HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-0519.CONT'D.MINCivic Center Council Chamben, 1175 East Main Street
I. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Wastewater Effluent and Bhnolids Management Decision. (CONTINUED FROM COUNCIL
MEETING OF MAY 16, 2000)
Public Works Director Paula Brown gave a quick overview of the memo provided to council. She explained staff
has gone through the options available, and two options appear available to council. The original design has bean
left in for comparison purposes only. The options available are modifying the irrigation system for poplar
plantation, with the biosolids modified to a Class A, and the other option is to discharge year round to the creek and
still use the city's property for a Class A biosolid. She recommends the Class A biosolids and the land application as
the only viable option at this time. Her recommendation is the poplar plantation. The primary reason for staffs
recommendation is Level 2 water is more than adequate for tha purposes as shown for poplar plantations, and going
to Class A biosolids give staff flexibility, with an easier option offsite. The cost is $1 million less in capital.
Brown explained that with regard to the water transfer or water lease for inslream use, staff gave a proposal to
modify irrigation rights on the Imperatrice Property and the Ci~fs own property and she believes that will work.
Her reason for the water trade from the irrigation property is tl~t it is a viable option and makes sense and is
something the city can pursue. Brown then explained the Impl~nentatinn Steps on Page 3. In addition, she clarified
the edditionalwaterquaiitymonitoringofeffluentinthepon 'tomonitorregrowth. Ifthere is jnstification for
adding sodium hypochlorite prior to putting the water into thed~'gation system for disinfection purposes, the city
will do that, and in fact is recommended for poplar troas. Air quality monitoring can he done to evaluate the
potential Iravel distance of any pathogenic organisms. It is the city's racommendation that lime stabilization
currently used at the treahTlent plant is continued as it shrinks the size of the lagoons on the offsite property, and the
lagoon on the offsite property can he used just for winter storage, with biosolids at all other times of year going into
drying beds, or placed in liquid form on the property. It is the city's recommendation that the binsuiids go in dry
form as the liquid form requires a vehicle or spreading mechanism. The effluent sprinkler and biosolids
management redosign for DEQ approval would be completed Within 30 to 90 days. It is the City's recommendation
to go with membrane firm, as the technology with membrane filters provides the city with better flexibility, use
and better long- term operation and maintenance. She reitera~d staffs recommendation to go to the hillside, use it
for poplar production, monitor that water, and take the Class binsollda to the hillside for $7~ million capital
versus an additional $4 million to go to the creek. She edd~dA~at temperature is an outstanding unknown and
something that will not be solved tomorrow, and could take until next year before DEQ has their temperature
TIVlDL's written. This would have to go through the Environmental Quality Commission and the EPA for final
approval, and then there would he an implementation period, which could be two to tan years.
Wheeldon questioned the reduction in costs of $1 million, and Brown stated that going to the hillside for a poplar
plantation reduces the initial option by $1 million, and this would not make any difference between Class A or Class
B if the lime stabilized product is continued.
Fine referred to No. 4 on page 3, end asked that if that recommendation was followed, would the city be completing
an effluent sprinkler and biosolids management redasign within 30 - 90 days, and what type of sprinklars would be
in that rodesign. Brown replied that the city does not have that information yet, although the sprinklers could go
from 20 to 30 feet, or 6 -8 feet.
Laws asked about efforts made to compare potential replacement water from water rights with the amount of water
that would be taken out of the creek. Brown explained we discharge on average 2 million gallons of effluent into
the creek a day, and if you take 2 million gallons a day, 30 days a month, seven months of the year that the city is
out of the emek, that makes 420 million gallons of water. Laws asked how much water is available to the city from
the city's water rights. Brown said she would not advise replacing the whole 2 million gallons a day for the entire
City Council Continued Meeting 5/19/2000 -Pnge I
time that it is not in the creek, end that the water should be put!in the creek when it needs it, which is typically as
Laws commented that with regard to reexamining TlV~)L's en~l going through the methodology, he had gone
through the documents and it did nut look like a good idea to reexumine phosphorous TMDL's, but temperature
would be something we would went to become involved with. Laws asked if the city went to en increek option of
patting the effluent in the creek, end therefore would have to meet temperature TMDL's, could that be phased in in a
way that would allow the city to start to get online tight away tO put water hack in the creek and address the
temperature control part later. Brown replied we do not have a~temperatare standard in oar current permit.
