HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Administrative Meeting 102673October 26, 1973
To: Mayor and Members of the Council
cc: Attorney Brant and Attorney Baldwin
• From: Councilman Wiley
Subject: The Hearing held in Judge MacMillan's office on October 25, 1973 at
8 :00 A.M. and at 3 :30 P.M. regarding the suit by Chudnow Construction
Company
Prior to the hearing beginning at approximately ten minutes to eight, Mr. Brant
gave Mr. Myers a copy of the respondants answer. Before the hearing Mr.
Trapnell told us that he had been to the Regional Office of the Department
of Pollution Control in Orlando requesting a 50,000 gallon addition to the
existing Palm Beach Gardens Plant, however the Department of Pollution Control
is currently withholding approval of that based on algae count in the polishing
pond.
The following is an approximate transcript as taken by my notes and should be
construed only in terms of subject matter and not as literal quotes, as I was
writing rather quickly..
• The hearing started with Mr. Myers calling Mr. Cooper as his first witness.
Mr. Brant stated that the City had no question regarding Mr. Cooper's
qualifications and dispensed with those questions. The discussion started
relative to the Ordinance #14, 1970, the Building Moratorium Ordinance.
Mr. Myers asked are you familiar with that Ordinance.
Mr. Cooper responded that he was familiar with the effect but he was not
instrumental in the creation, that was done by his predecessor, Mr. Lukin.
Mr. Myers asked why was the Moratorium placed in effect.
Mr. Cooper answered the plant was overloaded, it was not at the proper
efficiency, it was not maintained. In his opinion the most serious problem
was that the owner had no plans to upgrade (I gave Mr. Brant a note that that
statement was not true. The Utility did have plans that were approved by
the Board of Health prior to the Moratorium for upgrading the existing plant)
Mr. Cooper did mention something about the discharge to the canal.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973 Page 2
Mr. Myers asked did the Board of Health advise the City - he referred to
the terminology in the moratorium -to either lift or to allow building permits
• with or without the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
Mr. Cooper answered that it may have been the advice of Mr. Lukin. He didn't
know if Mr. Lukin advised regarding the Certificate of Occupancy. He did
know that Mr. Lukin did'_advise to issuing no more building permits.
Mr. Myers asked since this time has there been any expansion or new plant
action.
Mg.'Cooper answered yes, a concept was approved. The new plant which is in the
concept of a regional plant to serve the City and the environs.
Mr. Myers asked what capacity?
Mr. Cooper answered 22- to 5 million and then additional 5 million gallon per
day modules.
Mr. Myers and Cooper - There has been action _ ccn€truction has begun.
Mr. Myers - Any projection date for the new plant being on the line.
Mr. Cooper - Summer of 1974
Mr. Myers questioned were there any delays in zoning etc.
Mr. Cooper - regarding a 12 month period for completion ?
Mr. Myers asked did he submit a letter to Attorney Brant dated August 10.
Mr. Cooper in his opinion the new plant will be built, At will mean an
elimination of the existing facility. The potential for health hazard is
minimal. Mr. Trapnell has asked for additional flow (50 - 60,000 gallons per
day) from the Department of Pollution Control be allowed. His letter of
August 10th was on the basis that the new plant would be available in July 1,
1974.
Mr. Myers asked how many gallons does the average home or apartment put on the
line.
. Mr. Cooper - 350 gallons per day average.
Mr. Myers Will 50 to 60,000 gallons be needed all at once.
Mr. Cooper - There is a construction lag time
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Pge 3
Mr. Myers - Relative to Ordinance #14 called attention to the section where it
referred to overt action to-construct.
• Mr. Cooper - The best man to answer would be Mr. Trapnell. As far as he knew
the land had been cleared.
Mr. Myers - Did the Utility have all its permits?
Mr. Cooper responded yes.
