A second public hearing on Oct. 14 drew persistent, detailed public comment about the centralization of wastewater treatment and proposed SR 89 improvements, including alternate alignments and potential road widening. Dozens of residents urged the council to pause the project, release missing technical reports, and decouple urgent wastewater repairs from proposed widening.

Gwen Roach, public works director, opened the item noting the city held an Oct. 1 open house that drew about 130 attendees and that staff received 38 comments. She said the Oct. 14 hearing was the second required hearing under the citizen resolution (Resolution No. 2024-1876) related to the project’s 15% design concept plans.

Speakers raised several recurring concerns: the city has not publicly released the 15% design concept report that commenters say is necessary to evaluate alternatives; many called for independent review of cost estimates and contractor contingencies; residents questioned Kimley-Horn’s traffic assumptions and urged origin-and-destination (cell-phone) analysis to better predict future traffic patterns; and commenters asked that the urgent need to repair failing effluent lines be decoupled from discretionary road-widening proposals.

Several speakers highlighted process concerns. Bonnie McMinn and other commenters said the city announced the public comment period before providing the 15% design report, and they asked for a pause to allow full public review. Mike Kofi and others criticized the traffic-count methodology as insufficient to justify a $20 million widening and asked for multi-week automated studies. Multiple commenters cited Proposition 401 (charter limits on spending without voter approval) and requested an independent accounting of “centralization” projects and total expected costs before committing to major construction.

Residents pointed to a recently reported effluent-line failure (noted in meeting public comment) as evidence that underground infrastructure upgrades are urgent; several urged the city to prioritize pipe replacement and clarify whether that work counts as repair or new construction for charter purposes. Commenters also contested roundabout design choices, saying many crashes in the study area occur in existing roundabouts and questioning whether adding roundabouts increases crash risk.

City staff did not present a new technical report during the hearing. Council members acknowledged the volume of public concern and asked staff to ensure geotechnical and design reports, cost estimates and the 15% design report are available; council did not take a final vote on construction contracts or widening at the Oct. 14 meeting. The next formal votes on design or construction contracts were scheduled for later meetings, where council members said they expect additional analysis and cost detail to be provided.