The transcript that follows was generated by a computer program and contains some small errors. Be mind full of that when you read the transcript. The video recording of the December Council meeting is on the city website for viewing.
MANAGER PATRICK: 00:02
Secondly, I wanted to share with you a project that’s proposed for coming to a lompoc, uh, with the, uh, business. Sure fresh and it’s an agricultural business. And the reason I’m bringing this to you is we’d like to get an indication from the, ultimately,
after I’m done presenting here in the next few minutes, uh, just sort of a head nod, understanding where, whether you would support going forward with some of the considerations that we’d have. There may be a little unique to this project and it may even require some changes to the ordinance. But before we would expect the potential investors to make larger investments, we, we like to get a read and the council whether they would support the actions necessary to bring a project like this to town. Um, the project proponents are here and I’ll let them get into the, a little more detail if you’ll allow them to have a couple of minutes till.
MANAGER PATRICK: 01:04
So talk about, uh, you know exactly what they have in terms of what they’d be doing and they’re in a food, Washington processing operation. Something that would bring 60 or more jobs to the city. And uh, so let me just give a quick overview and then if you’ll permit me, I’ll ask the project opponents that they’d like to say order to. This is that. There we go. I’m OK. Doesn’t like my point or, um, the, just to orient you here, but toward the bottom of the center is the, a wastewater treatment plant. All. Thank you so much. Uh, so our wastewater treatment plant right here, river bend your Central Avenue here, west end of the airport here. Um, the, the industrial park project is here and that’s where they would propose to cite this particular business and, and project a couple of things because of the amount of water and particularly with wastewater that they would, um, uh, process as a result of their operation and wastewater.
MANAGER PATRICK: 02:26
It’s fairly clean. One of the things that they’re interested in in is bypassing our wastewater operation and running a pipeline along central avenue within the city right away, uh, and to grant them an easement. This, that I think about a sixth of a mile though would sick. I’m sorry, six tenths of a mile would run along here to then use that to irrigate farm line that’s over here. And so they would be working with the, the, uh, the regional water quality control board to get those permissions. But for us, while it’s different is normally we would require that water to go wastewater plant, but in this case, if they can save money and we can reserve our capacity, then in that case, um, we’d be willing to cooperate and, uh, you know, allow some use of our easement there, be some market value to that. And so that we’re not making a gift of public funds.
MANAGER PATRICK: 03:29
We’d figure out what that market value is for that and expect the city to be compensated for that. So one question would be, would you be inclined to help a, would you be inclined to do things like adopt an ordinance that would allow an alternative views, uh, with the wastewater? Secondly, is, uh, just having to not only secondary use of the wastewater but the use of the, uh, uh, w being able to grant neasman and our right away. And then they might also recommission uh, well it’s been used in the past and might not be currently in production. And would we be willing to allow that to happen as well. So these are the couple of questions and we’re just trying to. We’re not asking you to take any action. There’s no real formalized project for you to take action and on, but we’re just trying to get a feel before they make larger investments whether or not the counsel would be willing to support that type of activity. And with that I’m going to ask if any of the project proponents to come up. So this would be Tom Davidson.
DIRK STARBUCK: 04:37
Before you leave, let’s Ron Miller. I’d like to toss out something here very quickly. You said the reactivation of a well to support water to this facility on our zoned industrial property. The city at this point currently is really having nothing. I’m going to refer back to the Campbell cooler when it’s a huge water user. They wanted to put in a well and were denied because you know, you couldn’t have a well to make ice for the chillers, etc cetera. Once this is built in to employ people, I can understand the water wastewater, but I’m curious as to why we would go ahead and deviate for this by reactivating. Well, by selling them watermill we have ample capacity to do so.
MANAGER PATRICK: 05:28
Well just one compensation, one, one consideration for you to consider is that there had been an existing well there it had been productive in a previous time, so, uh, as opposed to establishing a new well,
DIRK STARBUCK: 05:46
but we would sell water or if there’s something that we didn’t allow one to do, but now we’re willing to do for another. So.
MANAGER PATRICK: 05:54
Well again, I’ll leave it to the project proponents to make. Maybe they can better articulate their, their specific, a request or inquiries.