Bob Eimstad clarified that a temperature management plan wojfld have to be developed if allowed to discharge intO
the creek, which would become part of the permit if accepted ISy DEQ.
lendowner, with notification to TID that the city would trimslet, convert or lease the waters for instroum purposes.
Reid questioned the soils end depth needed for growing popl~ trees end asked if Sylvan Systems had actually gone
onto the site to look at the soil. Brown clarified they had not g~ne onto the site to do test pits but had seen the site
and the foundation engineering report.
Eimstad said he had been on a tour with one of the poplar plantations and the soil situation was discussed at length
and they felt confident having reviewed the information and se~n the site that it would be suitable for poplar growth.
Wheeldon inquired as tO a wetlends solution. Brown replied t~.at the system did not produce the resulting
phosphorous levels. Adjustments had been made within the soil filter system and unless a different wetlands
methodulog~ is applied the system did not work.
John Gasick of DEQ said he had en opportunity to discuss the issue with a ~sheries biologist for the Deparunent of
Fish & Wildlife end he commented that the focus should be on the water for the fish. Water quantity is now
definitely looked at as an issue. He presented a chart on the oVerheed projector end explained the slroam gauges
location one of which is downsUeum on the confluence of Ashland Creek and Bear Creek, end the other upstream of
the Rogue River Irrigation District diversion. There is not a 1o~ ofhistotic data available, but explained that 1997 is
an average year for water flow. The goal is to manage Bear C~eek tO 10 cfs all the way from Emigrant Lake to the
mouth, and in 1997 Bear Creek had over 10 cfs the entire year. He added that 600/0 of the phosphorous loading in
Bear Creek comes from Ashland.
Reid agreed that the phosphorous needs to come out of the water, but as far as fish and environmental health is
concerned the first thing needed in the creek is water. She added that the water will be cleaner because of the new
plent end tertiary third stage with membrane filters.
Hauck questioned the cfs end where it becomes problematic in Medford. Gasick clarified that whatever goes down
to Medford gets taken out at Medford as that is the low point ill the system. Gasick said that if you were to take out
the phosphorous and put in the effluent that will not do anythi~lg tO change it, end you will have the same situetion
as you have now as you cannot manage that water down to the ~reouth. He added that all the effluent goes into the
Rogue River Irrigation District at this point.
Laws questioned the City being required to submit a "water quantity management plan to augment the flows in Bear
Creek during the critical flow period immediately following the iffigution season, end the proposal to augment
sWeum flows during this critical period by coupling the water rights f~om the purchased property end the holding
reservoir to meet the concerns of ODFW." He asked where We would stand with DEQ if the City did a plan beyend
what has been done end didn~ get adequate water.
Gasick said they would ask the City to submit a revised plan. He added that the Water Resources Dept. has put
together several ways of getting 10 cfs in the creek.
City Council Continued Meeting 5/19/2000 - Pnge 2
Wheeldon asked whether the cost of replacement water was factored in, end as the water rights have been paid for,
does the City then pay for the water as well.
Brown clarified that for TID water we pay for the lmperatrice' ter on the City's property, a maintenance end use
fee, regardless of whether or not we use the water, end this is '~luded in the operations and maintenance cost of
purchasing the water.
biosolids.
Brown said the use ofbiosolids is a soil amendment, as it mak~ the soil better for eny type of grass crop even if it is
for caRle grazing on the property.
Nolte added that the same issues are involved using only biosOlids and not U~ated effluent and it has to be for a farm
use. Ira farmer applies fertilizer to farm property no one will l:luestion it but when the City applies fertilizer we are
challenged, so we have to be in a position to show it is for fanli use.
AI Cook, Regional Manager of Water Resources, introduced hhnself, end said them are a number of things he would
like to clarify. He said that Paula is right with her recommend~itious~ There are so many options it makes it difficult
to son out to craft a solution, but is very confident there are sufficient buckets of water in the valley to take a hard
look at it end figure how that water may be utilized. The majo/ity of the water rights in the valley right now are
going under a process called final proof survey, which means llhey are not subject to transfer regardless of their
ownership. The City has some water rights that are tied in up ~e final proof survey end the city has water rights that
are f~e end clear from that. That process is near completion and he expects to have that wrapped up as far as the
upper valley goes by the end ofthe year. He said the stateme~t there is more demand for water in the valley than
water is true, but not a complete picture as you have to look atithe other side of the coin which is the water rights
that can be accommodated elsewhere, for example onnew lena, ornewwater rights. IfRogue Valley lrrigation
District chose to exercise their water right, as they have the oldest end largest irrigation right, you wouldn~ have eny
water in lower Beer Creek. He said that the only way the City today cen guarantee a delivery of eny quantity of
water from a right held by the city would be through a lease or a transfer, end just by putting more water in the
stream guarantees that water goes back in the siream.
