Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMEMO, LETTERS, COMMUNICATION $ "' AN,HILL, CITY OF WATERLOO , IOWA GG «.. WATERLOO PLANNING, PROGRAMMING l ZONING COMMISSION 4 % S�m 715 Mulberry St. Waterloo, IA 50703 (319) 291-4366 Fax (319) 291-4262 ��ePJpp �p DONALD J.TEMEYER • Community Planning&Development Director April 10, 2007 Mayor TIMOTHY J. Honorable Tim Hurley, Mayor HURLEY City Council Members City Hall Waterloo, Iowa COUNCIL MEMBERS Dear Mayor and Council: At the regular April 3, 2007 meeting of the Planning Programming &Zoning REGINALD A. Commission, the request by Elk Run Energy Associates LLC to annex approximately SEHMITT 345 acres of land from Black Hawk County to be included within the corporate limits Ward of the City of Waterloo was reviewed and recommended for approval by a 6-5 vote. CAROLYN Please see the attached maps and legal descriptions. COLE Ward 2 This land is located along Merle Road, north of Newell Street, % mile east of North HAROLD Elk Run Road (East of Elk Run Creek). In conjunction with this request, the City will GETTY rezone the area as described, which will automatically be zoned "A-1"Agricultural Ward 3 District upon its annexation, from "A-1" to "M-2,P" Planned Industrial District. This entire area, within the Waterloo city limits, is shown as Industrial on the Future Land JOHN A. Use Map, part of the City of Waterloo Comprehensive Plan. KINCAID Ward 4 The annexation and rezoning of land would allow for the development of a 750- rzoN megawatt coal-fired electric generation facility. Land is automatically zoned "A-1" tti 1I'FR when it is annexed. This will further allow the City of Waterloo to work with Elk Run Ward 5 Energy Associates LLC, through a development agreement, for the provision of services to the site, including water, wastewater, sewer, road improvements, etc. BOB GREENWOOD There have been several petitions submitted in opposition and letters in favor of the At-Large request. They are on file in the City Clerk's office for your review. ErZ1C Therefore GUNDFRSON , we request the City Council take the necessary action for the approval of At-Large the annexation, and request that such action be taken prior to, but at the same hearing, that is set for the rezoning of land. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office Sincer Noel Anderson City Planner Attachments Cc: Donald J. Temeyer, Community Planning&Development Director WE'RE WORKING FOR YOU! An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer r � �` :... a't 4 P' l puowAe�{ N = - _ _.,,, C. -riti =L . a.) ? I s. w 4CC Lc, 0 t r,. .,.1,M,—, N 1'c a '1" --I S 4", .irt-,4,- „ i I if .i.... r-- 0, ,, ..„..43,Nikt,-,0, ,,, e S z I S Ca (a) LJ� Srt:si r- e__ fi <<; ",'A' 7 - a# ;X v4- �, lO . a) IO ` Y 1— A—, F at CIN CZ ,. ma ',` s ( U0 P:1 ai-1aW � o suONa) O gz � ZF, w Qt2 �4` :''''''',11 T 3 � f '� , Y O t 3 , 0' v, = X' aU O \ � to � Z c w a) r) i'"`-0 ', A:11".; ,FIS.t.i'* ..______ —.., - _o i U #C a i4 M i (Q ul . a ^' g r# u) 4-- Mill-A*" y {- � w ",4 t.. 4 Q ^\ O (9FG) ' t O W � 'r T(/3 ~ Est T� -v Q Ui , k l U 0 f _- to... 1 F, Q 1 �. I Q O .,,.,4 o N' .t i /% Li Ili a) Q) r r ,.,,,. 4 ' W N 43 c Oa) < AlioY.g ,,.�/ -1--i L.L. ,' (1)— ‘4° —0 -..1,;,, ', rt .- .�„ ," .. , .. _..... gy , D 'D < __- .....,- . _ p�{ un?{)II3 N , N P W • C p p n/ (� c L.L. m C w. m ca C \ � 0 . , 01--., 1i f ›, ..^ •I, Annex—NE area— Elk Run Energy—Mar 07 REQUEST: THE REQUEST BY ELK RUN ENERGY ASSOCIATES LLC ON THE BEHALF OF LANDOWNERS FOR THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 345 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ALONG MERLE ROAD, NORTH OF NEWELL STREET, % MILE EAST OF NORTH ELK RUN ROAD (EAST OF ELK RUN CREEK). THIS IS BEING REQUESTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A 750-MEGAWATT COAL- FIRED ELECTRIC GENERATION FACILITY. APPLICANT: Elk Run Energy Associates, LLC do LS Power Development, LLC, 400 Chesterfield Center, Suite 110, St. Louis, MO, 63017. LOCATION: The site is approximately 345 acres, east of