Mr. Myers - Did he have to submit plans
Mr. Cooper responded yes, we gave approval.
page 2
Mr.Myers called attention to the fourth line of Ordinarce #14 /regarding the
City.being aware of the plans. Mr. Myers asked is there any health hazard
today.
Mr. Cooper - Not within the 50 or 60,000 gallons per day(referring to the
additional gallonage requested from the Department of Pollution Control.)
Mr. Myers showed the letter- with _ the construction permit with the
proviso:
• Mr. Cooper - That letter was issued to Palm Beach County Utilities.
Mr. Myers - Who approved it? (He entered the letter as Exhibit 3.) (The City
had not received a copy of this. Mr. Brant was given a copy by Mr. Trapnell
at this time.)
Mr. Brant questioned of Mr. Cooper as to the evidence for the twelve month
projection. He cited the North Palm Beach Plant, noted that it was the same
Utility Company, the same management and cited the delay in the expansion of
the North Palm Beach plant. Mr. Brant asked "does the Utility Company have
all the permits..for the: new- plant ?"
Mr. Cooper said he didn't know.
Mr. Brant asked was there any health hazard.
Mr. Cooper responded that a health hazard would exist for the interim period.
• Mr. Brant asked if Mr. Cooper was familiar with the progress since the
issuance of his letter.
Mr. Cooper responded no.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973 Page 4
Mr. Brant asked the average gallonage on an 108 unit apartment building.
Mr. Cooper responded it would be in the range of 15,000 to 250000 gallons per
• day.
Mr. Brant called attention to the letter of August 10 from Mr. Cooper. It was
recommended that the City rescind its moratorium,. Relative to that statement
Mr. Brant asked is it a fair statement that this is based on your theory of
not permitting any more than 50 to 60,000 gallons per day.(additional)
Mr. Cooper - yes
Mr. Brant called attention to Paragraph 6 of that letter and asked for an
explanation.
Mr. Cooper responded it pertained to relief of the Temporary Operating Permit -
that the Utility had asked the Department of Pollution Control for 50- 65,000
gallons per day. The Department of Pollution Control had made a counter offer
which they did not feel reasonable. (The Utility and the Board of Health did
not feel reasonable.)
is Mr. Brant - Would it be a fair statement that the Board of Health and the
Department of Pollution Control are in conflict over this 50 - 650000 gallons
per day.
Mr. Cooper responded yes.
Mr. Brant - Had Mr. Cooper seen the site.
Mr. Cooper responded no.
Mr. Brant - Mr. Trapnell would be the best witness but do you have any record
on average flow.
Mr. Cooper responded no, he had the range.
Mr. Brant asked to have the range explained.
Mr. Cooper responded that the flow varies from month from month. Mr. Trapnell
would be the best witness. He thinks the flow is approximately 7500000 gallons.
isHe referred to the influence of rainfall as a fluxuating factor in the
average month to month flow.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Page 5
Mr. Brant asked Mr. Cooperifin his capacity with the Board of Health did.' he
wear another hat: What is that capacity?
• Mr. Cooper responded that he was not an arm of the Department of Pollution
Control, that that enforcement came out of Ft. Lauderdale under the jurisdiction
granted by the State. He did have an Environmental Health Officers hat that
he wore.
Mr. Brant asked that as far as granting connections the final authority rests
with the Department of Pollution-Control.
Mr. Cooper responded yes.
Mr. Brant asked do you have assurance with no hesitation that the new plant
will be hooked to the City of Palm Beach Gardens.
Mr. Cooper responded no.
Mr. Brant asked if the Utility owner decided not to connect can--you force him to.
Mr. Cooper responded we have no way to force him.
• Mr. Brant asked what was his basis for the twelve month projection.
Mr. Cooper responded primarily on the basis of equipment.
Mr. Brant asked if he had made an allowance
for completion for acts of God, strikes, lal
Mr. Cooper paused - A primary basis for his
equipment.
