Petaluma council to consider Dutra appeal

The Petaluma City Council decided Monday night to evaluate whether to appeal a judge's dismissal of a lawsuit trying to halt the Dutra Materials asphalt plant.

After a closed-session discussion, City Attorney Eric Danly announced that the council agreed to analyze whether there are legal grounds for an appeal and how much it would cost to continue the fight.

The council joined with five nonprofits and several individuals in the suit, arguing the county and Dutra failed to address potential public health and environmental impacts of the plant when it was approved by the county Board of Supervisors in December 2010.

Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Rene Chouteau dismissed all claims last month against Dutra and its business partners, allowing the project to move forward. The plaintiffs have 60 days to appeal.

The plant, first proposed more than six years ago, could begin construction late this year, owners said.

All seven council members have opposed the plant, which would be at the southern end of Petaluma and across Petaluma River from popular Shollenberger Park.

Aimi Dutra, spokeswoman for her family's company, said her company is set to move forward, whatever Petaluma ultimately decides.

"I don't think it's going to alter Dutra's course," she said. "We're going to continue to be a local resource for Petaluma like we have been for years."

For 23 years, Dutra operated an asphalt plant along the Petaluma River not far from the current site. That plant closed in 2007.

Earlier Monday, 28 opponents and supporters of the plant, planned for 38 acres adjacent to Highway 101 and the river, spoke during a public comment period.

Joan Cooper urged the council to "fight to the end" to try to prevent the plant from opening: "You can't not afford to do this."

While he enjoys Shollenberger Park, Gary Shelden said he supports Dutra.

"Do the right thing and let the plant move forward," he said.

Cat Canto told council members they needed to represent Petalumans who oppose the plant: "This is the time for you all to stand up, not with big business, but with the community that has voted against this time and time again."

Chester Parker, a 68-year resident of Petaluma, argued for stopping legal action: "I don't want one dime of my money spent on opposing this."

Critics of the plant coordinated an online opposition campaign that resulted in more than 1,000 identical emails to council members between Jan. 5 and 9 from people all over the world.

The emails, sent through a petition started on Change.org, urged the city to appeal Chouteau's ruling.

Councilman Mike Healy, an attorney, cautioned constituents who'd emailed him that an appeal could be costly and would have high standards to reach.

For an appeal to be successful, it would have to prove that Chouteau made reversible errors in his legal analysis - not whether the plant is perceived as good or bad for Petaluma.

"I have to tell you that no obvious instances of reversible error leap off the pages, at least to my eyes," Healy wrote.

The plant was approved in 2010 on a 3-2 vote of the Board of Supervisors, which rejected an earlier version of the project. The majority said changes and safeguards required in its approval satisfied their concerns.

Opponents argued the board failed to take into account environmental impacts, including production of as much as 570,000 tons of asphalt and rock material annually and 145,000 yearly truck trips.

Chouteau, a former Santa Rosa city attorney, ruled the county's environmental analysis was adequate and open meeting laws had been followed. He also found that the dozens of safeguards the county required of Dutra to lessen effects on traffic, air quality, noise and nearby wetlands were adequate.

He said the plaintiffs had presented "no substantial evidence" that the mitigations required of Dutra fell short.

You can reach Staff Writer Lori A. Carter at 762-7297 or lori.carter@pressdemocrat.com.