Elk Run Creek, from the railroad line to Newell Street. Elk Run Energy Associates LLC is purchasing approximately 494 acres in total, and leaving some area out of the annexation request to allow for a buffer between other properties and the city limits line. ZONING HISTORY: The property has been zoned "A" Agricultural District (since 1982) and is located outside of the corporate boundaries. This portion would be annexed as a part of this project. COMPREHENSIVE The Black Hawk County Future Land Use Map designates the area to be PLAN: annexed as agricultural. The City of Waterloo Future Land Use Map shows this entire area inside of the city limits as Industrial. SURROUNDING LAND USE: AREA ZONING CLASSIFICATION CURRENT USE North "A" Agricultural District agricultural "A-L" Agricultural Limited Quarry use East "A" Agricultural District agricultural "R-S" Residential Suburban residential homes South "A" Agricultural District agricultural West "A" Agricultural District agricultural "M-2,P" Planned Industrial Deere, Tyson, Eagle Tannery FLOOD INFORMATION: There is a small portion of the requested area that is located within a flood hazard area as indicated by the Federal Insurance Administration's Flood Insurance Rate Map 190535 0040. The area for development of the power plant is not located within the flood hazard area. MAJOR STREET PLAN: The area is served by Newell Street, which is classified as Minor Arterial (in city limits), and by North Elk Run Road to the west, which is classified as a Minor Arterial. North Elk Run Road has access to Highway 20 and 1-380 to the southeast, classified as Principal Arterials. UTILITY SERVICES: All services will be extended to the site by the applicable companies, Annex—NE area—Elk Run Energy—Mar 07 including water, sewer, gas, electric, phone, etc. These services will be extended through the rights-of way. DEVELOPMENT SECTOR The LESA score for the site is 174 out of 300. ANALYSIS: This score represents a low agricultural value. PROPOSED USE: Elk Run Energy Associates, LLC affiliate of LS Power proposes to construct a 750-Megawatt coal-fired electric generation facility. The project would involve rail accessibility and use. STAFF ANALYSIS: The requested area is a 345-acre site, outside of the corporate limits, which would be voluntarily annexed into the city limits as a part of the project. Elk Run Energy Associates would be purchasing the area for annexation as a part of their project, and they are requesting the annexation. The area to be annexed is not abutting the City of Waterloo corporate limits, so this annexation would be classified as a "flag pole" annexation. By this description, the City would annex portions of Newell Street heading easterly to the main entrance site of the project. The annexation would not create any type of island situation, which is prohibited by the State Code of Iowa. A "flag pole" annexation is legal. While this area is not included within the City of Waterloo Future Land Use Map, the entire area within the corporate limits in this vicinity is designated for industrial development. This is due to the presence of Deere and Company, Tyson Foods, the Eagle Tannery, Ferguson Enterprises, Warren Transport, Kinder Morgan Energy, as well as the Northeast Industrial Park. The City of Waterloo has invested in past infrastructure improvements to this area for industrial type development, and this annexation would appear to meet the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the use of existing infrastructure and logical expansion of an industrial area. The City of Waterloo has held a consultation with other entities as required on this request. At that consultation, of which the notes and submittals are attached for your review, there was discussion of drainage, traffic, and the overall development of the power plant. The majority of comments were focused on the project itself, and its operation. There has been a petition previously submitted to the Black Hawk County Board of Supervisors, from adjacent