JOE PANONE: 06:07
Mr. Mayor, before the speaker comes up, I’d just like to make sure that we clearly understand in order to stay compliant with the Brown Act. We’re not asking you to have a lengthy discussion about this, but we’re asking is whether or not you have an interest in wanting to grant an easement as described and to modify your current ordinance to create an exception for both wastewater and water use. For a new facility not coming from your facility or using their facility, that’s really what we’re seeking because if you’re not interested in that than there would be no point in bringing anything to you.
BOB LINGL: 06:44
Councillor Mosbey if you have a comment, but if you want to keep that to the constraints of what the city attorney said,
JAMES MOSBY: 06:53
It just gives a little bit more information on what you’re talking to. Keeping a little vague, but can you tell me how much money the city wouldn’t be getting in wastewater or water by doing this movement? We wouldn’t be getting.
MANAGER PATRICK: 07:07
Well, when we were originally computer there where there had been something probably on a very high six figure amount annually for wastewater charges for instance, but I’m not sure we would get that in. In other words, if you weren’t going to permit, it may end up being a a financial and economic deal killer to the. To the deals, so I’m not sure that we’re forgoing a revenue. It’s. I guess that’s an ultimate decision.
JAMES MOSBY: 07:41
I’m just trying to be compared. If we did it here, would be setting precedents to do it for any of the houses that bordered up on there as well and et Cetera, et cetera. Just
MANAGER PATRICK: 07:52
I don’t believe that’s what we’re talking about as precedent setting. I believe you get to consider each of these on a case by case basis.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 07:52
OK Sure
MANAGER PATRICK: 08:02
Mr Mayor, you OK?
TOM DAVIDSON: 08:05
Mr. Mayor, council members, Tom Davidson. I’m a commercial real estate broker. I represent a sure fresh and the owners of this property. I’m not sure Patrick described this exactly the way that we’re proposing this to happen in first to address you, Mr Mosby. The. These people use like four and a half million gallons of water per month. They’re currently in a facility of 75,000 square feet up in Santa Maria there on a grandfathered well up there. It’s an older building built in the fifties. They’d like to do something modern. The family owns a number of ranches west of town. They take vegetables, blanch them, freeze them, so them to food processors. That’s the business. I’m this site.
They’re looking at building in the neighborhood of 100,000 square foot building. They’re precluded from doing a number of things up there now where they are, they cannot do strawberries, etc.
TOM DAVIDSON: 08:57
So they believe that they will expand their business. They have Sixty, 70 employees today. They think that they will expand that. The proposal is to take a well on the first property west of the wastewater treatment plant, bring it into the site for process use only do what they do, wash a etc. Vegetables, blanche some and return that water and then reuse it to irrigate. Instead of just irrigating, they’re going to use the water twice. They’re gonna use it for process in the plant. Then they’re going to take it back out to that site and use it for irrigation to grow crops. Those two pipes would require an easement along city right of way to do so. Now as far as the domestic use, if they have 100 employees, all of the domestic use for sewers, and I mean for a sanitary use would also would be purchased from the city.
TOM DAVIDSON: 09:53
This is a freezer. They’re going to be one of the largest electrical users in time, and the problem is that the high six figures that you mentioned, business doesn’t make sense. If we can do this process, and this is not meant to be a threat whatsoever, it’s just if, if they’re allowed to bring water in from off site, use it in their processing and they, and there’s very little trinket, it’s almost a hundred percent that would be returned back out other than a small amount of evaporation for irrigation. They would still be a city customer for water, sewer, electric, et cetera.
TOM DAVIDSON: 10:35
So the, the, the idea of, well, there is an existing well on site. We’d originally asked, could we continue to use that? Well that’s not necessarily. It might be there as a backup in case there was a problem with the well offsite, but if that’s off the table, we’d be happy to eliminate that well on site. Now the other thing I’ll say is this is a 30 acre business park and the problem we’ve had thus far as we get a single person in to look at one of these lots and across the, um, it would cost the family in the mid to high seven figures to build all the infrastructure to put one tenant in there. This would allow us, we’re talking about 15 acres here, up against the airport. Probably The least recognizable part of the property for these people. This deal alone, the sellers aren’t going to make any money, but what they aren’t going to be able to do is put in all the infrastructure, curb gutter roads, et cetera, so that, that part now can kick off and we can do other business.