Mr. Brant added did he not have percentages
Mr. Cooper responded he had a five page or
book he could go by.
in his twelve month projection
sor, etc: Wasn't that normal?
twelve month projection was
etc. that he could go by
five inch thick (I don't know which)
Mr. Brant asked then about Ordinance #14 and did Mr. Cooper know of the approval
of the expansion of the existing Palm Beach Gardens plant in 1970.
Mr. Co°2er responded yes although no action had been taken.on the part of the
Utility.
• Mr. Brant referred back to the August 10th letter and he asked the base for
the twelve_, month construction. He wanted to know if construction was underway.
Mr. Cooper responded that the equipment was ordered and it was the owners own
Chudnow Hearing - October,25, 1973
estimated completion date.
Page 6
Mr. Brant asked vas Mr. Cooper still of the opinion that July, 1974 was a
• reasonable date
Mr. Cooper paused and answered yes.
Mr. Brant asked for arguments sake that the time the letter was written it
was based on the estimate completion.
Mr. Cooper responded don't hold me to the twelfth month. It is an estimate -
he could make a critical path estimate - he could do it.but he didn't.
Mr. Brant asked the twelve month period - does it include the transmission
liner do they have the right -of -ways.
Mr. Cooper responded it would be the biggest problem - he did not know if they
had the right -of -way approval.
Mr. Brant asked is a lift station required.
Mr. Cooper said yes.
• Mr. Brant asked if the plans were on file.
Mr. Cooper said no.
Mr. Brant then stated that he assumed that Mr. Cooper had taken this into account
in the twelve month projection.
Mr. Cooper did not answer.
Mr. Brant asked that his statement regarding the health hazard revolves around
the 50- 60,000 gallons. If a new plant is not built or hooked up would we have
a health hazard.
Mr. Myers objected at this point.
The Judge overruled and asked Mr. Cooper to explain the 60,000 gallon influence
on the new plant.
Mr. Cooper explained that the 60,000 gallons per day would overload the plant.
He did not think a health hazard would exist although degradation of the water
• quality would exist on the discharge from the plant. At the time of the
moratorium we based our decision on the rapid expansion of the Community -
there were no plans to expand etc. The issue here is now we are regulating flow.
He made a point that we could now regulate flow - it was a practical issue.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Mr. Brant asked what is the maximum daily flow.
Pag e 7
Mr. Cooper answered 770,000
• Mr. Brant asked is there any independent record of demand for building permits
Mr. Cooper answered - we have single family records regarding septic tanks.
Mr. Brant asked in your calculation of 60,000 gallons per day and the twelve
month projectidn_i have you taken into account the on -site treatment plants.
Mr. Cooper answered that they would continue on the line with no change.
Mr. Brant asked are you familiar with the Longwood agreement.
Mr. Myers entered objection.
The Judge clarified the issue - overruled the objection.
Mr. Brant asked that we are trying to tie in the on -site treatment plants with
the 60,000 gallons per day.
Mr. Cooper answered that it was his understanding that the on -site treatment
plants are negotiated settlements. If you are asking me do I mind if Chudnow
puts in an on -site treatment plant, the answer would be no, I do not mind It
• would tax the Utility less.
Mr. Brant asked if Mr. Cooper was familiar with the Longwood on -site treatment
plant and the agreement to get it off the line.
Mr. Cooper responded that the plant provides pre treatment and the effluent
goes to the Utility.
Mr. Brant asked have you taken that into account.
Mr. Cooper answered that was a fine legal point. He was not prepared to
answer.
The Judge asked. if he: considered this..
Mr. Cooper said he had no consideration.
At this point the hearing was recessed until the afternoon.
The hearing resumed at 3;45 P.M.
• Mr. Cooper still on the stand.
Judge MacMillan asked Mr. Brant if he was finished with his cross examination.
Mr. Brant answered yes.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Page 8
Mr. Cooper said he would like to correct some of the statements he had said
earlier in the day. He had stated that last months daily flow in September was
• in error- that the correct value was 870,000 gallons per day.