Bwwn clarified that you jug cannot put it back in the creek as~irrigation flow, you have to put it in specifically as en
inslreem use end label it.
Laws said Cook had made en excellent point that the City is g ing through a whole change in the way water fights
end water management are handled end asked if be had eny i~ how many years it may be before it is sorted out.
Cook said he wasn~ sure what "sorted it out" means but they will take a look at given projects end fry end work it
through the steps. To suggest that within five years we would have a laissez faire market situation with water is
probably folly.
Gasick clarified that the fall is a critical time for the anadromoUs fish return. May end early June are also significent
times when the ~ are heading out. Those are the timas to focus on end a water quantity management plan should
take that into account.
Mayor Shaw asked council if there were further questions end this is en opportunity to discuss end deliberate to a
decision.
Wheeldon read aloud a statement of her thoughts. She believes that what our consultants, stuff, end state agencies
have presented is sound end feels that while there are not 100°4 guarantees is confident that this project has been
city Council Continual Meeting 5/1912000 - Pag~ 3
given considerable attention, it will continue to be a high proffie project end many adjusUnents have been made to
the plan to ensure its success. The ongding monitoring will ensure that the risks are minimized. She feels the scale
of the project, although nnt huge by many cities' standards, ha.'~ cenm'bnted to the concems. The amount ofwater
held in the reservoir, when and how often it will be sprayed, mid the potential of oversaturation of the ground, have
all contributed to concerns. The large mount of water was also really a deterrant in oar developing a piece of the
wetlends solution. The hapacts era project this size on surrounding neighborhoods is a greet concern as well. She
continues to support the rationale of the initial council declsiml to keep the effluent in Ashland for use, but is
realistic about how it can be used given the recent experiences~ She asked if the parents of Ashlend's children would
be content to have their fields watered with Level 4 water, end doesn't believe so at this time. She doesn't think that
Class A sludge is necessarily something that people will accep~ at this time. She feels thet in l0 or 20 years when
water rates are high or the Parks maintenance budgets are under fire we will be ready to use these resources in
different ways but for now the social acceptance would continue to be low. It will take two to ten years for the
temperature issue to be sorted out, end even though we are nol subject to that temperature standard fight now, she
cannot vote for a solution that does not provide for this now. She said we have spent ten years on this issue, end it
should not be a temporary solution. As DEQ has suggested, the temperature issue is around the corner end we must
plan for it now. Mechanical pooling of the effluent on this scale is unacceptable from the perspective of resource
conservation end the potential impact on the immediate neighborhood. The talcking of sludge greet distances
cannot be sopponed any longer. She believes the solution to this problem lies in breaking it into smaller pieces with
suggest that we proceed with the poplar plan, with the intention of reducing the mount of water actually needed to
pursue the plan to one-halfar one-third of oar flow with the sllreading the Class A biosolids on the site to stabilize
end enrich the soil for the poplar growth. She feels that to stSbilize the impact on the immediate neighborhood we
need to look at potentially building a smaller wetlends that might accommodate a portion of the effluent that for a
time would go and begin the poplar phntatiun end focus on putting water in the creek end improve the ripmlen area
in Bear Creek. OncethepoplarplentetionlsestabllshedusesOmeofthewetertocreateaviablewetlands. Webave
not given the wetlends system enough time as an ecosystem needs to develop over time to prove itself. She feels it
would stabilize the impacts on the offsite property and while she understands the concerns of the neighbors, we are
all in this together.