neighbors, requesting the Board of Supervisors to stop the City of Waterloo from annexing the land. Said petition notes flooding, emission of chemicals, and traffic as reasons for the opposition. The Board of Supervisors has endorsed a letter from the Black Hawk County Engineer noting the need for information and planning on improvements relating to drainage and traffic/road improvements. The City of Waterloo has expressed its intent to maintain the improved Newell Street, after its annexation. The other notes of traffic to the site, drainage on and from the site — including bridge improvements —will be addressed in the Development Agreement between the City of Waterloo and Elk Run Energy Associates LLC, as well as meeting city codes and ordinances for such drainage designs, etc. Annex— NE area— Elk Run Energy—Mar 07 The City of Waterloo City Council will take action on the annexation of land at the same City Council meeting as the rezoning hearing. The annexation would then be forwarded to the State of Iowa for their review and approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Therefore, staff recommends that this request be approved for the following reasons: 1. The request is in conformance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, due to past infrastructure investment in this area for industrial development, making this a Smart Growth Project. 2. The request would appear beneficial to the continued development of the Northeast Industrial Park area, and would appear compatible to surrounding industrial development. 3. The request would put more land into the city limits in the Primary Growth Area. 4. The request is a voluntary annexation. DESCRIPTION: ANNEXATION A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN PART OF SECTION 14 AND PART OF SECTION 15,TOWNSHIP 89 NORTH,RANGE 12 WEST OF THE 5TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,ALSO PART OF NEWELL STREET,ALSO MERLE ROAD,AND ALSO PART OF THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY,ALL IN THE COUNTY OF BLACK HAWK, STATE OF IOWA,MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE SOUTH 89°(DEGREES)20' (MINUTES)35" (SECONDS)WEST(ASSUMED BEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS DESCRIPTION)ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14,A DISTANCE OF 632.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE SOUTH 00°01'46"EAST, 33.00 FEET TO THE PRESENT SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NEWELL STREET;THENCE SOUTH 89°20'35"WEST ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE,2,022.48 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 23,TOWNSHIP 89 NORTH,RANGE 12 WEST OF THE 5TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN;THENCE SOUTH 89°49'51"WEST ON THE PRESENT SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NEWELL STREET, 1,005.90 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 00°34'11"EAST ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 17.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 89°49'51"WEST ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE,900.02 FEET;THENCE NORTH 00°34'11"WEST ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 17.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH 89°49'51"WEST ON SAID SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 741.02 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 22,TOWNSHIP 89 NORTH,RANGE 12 WEST OF THE 5TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE NORTH 00°34'11"WEST ON SAID WEST LINE,33.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE NORTH 00°13'42"EAST ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15,A DISTANCE OF 33.00 FEET TO THE PRESENT NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NEWELL STREET;THENCE NORTH 89°49'51"EAST ON SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 863.37 FEET;THENCE NORTH 00°10'47"EAST ON SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 17.00 FEET;THENCE NORTH 89°49'51"EAST ON SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE,460.