Trash-to-Energy Plant Hit by Suits : San Marcos Mayor Calls Filing of 3 Challenges ‘Legal Harassment’

Seeking to block a trash-to-energy plant planned in San Marcos, a neighboring city, a developer and a group of environmentalists filed a trio of lawsuits Wednesday challenging the $217-million project.

Although the language varies, each suit contends that San Marcos failed to adequately assess the environmental effects of the trash-burning plant, which is planned for a 15-acre parcel beside an existing landfill.

“We feel it is indeed a project with a great deal of regional impact,” said Encinitas Mayor Marjorie Gaines, whose city filed suit in Vista Superior Court. “Whatever happens with those pollutants, they’ll eventually reach the lungs of the people of North County.”

Other Suits

A similar lawsuit was filed in Vista by North County Concerned Citizens and Citizens for Healthy Air in San Marcos, two nonprofit groups, and Christward Ministry, which operates a religious retreat about a mile from the proposed plant.

Rhinegold Inc., developer of a 148-acre housing project planned in Olivenhain, also filed a lawsuit in Vista Superior Court on Wednesday challenging the plant. The land is near a canyon being considered for expansion of the San Marcos landfill, a project that will likely prove necessary to accommodate ash from the plant and trash that cannot be recycled.

San Marcos officials said they anticipated each of the lawsuits, which come on the heels of a narrow victory for the trash plant last week at the city polls.

“It’s legal harassment and we expected it,” said Mayor Lee Thibadeau, an unswerving supporter of the trash plant. “These opponents wanted us to let the voters speak. Now they’re saying voters be damned, and I have a real problem with that.”

Challenges Similar

Each of the lawsuits challenges the plant, which will burn most of North County’s garbage while providing electricity for 40,000 homes, on similar grounds.

First, they maintain that San Marcos officials violated state environmental laws by failing to address the impacts of expected landfill expansion, a project the opponents contend goes hand in hand with the trash-burning plant.

In addition, the suits contend that important reviews of the plant’s risk to the public health arrived too late to be adequately considered by San Marcos officials and the public.

They also argue that San Marcos failed to adequately assess the regional impact of the pollutants that will be emitted each day by the plant’s 300-foot smokestack.

Moreover, the three suits allege that San Marcos officials failed to follow the proper procedural path while reviewing the project.

Encinitas officials contend that their appeal of the San Marcos Planning Commission’s approval of a permit for the plant was ignored, and the matter was never reheard.

Want Permits Revoked

The various lawsuits seek to have the project stripped of all permits, an act that would mean “they’re back to Ground Zero,” said Dwight Worden, a Solana Beach attorney handling the Encinitas lawsuit.

Worden and the other attorneys for the various opponents say they hope that the group planning the plant, North County Resource Recovery Associates, will voluntarily hold off on starting work. If not, a court order will be sought to block construction, Worden said.

Jerry Dawson, an attorney representing Rhinegold Inc., took San Marcos to task for agreeing to accept funds from the plant operators for a senior citizens’ center in the city and other projects after the facility is built.

“That is simply bribe money, in my view,” Dawson said.

Thibadeau said each of the issues raised in the suits has been addressed by San Marcos officials and he feels confident that the city will prevail in court.

He said city officials did not review the proposed landfill expansion “because we don’t know if that is going to happen yet.” Moreover, he insisted that all environmental reviews were conducted in a timely manner, as required by law.

In addition, the effects of the plant on surrounding communities were addressed in the various environmental assessments, he said. If the city erred on procedural matters, it was on the side of caution, Thibadeau insisted.

“We took no chances,” he said. “If we had any procedural mistakes, it was in doing things twice.”

Thibadeau also questions Dawson’s argument that the council had been bribed by agreeing to accept funds for roads, parks and a senior citizens’ center.

“I guess one could call it bribe money if the council got its hands on it, but it’s going to charity,” he said, referring to the many projects that the money will build for city residents.