Mr. Myers asked did the 870,000 gallons constitute a health hazard.
Mr. Cooper answered we have tested the facility with 820,000 gallons per day
flow with no apparant loss in efficiency. This was a 24 hour daily test and
included rain water infiltration.
The Judge asked does rain water get into the water system.
Mr. Cooper answered that the water system was separate. The sewer system has
poor seals at the man holes, cracked pipes with the high,-water table.
Mr. Myers asked that there was confusion regarding the Longwood, that the
gallonage was considered in the 60,000 - is it not a fact that the 770,000
gallons includes what Longwood sends through the plant treated. It would not
increase hydraulic - would it increase bacteriological load.
• Mr. Cooper responded both Longwood and Tanglewood are included in the 770,000
gallons.
Mr. Myers asked if increased bacteriological load came in would it constitute
a health hazard.
Mr. Cooper responded no.
Mr. Myers asked regarding the North Palm Beach equipment delays was Mr. Cooper
familiar with the North Palm Beach moratorium.
Mr. Cooper answered yes. The plant was considerably overloaded - the moratorium
was placed on.
Mr. Brant objected asking the Judge and citing he failed to see how the North
Palm Beach situation entered into this issue.
The Judge agreed.
Mr. Myers explained that he intended to tie in the North Palm Beach and the
is letter that Mr. Cooper had sent to the City.
if
The Judge askedA1r. Myers had a question. He asked Mr. Brant if he objected.
Bill said yes. The Judge upheld that objection.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Page 9
Mr. Brant asked was, the. letter- based on conjecture and not factual data.
Mr. Myers on cross examination regarding paragraph 6 of Mr. Cooper's letter
• explain
dated August 10 - you were asked to what happened - please explain the
unreasonable counter offer.
Mr. Cooper answered that the request was that the efficiency be increased to
85% and that the Board of Health certify the solid disposal. Mr. Cooper felt
that 85% was ridiculous.I;f it is their intent to '_ control pollution the
efficiency would have to go greater than 85 %.
Mr. Myers asked what level does the plant now treat.
Mr. Cooper answered we did a 24 hour analysis in mid August - the BOD was
approximately 787o which is very good for that type of facility. Greater than
85% is unreasonable based on a new plant and would not produce a measureable
effect. The Department of Pollution Control's demand `- seems to be for
treatment sake only.
• Mr. Myers asked referring to the moratorium ordinance(see page 2)are those
facts current now and do the conditions now exist.
Mr. Cooper answered that he had spoken on the overt action - the performance of
the Utility,�hey have improved.I-n 1970 it was less than Poor - the treatment was
in the 30 to 40 percent range. Now it is up to 787a. And it does have a
polishing pond.
Mr. Myers asked you have handled this kind of matter before, do you have any
opinion on how to handle this kind of matter.
Mr. Brant objected - failed to see how Mr. Cooper qualified to answer.
The Judge asked Mr. Myers to explain the question.
In the explanation the name of John MacArthur came out for the first time.
The Judge commented on this. The Judge asked Mr. Myers to ask the question.
Mr. Myers asked Mr. Cooper did he have an opinion.
• Mr. Brant objected.
Mr. Cooper to
The Judge asked /answer the question yes or no.
Mr. Cooper answered yes.
Chudnow Hearing - OCtober 25, 1973
The Judge asked Mr. Brant if he objected .
Page 10
Mr. Brant said yes. He is at a loss to know how Mr. Cooper qualifies.
• The Judge upheld.
Mr. Myers made reference to solving the Cities health problem.
Mr. Cooper made reference to the Blair case. He said they tried to encourage
new construction. There is a way to manage the interim. Take that quantum
and apply it to the existing facility until the new facility is built. Controls
could be through the City building department with a gallons limit established.
Mr. Brant asked is it not a fact that the Department of Pollution Control has
final control.
Mr. Cooper answered yes.
