could." He said he'd only seen such an intense level of public response once before, when the council voted to double the garbage rates in 2005.
Councilmember Mike Healy, a lawyer, wrote in a letter to constituents that, while he continues to oppose the asphalt plant at the proposed site, he needed to be convinced there were adequate grounds for an appeal.
He also wondered if the city had a useful role to play in an appeal and whether it could afford the cost of participating.
Such costs are unknown to date, though the non-profits say they have and will continue to shoulder the majority of the legal costs associated with opposing the plant.
The city's attorneys have billed Petaluma a little over $68,000 in litigation and pre-litigation expenses, according to information obtained through a public records request.
Glass also said he hadn't decided yet whether or not the city should join in the appeal, but that the "decibel level" of concern over the plant was causing him to think the city should stick it out. "We're not completely out of the ball game, and it ain't over til it's over," he said. "You've gotta play all nine innings."
Dutra's attempt to build an asphalt plant at Haystack Landing began in 2004. Before that, it operated a quarry and asphalt plant west of Highway 101 since 1992, which it sold in 2005. It also operated a temporary asphalt plant across the Petaluma River from the Sheraton Hotel for three years.
Beginning in 2008, residents and environmental groups began to oppose the plant as Dutra sought approval of the draft and final environmental impact reports.
The project has undergone several revisions since then in response to environmental and health concerns raised by residents. In early 2010, Dutra again revised the project to address a concern from the United States Coast Guard that the proposed new docking site for barges could create a navigational hazard.
The Board of Supervisors approved the project in Dec. 2010, and the Petaluma coalition filed suit in early 2011.
(Contact Jamie Hansen at Jamie.hansen@argus courier.com)
UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy: