Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Biosolids Site Purchase topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council approves purchase of Kern County site for biosolids handling; litigation ongoing

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The council approved a staff recommendation to buy a property in Kern County for biosolids disposal/handling, noting litigation with Kern County but saying the site can be used even if the county ordinance survives. The measure passed with amendments to the payment routing.

The City Council on Feb. 22 approved acquisition of a property in Kern County to handle biosolids from the Hyperion treatment plant, adopting a staff recommendation and a minor amendment to the escrow payee.

A public speaker raised concerns about past planning and costs; council members asked staff and the city attorney about litigation with Kern County over an ordinance that could restrict biosolids handling on county roads. The city attorney said the city is litigating the validity of the Kern County ordinance; staff told the council that even if the county ordinance is upheld, the selected property remains usable for class A biosolids and the city would be able to use state roads (and thus would not be liable for the county road fee). Bureau of Sanitation director Judy Wilson said hauling costs to the proposed Kern County site would be about $21.50 per ton, while hauling to an alternative location in Kings County would cost roughly $28.00 per ton, a difference the department estimated at more than $1 million per year.

Councilmember discussion included a request to adjust the escrow payee: the council approved changing the check recipient to First American Title Company (escrow) rather than paying the property owner directly. The council approved the acquisition (with the escrow amendment) by a recorded vote of 13 ayes.

Speakers and staff identified next steps as continued litigation with Kern County and implementation planning; staff emphasized cost differences among alternative sites and said the chosen site remains the most economical workable option even if litigation does not resolve in the city's favor.

Speakers quoted here are taken from the Feb. 22 public record and are attributed to the roles or affiliations they gave at the hearing.