Mr. Brant asked you stated 700,000 gallons is designed and 770,000 is the
approved overload.
Mr. Cooper answered you could work at designed capacity in excess of 770,000.
Mr. Cooper qualified that the 7702000 gallons is based on a 16 hour day. This
• may not be the case in Palm Beach Gardens since there is storage in the line
which lags.
Mr. Brant asked are there sewage treatment lines near the property in question.
Mr. Cooper said I guess so.
Mr. Brant asked do you know if North Palm Beach has lines in the area.
Mr. Cooper did not know.
Mr. Brant asked regarding the Longwood situation are you aware the Longwood
Plant has just recently been hooked up.
Mr. Cooper responded he assumed it was on the line.
Mr. Brant asked if Mr. Cooper was aware that Longwood is dry.
Mr. Cooper said no.
Mr. Brant asked if Mr. Cooper was aware of the Tanglewood capacity.
• Mr. Cooper responded he thought it was near 40,000 gallons per day.
Mr. Brant asked do your records show the average Tanglewood flow.
Mr. Cooper responded that he could not recall
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Page 11
Mr. Brant asked if both of these were out of utilization what effect would the
efficiency have at the existing plant.
• Mr. Cooper answered it would drop.
Mr. Brant asked how much.
Mr. Cooper answered less than 100
Cooper
Mr. Brant asked could it be zero. What is the flow range.(M±. /discussed the
flow and the various months and the SOD) -(I did not get the exact months or the
dates) (Mr. Brant talks too fast) Regarding January
Mr. Cooper cited this month as saying here we are getting into basic sewage
treatment. It is a dry month. Rainfall infiltration can approach 100,000 gallons
per day.
Mr. Brant asked how do you determine rain amount
Mr. Cooper said by taking the monthly differences
Mr. Brant asked aren't there peak months
Mr. Cooper said I don't think Palm Beach Gardens has a tourist period. He
• cited Palm Beach where there is a high monthly periodic increase.
Mr. Brant - Going back to the 10% - Will taking Tanglewood and Longwood off
the line - will the Board of Health go as high as a lOo degradation.
Mr. Cooper said yes.
There was a break here and Mr. Brant and Mr. Baldwin conferred.
Mr. Brant asked that in Mr. Coopers office did he have rainfall data.
Mr. Cooper said he did.
Mr. Brant asked if it would require a court order to get it.
Mr. Cooper said no.
Mr. Brant asked did he recall the flow of the plant in November 1970.
Mr. Cooper did notrecollect - he thought it was approximately 800,000 gallons.
Mr. Brant asked if November was a wet month.
Mr. Cooper responded that May through October is the rainy season
Mr. Myers questioned that the Department of Pollution Control has final
authority and that they do not base their decisions on a health matter.
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Mr. Cooper responded they do: °not judge on health
Page 12
Mr. Myers relative to the 107 on Longwood and Tanglewood would it operate at a
• lower efficiency at the plant.
Mr. Cooper said put it this way - I would not recommend they come off the line
Mr. Myers said do you object to on -site treatment plants
Mr. Cooper said not if they discharge to the Utility.
Mr. Myers asked would you expect a drop in rain-now through May which is the
construction period for the new plant.
Mr. Cooper said yes
That was all of the questions fer.JMr. Cooper.
Mr. Myers called Mr. Trapnell and asked him to state his name and title
Mr. Trapnell stated that he was--a Director of Palm Beach County Utilities and
a Vice President of North Palm Beach Utilities
The Judge asked is Palm Beach County Utilities a private organization?
Mr. Myers asked Mr. Trapnell did you have occasion to take over the Palm Beach
• Gardens plant 2 years ago.
Mr. Trapnell answered yes. When I took it over conditions were terrible. The
digesters chloridator(and he went on to mention many other items)were
inoperative.
Mr. Myers asked was the moratorium in effect.
Mr. Trapnell answered yes. He would have done it also
Mr. Myers asked since that time what has happened.