Fine thanked end enmplimented the Mayor for running this anti the last meeting. He said she had gotten a lot of
people, both technical experts end citizens en opportunity to contribute end has helped everyone individually move
sufficiently sound to satisfy ~he community. It sntls~as him a~d feels there is no health risk Woublesome to him
personally. However, he feels that most of the community do{s not see the risk level in the same way. He feels we
have a public duty end the level of risk would not be minimized sufficien~y to make any hillside effluent disposal
scheme acceptable to oar community et this time. He doesn't f~el it appropriate for elected officials to do what the
latest sWaw pull suggests would be most popular. On the ethel hand he is firmly convinced we cannot properly
disregard public opinion, and cannot fly in the face ofen overwhelming public sentiment. He said his e-mils have
been about S0-1 against usin~ the effluent scheme on the hillsidle, end that includes many people fully aware of the
science and costs involved, end we have to balance the remaining risks. There is a risk we may have to use
mechanical refrigeration to lower temperatures, but said he is ileaxing now that is a less proximate risk than heard
before. The chances of having to do that are somewhat more remote end the timeframe when that may have to done
appears far distant. As EPA imposes the new nationwide temlteratare rules, he is convinced there will be a
~roundswell of revolt, not only on the pocketbook sentiment I~t a realization that we have a dwindling supply of
electric production capacity in the US, end the possible minimal benefit of using Bonneville to drain away vital
resources to sustain the Columbia and Snake River salmon runS, would not justify using mechsnical refrigeration to
chill effluent in the hope of restoring a sahnon run to an irrigation ditch. He feels it is justifiable to risk die
possibility that we will have to bum $2 million worth of electrlcity, end that oar community demands that we do
spend the additional roughly $5 million it will cost to get what: is likely w he a once end for all solution, socially
acceptable, end will put an end to discord in the community by discharging all of the effluent through tertiary
membrane filwation end cooling to the extent necessary into B~ar Creek. He is not happy with the concept of
encumbering all of the City's water rights in perpetuity which We may well need to get replacement water should we
go to the hillside. He feels that after the experiment with wetlands that failed et the expense of public funds, he
doesn't think a City government should continue in its role as a scientific research establishment, and docsn't care to
City Council Continued Me~ting 5/19/2000 - Pag~ 4
using the hillside for disposal of Class A biosolids and return~g the water to Bear Creek through membrane
filtration.
Hauck added he respectfully disagrees with Fine as he feels te perature standards nut only will be applied but will
be even tougher then before. The history of this is that the sci ce continues to become more refined and standards
would be told that we would not be allowed in the creek enles~ we could absolutely not find an alternative to that.
Costs are exorbitant for that option and he cannot vote for thnt~in light of the temperature issue. Just putting the
water back in the creek does not solve the problem, and it utkeh water management end that is the issue.
Laws .s~id he feels it has .been nerrowed down to two options ! r effluent. He feels .the bird in the hand is the option
probably would be cheaper, but TID water rights are uncertaint, and if we go on the bill we have to have replacement
water. If we use the other city water rights it would be at the e~penso of our water supply plan which he thinks
would give other psobletns, and them are potential delays involved with that option which could end in it not being
permitted at all. He refim~ed to the City of Dallas lawsuit where the City agreed with a manufacturer to take sledge
and treat it and use poplar Wees to get the phosphorous out as t~art of the treatment. Dallas is in the process of
applying for a land use permit for agricultural use for their tre~ plantation, end both LCDC end neighbors have
appealed this to LUBA. He said that LCDC end the State Dept of Agriculture are probably going to file a brief with
the neighbors because they believe it is not an agricultural use but a utility. If it is a utility, then we have a potential
block as a utility under state law can only be put on EFU land if you can prove you have no other feasible
alternative. He stated the Dullas case is directly applicable to our situation. The question is, is this poplar tree
plantation used to clean up sewage and is it an agricultural use or a utility. If decided it is a utility, than our use
would also be a utility. For those reasons he dues not feel this is a certainty end this could be delayed by other legal
processes. He is for the bird in the hand.
Hanson moved to return the effluent to the creek throught~ut the year.
Mayor Shaw said everyone should have an opportunity to speak.
Reid seconded the motion.
Council Discussion:
Laws wanted to confirm that we are talking just about the effluent now and separating that from the sludge, end
Hanson said we had not goRen to that part yet.
Hanson said he would like to finish his motion, which is to retllm the effinem to the creek throughout the year. He
said he has not decided what to do with the biosolids yet, and directed staff to prr~ent a plan to council to be
approved.
Mayor Shaw said they have presented a plan and we need to ~ something for DEQ.
