CC Min 2003-08-11 Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Mark McLaren stated that at the last meeting PWS Director Ingram stated he did not have an alternative to alternative "D" available, but it turns out it is alternative ~ "E" dated February 22, 2003. He stated that if you propose to only use water east of the freeway, that mainland Redwood City might not be quite as concerned. He asked why that was not presented to the people during the public comment period and stated that Council might consider extending the comment period because all the information was not available. He further stated it seems a lot of people of become upset over a relatively small amount of water. He applauded the task force concept and hopes it is empowered to look at alternatives to recycled water. Chet Yee, Redwood City resident, distributed technical publications and articles and objected to the action taken by Council on July 28. He stated he spoke against the proposed resolutions, especially, opposing the second resolution. In regards to chemicals, especially, potent and harmful prescription drugs continually dumped into toilets, from his point of view as a Director of Pharmacy at the University of California, he is very alarmed at the amount of residue drugs carried in the recycled water being found in many other areas. His concern is also expressed as a member of the board of trustees of the California Pharmacists Association where many pharmacists are encouraging their patients not to dump unused drugs into the toilet because of the potential of having residue chemicals available and then exposed to children in playgrounds being watered by recycled water. He raised the concern in the amount of contact dermatitis, entopic dermatitis, asthma and other allergic symptoms among young children that may or may not be related to the chemicals. He gave an example of a change in project plans in Los Angeles and stated that the community of Redwood City deserves the same. Bob Parkhurst referred to a letter from Dr. David L. Sedlak and transmitted it to Council. Mr. Parkhurst stated that he would not hesitate to use recycled water for all landscapes where children are not exposed. He further stated that he does not feel confident about the playgrounds where children play. The response from Dr. Sedlak was that it is a very emotional issue, is difficult to discuss on a deep scientific level because there is not much data on how children might be exposed on playgrounds. Carl Theobald stated that he and his wife are firmly opposed to the use of recycled water anywhere children are likely to be present and that they are truly fearful of potential harm to their children should such a course of action be pursued. After review of both sides of the argument, he concluded that there is no convincing evidence to demonstrate that recycled water is safe for use in areas where children may be exposed; that alternative solutions have not been entirely researched; and that his opinion is not unique but representative of a large but silent contingent population of many overworked professionals that simply do not REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 11, 2003 MINUTES PAGE 7 MINUTES Book No. 60 Page No. 28