Mr. Taapnell answered we have cleaned it up to near capacity as possible.
Mr. Myers asked what was the treatment level at the time of 1970
Mr. Trapnell answered nobody could really tell. He discussed items regarding
the plant etc. and how terrible the situation was
Mr. Trapnell responded the old plant will come off the line to make room for the
water plant
Mr.
Myers
entered the TOP for the old plant
into evidence
•
Mr.
Brant
- Mr. Trapnell discussed service
under the Public Service Commission
The
Judge
asked when the new plant will be
completed
Mr. Trapnell responded the old plant will come off the line to make room for the
water plant
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973 Page 13
Mr. Myers asked what is the status of the construction of the new plant.
Mr. Cooper furnished the construction permit
• Mr. Trapnell furnished the County permit, the building permit and this was
entered as exhibit #5.
Mr. Myers asked do you have all the permits.
Mr. Trapnell said yes all of them.
Mr. Myers asked what is the construction progress status.
Mr. Trapnell said that he had all the contracts ready in April, May and June
ready for the approval of the various County agencies. These were all signed
by Mr. Trapnell, initialed by Mr. MacArthur and Mr. Schwencke The contract
for the building was let this week
Mr. Myers asked how much of a committment have they made
Mr. Trapnell said $800,000 to a million dollars
Mr.Myers asked is all of that in equipment
• Mr. Trapnell said yes
Mr. Myers asked when the equipment would arrive
Mr. Trapnell answered that some was here. The pipe was going in today under
the first tank _ 400 h.p. blowers and other equipment he listed. The orders
were to be released tomorrow. The plant City steel equipment would be delivered
plant
sometime between Dec. 20th and January 10th. These are /components:: to go inside
the building.
The Judge asked maybe we could expedite the situation. Could you answer what is
the operation date.
Mr. Trapnell said his target was July 1st.
The Judge asked what year
Mr. Trapnell said 1974
Mr. Myers said that earlier there was questions on the right -of -way.
• Mr. Trapnell said we have no problem. We are negotiating as to over and under
the turnpike
•
•
•
Chudnow Heaing - October 25, 1973
Mr. Myers asked does Mr. MacArthur own the land.
Mr. Trapnell said most of it
The Judge asked is the plant located West of the turnpike
Pair. Trapnell described the location1__, of the new plant
Mr. Myers asked are you familiar with the Chudnow property
Mr. Trapnell answered yes facilities are there
Page 14
Mr. Brant looking at exhibit #5 and noted that the date was October 5th
Mr. Trapnell answered we have been held up since April
Mr. Brant asked you list.Larry Jarrell Cosnstruction Inc. Do you know of Mr.
Jarrell's experience
Mr. Trapnell answered Mr. Jarrell is a General Contractor. Crom will do the
plant. He has experience in North Palm Beach
Mr. Brant asked if a lift station will be necessary
Mr. Tia pnell said yes_-
Mr. Brant asked are the plans approved
Mr. Trapnell said no - they just got the plans today from Brockway, Owen and
Anderson and yesterday for the lift station and the force mains
Mr. Brant called attention to exhibit #4 on the bottom. Is the language the
only basis for hooking up the old plant to the new.
Mr. Trapnell stated we have to hook in. We can not meet the Department of
Pollution Control requirements for the old plant. We will have to pay a
$5,000 a day fine
Mr. Brant asked do you have a performance bond guarantee - performance on the
date.
Mr. Trapnell answered no. The contracts_: are all issued by Palm Beach County
Utilities. He has no doubt when the plant will be in operation.
Mr. Brant asked do you include the existing lines off the existing plant
Mr. Trapnell stated that plans are on the board. He doesn•t expect any trouble
in getting approval
Mr. Brant asked as an officer of the Company will this plant serve other areas
Chudnow Heating - October 25, 1973 Page 15
Mr. Trapnell answered that under the Public Service Commission they have a new
which to
service area /: -:he described from Silver Beach Road to the ocean /Donald Ross
• Road etc.