TOM DAVIDSON: 11:39
So, um, there’s economic development in the sense of hiring a number of people that are going to create a number of jobs here, great industry and w, we just don’t feel like this is something that sets a precedent where you’re going to run these lines elsewhere. And I think it’s a message to the economic community that books opened for business.
TOM DAVIDSON: 12:02
And we want to bring business here. You have so few tools to attract business. This is one of them. Be happy to answer any questions you have.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 12:02
Councilman Mosby
JAMES MOSBY: 12:13
Is that a question for the city manager on this? Just. It’s hard. It’s hard to do this. I know you’re wanting to give it light, but just in synopsis. So we’re going to take half the industrial park that we have there to put in a project. Fifteen acres, possibly 60 employees. Give them an easement. They’re going to be inside the city limits, but they’re not going to buy for the largest part of the industry to use. They’re going to produce their own water so they’re not going to pay the industrial use water component and then we’re going to allow them to take the wastewater by our hundred and $5,000,000 wastewater plant and we’re going to bypass the city limits and put it in the county. I just don’t get why the project’s not built in the county instead of in the city because it seems if you want to join the community and join the city, then we should join the community. Joining the city and hook up to our, the rest of our programs that we have here, our water plant and our wastewater plant. I mean that’s one of the components while we have the growth because reading the general plan and the potential expansion is why we built the wastewater plant was for the growth component, but we’re dodging our growth component for the general plan, so I mean will be for the facility if they hook up to our in truly join our city with, with using our water and our waste water. BuT I would be opposed to this project because the way presented it.
MANAGER PATRICK: 13:42
I’m not sure her to question in there, but let me just correct one or maybe you have one thing to the mixture of consideration in terms of the water that they might purchase. The original entire industrial developmentally contemplate. If you looked at the mpo, environmental impact report only contemplates about a million gallons of water being consumed in the entire industrial development. This is for a portion and they had for four and a half million gallons. So even though I know what you’re. I hear clearly what you’re saying about where I’m bypassing this opportunity to have sold them that directly. Um, the entire industrial development never contemplated that comes from
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 13:42
Councilmember Osborne
JENELLE OSBORNE 14:33
first I went up and tom davidson for thinking outside of the box because you own property and are farming it and therefore using that you’re going to farm and water those products. The idea that you have found a location where you can expand and use that water twice, shows you’re thinking very forward and utilizing your water not once just to grow but to process so it is a cost savings. The fact that you’re still willing to build inside the city limits and bring the jobs here and expand here is huge and I agree. It’s one of those things that you’ve got to have a large anger to kick off that industrial park and we’d been waiting quite a while for that industrial park. So I would actually like to see a proposal come forward that discuss the easement, discussed an exception to the ordinance. Because I think this is creative thinking and we’ve got to start looking at this. We’ve been told we’re an ag community that we can’t go beyond our borders and if we don’t embrace the ag community and ag manufacturing and modern technology, then we’re going to lose it and it’s going to go home elsewhere.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 15:46
So. Ok. So we’re not asked to make any decisions. Just whether we want them to proceed with a proposal going forward.
MANAGER PATRICK: 15:52
I’m just trying to get a pulse read here.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 15:54
Ok, so we have one. Yes. One here more. I say yes, we want to hear more councilman vega.
VICTOR VEGA: 16:03
I’d say yes. I want to hear more
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 16:03
Councilman starbuck. 16:03
DIRK STARBUCK: 16:07
I was nodding.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 16:07
OK
MANAGER PATRICK: 16:12
I would record that as a yes then.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 16:15
And council member mosby. Councilman mosby. (MOSBY HEAD YES)
MANAGER PATRICK: 16:15
Ok, thank you.
MAYOR BOB LINGL: 16:15
Anything else?
MANAGER PATRICK: 16:30
Yeah, no, I don’t think so. Thank you all.
MANAGER PATRICK: 16:35
Ok, I’m public comment on the consent calendar.