American obsession with bottled water

At their May 17 meeting, the Benicia Community Sustainability Commission discussed prioritizing 120 Climate Action Plan strategies. One of the recommended 2010 priorites was Strategy SW-1.1. -Limit City Spending on Bottled Water: Limiting City spending on bottled water to necessary fire safety operations will reduce the City’s solid waste consumption and will demonstrate community-wide leadership, while reducing overhead.

National Public Radio (NPR) yesterday featured an interview with Peter Gleick who is with the Pacific Institute in Berkeley and a 2003 McArthur Fellow (genius award) discussing his new book: Bottled and Sold: The Story Behind Our Obsession with Bottled Water. More than 85 million bottles of water are sold every day in the United States. Freshwater expert Peter Gleick explains what's in them -- and why we drink them -- in his book.

Read a fascinating excerpt from Peter Gleick's book, Bottled and Sold: The Story Behind Our Obsession with Bottled Water at this link:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833795 

Below is the transcript of the NPR interview with Peter Gleick on May 17:
War On Tap: America's Obsession With Bottled Water

City and Seeno - drivers seat or back seat

Last month I requested that the city council review the open 2002 application of Seeno for the Benicia Business Park in light of the recent 32-federal agent raid on Seeno's corporate headquarters. For a host of reasons, it seemed prudent to make sure the city was not exposed or in a compromised position.

The majority of the council voted to require Seeno to provide the city a progress update in six months, and asked Seeno to respond promptly to the city’s request for their participation in seeking a grant to underwrite the development of a specific plan for the property. The Seeno Company was to be informed that the city retains the option of changing its fee structure for the business park application. The city council moved to request a signed letter from Seeno that they would comply the adopted 2009 resolution.

"It’s not quite time to say ‘I told you so,’” Councilmember Mike Ioakimedes told Campbell during discussion of Hughes’s motion. “If we send them a letter, and they don’t sign it, that’s an indication of their sincerity. If they do sign, that changes the ballgame in the short term."

The council was to have an answer and consider action for May 18th. Yesterday, the city received the Seeno response.

The response is "qualified" by not agreeing to a specific plan nor to paying the fees in effect at the time of project approval (in other words the current fees, not the 2002 fees). The "guts" of the action taken in February in 2009 was the required specific plan and that the project would pay its way. There was no response in yesterday's letter about Seeno's position on the sustainability grant for which the city was applying.

As required by the council, this consideration of the 2002 application will be on the agenda for June 1, 2009. You may want to attend or email your thoughts to the city council members: mioakimedes@ci.benicia.ca.us.ca , aschwartzman@ci.benicia.ca.us , tcampbell@ci.benicia.ca.us , mhughes@ci.benicia.ca.us , and city manager, jerickson@ci.benicia.ca.us

[You may also email me, epatterson@ci.benicia.ca.us or just leave a comment here on this blog by clicking the Comments link at the bottom of this post.]

During the sometimes rancorous 2-year (one election, tons of campaign money) process that included public groups developing strategies and a specific plan vision and staff "interpreting" the council's "no" vote, it became clear that the city needed to be in the driver's seat to ensure the planning process. Without this control and authority, every single issue near and dear to Benicia was a struggle and a battle hard fought: grading, traffic, air pollution, school impacts, water use and storm runoff, energy efficiency, alternative energy, jobs matching demographics and developer fees.

Based on this experience, the qualified assurance in yesterday's Seeno letter is just that - qualified. In other words, plan on fighting for the elements agreed to in the city resolution and embracing the community meeting vision - a specific plan now that provides assurances that future development meets the community's vision.

Additionally, experience has shown that Seeno questions and negotiates to pay lower fees and that will be another fight. To put off tomorrow what could be done today - close the 2002 application - is a choice that either puts the city in the driver's seat or in the back seat. The downside of closing the application, according to others, is that the Seeno company may not do anything with the property for many years and the city would not realize economic benefits from development.

It is good to remember the events from 2002 to now: an incomplete application accepted in 2002 that took about two years to get all the information submitted for the EIR assessment. After two years of public hearings, workshops, and a facilitated public discussion on the planning for and of the so-called Seeno property at Lake Herman Road and East Second, the council passed a resolution providing for the requirements of a specific plan to, among other things, design a "walkable" sustainable business park, reduce traffic impacts, avoid net increase in air pollution, ensure no net increase in stormwater runoff and a project that does not impact city services. One key elements of the future specific plan is to design and develop for jobs that match the people who live and work in Benicia - there is a higher educational level that should be a great work force for innovative and entrepreneurial businesses to meet the challenges of an emerging green economy.

The corner stone to getting a project that reflects the General Plan and the public's vision as chronicled in the January 2009 facilitated "community meeting" is the process:

PROCESS:
A specific plan (paid for by the developer) should be a requirement.
Require substantial community involvement early in the
process—this is the key to success.
Need a new, not just a revised, project.
Promote the vision of a green gateway.
A development agreement would be good.
Need an oversight committee that reports regularly to the community.
Need someone from the City on site during construction.
Provide residents with information and confidence.
Require an outside manager for the project who would be paid by the developer and would report weekly to the City.
Include significant penalties or performance bonds for infractions.
Require a comprehensive economic analysis.
Develop a community-based process.
Make sure PLA applies to everything, including future tenant improvements.
Include form-based code.
Ensure that the City enforces rules.