Reid said Hanson could make any motion he wants end it can I)e debated.
later date.
Reid seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION:
City Council Continued Meeting 5/19/2000 - Page
Wheeldon said she didn't feel the biusolids are a non-issue, th~ the biosolids are a very real issue and that the permit
from DEQ has to address those issues.
Laws said we have an immediate problem of what is to be do: with the biosolids. The hillside is not an mediate
d' " ' '
the hillside. If we are going to change that she will need direction.
Reid said ~hat under discussion of the motion on the floor, council can vote on a motion that deals with effluent end
put another motion on the floor to deal with biosolids. She said it is perfectly acceptable to vote on effluent on one
motion and biusolids on another motiun. Reid said she would ~ike to discuss the motion on the floor which talks
about effluent, which is the motion and second on the floor.
Mayor Shaw disagreed and said that the motion on the flour is!.for staff to come back with a draR of what to do with
biosolids and she said she is hearing from staff that is not an o~inn.
Hanson said that is not what the motion was. The motion was 1o return the effluent to the creek throughout the year
and direct staff to present us with a plan for councils' approvalSwhich would include dealing with the biosolide and
the temperature. But the question is is whether to put the water on the creek or on the hillside.
The Mayor said that Hanson's motion includes both and we don't have the time to come back with a draft of the
biosolids. They can be separated out as Reid indicated, and wok on the effluent.
Fine indicated council should address to vote first on the effiu~int issue and have a separate discussion and debate on
the other part of the motion relating to the biosolids.
Reid asked if Hanson would accept that amendment. Hanson ~ecepted that amendment and Reid saeonded.
Mayor Shaw clarified that what is before the council is discussion of the effluent less the biosollds. She commented
she has been with the program for the last twelve years, as hay' a couple of othen. She felt that today some
important information was conveyed to the council in terms o~concerns about water quantity in the eroek. There are
four prlma~ areas important for the council and as a governing body to focus on, which have differing values in
terms of each of councils' concerns. Her primary and sacondaty concerns are identical which is environmental and
health risk factors as proposed. She found it interesting to fred out today that Ashland is not the sole source of water
in Bear Cree~-In terms of environmental impact we have an opportunity to put water into Bear Creek v/nan the fish
need it most, and that is irrespective of the water rights. Quantity is clearly a management issue, and she doesn't
believe that given the high complexity as presented that we can hope to impact that distribution system. In terms of
health, she has had an opportunity to talk to the Oregon Health Division, both Ken Kaufman and Ron Hall.
Kaufinan's words were exactly that this has been blown way oUt of proportion. He said that it has always been a
design issue with him, it was his suggestinn to come back with fsmaller sprinkler heads, and to go to more intensive
agricultural use. Kaufman's supervisor, Ron Hall, is more than comfortable with what is before the council in terms
of using poplars. California currently reclaims 44% of all its teeated effluent, 84% of that is used for agricultural
purposes, and is used in almost eve~ state in the nation. Her third issue is economics. The poplar plan allows room
to grow which DEQ feels is important and she thinks we as a community do too. It pwvidas potential for revenue of
$3,500 per acre every eight years in poplar harvest which can go back into reducing our own costs. It is the least
expensive for ratepeyers, at a time when budget issues are bein~ discussed. It retains water here for our future use.
The cost in $1 million over the current plan is significant. We do not have a permit to go in to Beer Creek, and the
design and process, requiring stafftime and cousultants money would start over. Finally, the poplar pluntation as
well as the spray irrigation is preferred by the Department of Environmental Quality, staff, consultants, specialists
and by the Federal Government. The Mayor discussed the poltic outcry because she has also been receiving e-
malls, part of which is propagated by the fact that a great deal mf misinformation has gotten out with fear and
intimidation about lawsuits. She said that sometimes tough decisions have to be made based on economics,
environment and also the health and well-being of a community.
City Council Continued Meeting 5119/2000 - Page 6
Reid inquired if the council is reedy to vote. She said she deb~es the Mayor on each paint but feels the council is
moving in the most environmentally friendly and economic wa~.
Fine concurred with Reid.
ROLL CALL: Hnuck, Wheeldon - No. Hanson, Fine, Rei~, Laws - Yes. Motion passed 4-2.
DISCUSSION:
The Mayor brought forward the issue that biosolids now need 0o he discussed.