Mr. Brant asked what was the initial capacity
Mr. Trapnell described the plant basically--_ was rated at 22 million gallons
per day with some of the tanks and components as 5 million gallon capacity
",or= July 1
Mr. Brant asked /will they be able to serve all of the service area or was there
a priority area
Mr. Trapnell answered that the City of Palm Beach Gardens is first, that they
must make available the area to expand the water plant. The problem hereuas not,
sewage we don't have enough water - we'ue got to fill in the polishing pond
and expand the water plant
Mr. Brant asked regarding the existing lines - would they be hooked up before
or after July 1st.
Mr. Trapnell said he hoped before. He had received data yesterday that he could
• not sign or approve it because Mr. MacArthur was out of Town.
Mr. Brant asked on the contracts outstanding - did he have delivery dates.
Mr. Trapnell said 16 to 20 weeks
Mr. Brant asked was there a penalty for late delivery
Mr. Trapnell said no
Mr. Brant asked was there a guarantee
Mr. Trapnell answered none
Mr. Brant asked for the contract with Larry Jarrell. It was furnished.
Mr. Brant asked was there a completion date on the Jarrell Construction contract.
Mr. Trapnell stated there was a start within 15 days of signing it. There was
no completion date. They did not expect the general contractor to sign a
completion date when he had to irs tall equipment that was being furnished by
others.
Mr. Brant asked if there was a liquidated damage clause, shortage of material_°
agreements on other equipment etc.
Mr. Trapnell said there were no exceptions
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Page 16
Mr. Brant asked in the event of non completion was there a bond posted.
Mr. Trapnell said no. The Utility is the General Contractor
• Mr. Myers noted that the delays etc. that the Utility had run into with the
Area Planning Board, the Flood Control District and the County Zoning etc.
and he said the Utility still went ahead and made their committments.
Mr. Trapnell said yes
Mr. Myers then noted that they had taken overt action
Mr. Trapnell said yes
Mr. Myers asked have you advised the City
Mr. Trapnell said no he had not advised the City. He did advise Mayor Kiedis.
Mr. Kiedis was advised of the project date in July. Mayor Kiedis has looked
at the site
Mr. Myers asked has the City Council bothered to go to the site
Mr. Trapnell said no
Mr. Myers to Mr. Brant - asked if he had any objection to entering the
• ;:erox
copy of the contracts into evidence
Mr. Brant said no if the City was furnished a copy of them
The Judge asked what do some of these terms mean - BOD
Mr. Trapnell and Mr. Cooper explained that BOD stood for Biochemical Oxygen
Demand
The Judge asked the present site - he wanted to know where it was - he had
heard of the new one.
Mh. Trapnell described the location of the present site.
The Judge asked was the water plant there too
Mr. Trapnell answered yes
The hearing was adjourned approximately 5:00 P.M. with a continuance set for
8:00 A.M. on November 6, 1973.
40
Chudnow Hearing - October 25, 1973
Attorney Brant reported the following at the Workshop
Council held. October 25, 1973:
The Plaintiff has not arrested the case as yet. They
go - in all probability they won't conclude on Novemb,
12 hours set aside from 8:00 - 9. :30 A.M.t® spill over
Page 17
Meeting of the City
have two witnesses to
:?r 6th - they have an
until November 7th at
8 :00 A.M. Hopefully I will get one City witness on November 6th because of
the timetable established. There is a possibility they may not conclude this
case on November 7, 1973 the way the timetable looks to me. I do feel a member
of the Council should appear as a witness in behalf of the City. Mr. Wiley
has quite a handle on the problem and I would suggest to you considering
allowing me to use Mr. Wiley for that purpose.
The Council agreed with Attorney Brants suggestion that Mr. Wiley be the
designated representative to appear as a witness in behalf of the City.
•
•