Brown explained that if she does not have a decision on biosogds it will have to he landfilled at $35 a ton, and she
does not feel that is applicable to this discussion which is why · is giving council the only option she sees feasible
Hanson asked how much it takes for council to do biosolids o~ the hillside now.
Brown explained thet a lagoon would have to be built and that ~e need storage for the time when biosolids cannot
be applied. The City would have to get a permit from the conlty to do this, to build a road, pipeline and drying
facilities.
Hanson asked whether the lagoons built on the hillside for storage of the biosolids need to be edjacent to a slope or
can they be moved.
Brown said the council had just made a decision to put the effluent back in the creek and the lagoon would be built
on the top of the hill, although quite a bit smaller, and the drying beds are the same size.
Fine said he is happy with the staffrecommendation on biosolids as long as we are talking about Class A. He said
there have been issues raised in the community about the geolcgic stability of the slope, and has examined the report
as against the staffs consultant's report on the geological stabiLty and looking at the two is not convinced there are
geological issues that cannot be met. He edded he cannot give credibility to a geologists report he received recently
that was critical of the city's position, which was withheld from staff for over two months. The report, prepared on
February 18, was prepared by a consultant paid for by oppone0ts of the clty's plan. His impression is the motive
must have been to maxlmize the patential fear which opponent~ of the project have been trying to engender as a
means of gaining an objective. He finds that distasteful and wOuld like to go on record as saying so. He will
suppan the staffs recommendation on biosolids.
Reid asked about mechanical drying and equipment used in drying if we cannot go to the hillside.
Brown clarified that staffs recommendation is to dry it on the .hillside. If the hillsida fails and the City cannot get
the permit and is not an option, we would have to look st how much room is onsite at the treatment plant. She
explained there is not a lot of room ther~ and you still have to find sites for application of the dry binsolids, or
landfill. She clarified for Reid that we are landfilling today.
Reid asked if we are landfilling more of a liquid, and are we landfilling before drying.
Brown replied it is dewntered to a certain degree, but this is absolutely wrong and wants to go on record with that.
She said you need the landfill space, that she has worked in landfill practice in the past, we do not recycle our waste
products and to landfill biosolids that are an absolutely useful lhxxhct is a shame.
Reid reiterated that she does not want to waste useful products~but asked if it is passible like Grants Pass does to
come out with a bagged product.
City Council Continued Meeting 5/19/2000 - Page 7
is about 18,000 gallons ofbiosolid material.
Laws inquired how much of that is going to the agricultural sit~ and how much going to the lendfill.
Brown explained that at this point because of winter storage p~.blems we are keeping up with the daily production,
but because of delays on the offsite that is the portion going to!the lendfill
Laws asked what options do we have in terms of going out to l~nd more places to apply the biosolids.
Brown clarified that we have looked, but the county has rej d one site, as they went more information. Because
Laws asked the process we would go through to make the bio ' lids a Class A. Brown explained that Class A
material would still go through the lime stabilization at the ~e~ent pleat end would make that work for long term
rather then interim solution. On a daily basis, with the exception of wintertime, those would go to drying beds
directly. The liquid material decants back to the pleat end serves as feed stock for the pleat Material is then dried
for the time period required to meet Class A, mostly a heat api:~ication. In the winter time it would stay in storage
for 90 - 120 days end then be placed out onto the drying beds, and the liquid deeeats the same way. These are the
steps if it is to go on the hillside. She clarified that the biosolids we are currently dealing with are a Class B.
Laws asked if there was lend that could he acquired near the sSvage WeaUncut plant. Brown clarified she will
pursue that but there is not much lend there. The reason they ~ going to Class A is because of the neighbors. As
far as selling biosulids that is speculative, even at Class A.
Mayor Shaw inquired if the Imperan'ice property was still own~sd by farmers end they asked for Class B biosolids
applied to a portion of their acreage, what would he done. Brclwn clarified that we could go to the county end ask
Nolte clarified that farmers can do this but cities are not in the business of making a profit.
The Mayor inquired if the way around that would be to annex ~ prope~y into the city limits, end Nolte concun'ed
that you could bring in the urban growth boundmy.
Hauck mofionod that we aceept staff recommendation and ise city property for the disposal of Clan A
biosolids. Fine seconded.
ROLLCALL: All yes.
city Council Continued Meeting 5/19/2000 - P~e 8