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE NORTH 00°10'47"EAST ON SAID WEST LINE,2,598.71 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE NORTH 89°44'27"EAST ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15;A DISTANCE OF 1,321.17 FEET TO THE WEST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE NORTH 00°11'55"EAST ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14,A DISTANCE OF 1,325.27 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE NORTH 89°16'57"EAST ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14,A DISTANCE OF 2,642.29 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14; THENCE NORTH 89°17'36"EAST ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14,A DISTANCE OF 190.01 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION FOR CONDEMNATION,RECORDED IN LAND DEED BOOK 543,PAGE 1, IN THE BLACK HAWK COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE;THENCE SOUTH 00°01'39"EAST ON SAID WEST LINE AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION, 540.03 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND;THENCE NORTH 89°17'36"EAST ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND AND ITS EASTERLY EXTENSION, 1,019.61 FEET TO A LINE THAT IS 100.00 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE SOUTH 00°08'13"EAST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE,790.07 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE SOUTH 89°21'17" WEST ON SAID SOUTH LINE 1,211.12 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE SOUTH 00°01'46"EAST ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID EAST 1/2,A DISTANCE OF 2,206.84 FEET TO A LINE THAT IS 100.00 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN WARRANTY DEED,RECORDED IN LAND DEED BOOK 561,PAGE 63, IN THE BLACK HAWK COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE;THENCE SOUTH 89°20'35"WEST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE,632.01 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF A LINE THAT IS 100.00 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND;THENCE SOUTH 00°01'46"EAST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION,443.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 15,038,145 SQUARE FEET OR 345.23 ACRES. • f. k r`s ]xgra4 s t, s� 1 e ;1 elf l„0. t0 O -,,_,, ItG9-2£2-bW¢ 'COLN b W 831 I'O 18N '2ZZ 31111S '133tl1S 380H83AS I89 'H331 Hi en '310VO 11 13tlH3IH 888d38d tA8 U3 M,an a _ 8 N mYd z T. ' 0 z Ey : = Na c °d a R g WE 0 5 i.g 2 88 2 Z ~ � c ^ OYO8 0HOIUYB 11 n _ g 0 A © lit WsSg '_ i . i 1• R j, i _ i — a— — — — — • 1 s f e .. I isle i t - ,: s p I i2,4 `U `'4 J I -12 . _ ay --- — ®— , ---------- ®i � AIL --_ --_—__ NI •I— <1-0t20 I p i ®I ool- - g N a<Qy 3• 1 > I I la -.1 LL ZCOIQ00 i ` �' Ii m '$!-� if' a+z _1m tr ❑ ® IS aa_iwcco W.. II , ; a 3E n8„ e j oi a 2 a--I.V-T �... S-i • aYml 3y131 'L •� �+ _ oti �LL� /! ♦4 - . '-'. 1 -- --r I :'C_ it 1 oI-20oo >fN I fo r� .. g d• ' `l`�' 9 w ogPi Z LL~Z I `dID ill i 0 6: W4 Le QayyyJJN=JN \ I i LL - Zz0 j-< 'i\ �------------------- 1...tw7ZQ3 ��,f _ W Z LL 1 O <O . \ . ' \ . Jo i© _0 r 181 =$e I ICJ \ ® 1'q -, Lo ri-------AF ' ( I ::: (\.; ' �a f g (�' a i eiii �a a a$ I1;Pg '- zN"� � i . s j" o a Q 2. OJg , A '$ I G\k-1Q za aIt,. O N Is. g ® , N LL 0 N S tWNo N N� MiWx � J r `•¢ o~d»`2 � S '~ O " sn� o a:W Ni.;F~ a ff " -=w NOYJ<Oa�=0fW2?0 x p� 6 -uor- � \ 0ZZOZOOq rQW�N¢T67.-W<W O 7T 7or^- OWFaW' WPT WSNZ anWa�t1-< WAma? aN '¢OT'fi1NWyNwON.NHOoTi.r QzO\42:b04 lamLL kr¢N WWWOOO- - yN mm2mO1 oWo0¢0O .iWO:o or<O !ZU wW ¢o �O!OwOvO_ STw¢SZoJQ �ivizNLLNZm05 SUipZa0�- 6.U2'OLL NN �wiw¢ol"wao ~ wEoo<i-O< W3mJJ4,< pINi:QX-Qw=W¢P000 :1u0,4-4 om:0N-`: z!3 ola�p.oZ*w!e .ormwwx- E6 Q4o"Xi�P';N!NoP.:wmf•Nm � rOu�wN .tJ1,o-wLL;:.is o_rc ow `a te io Ywak !WLL' iohoo zripw��' xowww T`:;a ^iWNQiPW Oo ¢irow?Fam a 'o'� < e000000<z1.- o¢o. ` ¢ `aioi.ii'LLmlziiwouW1N_1J¢zoLLN �o 7i:! Y- ooa;r�emow;w.5,%NZ !.u;8;•4i.-omzm2wv vJ oiaaizm¢zQa1. WoF NWg« ?¢:i 4ii-.-miiaLLo-Nam xr'Nwo" iinoQ ¢oaTk¢N!wszz¢-iN1 �yr'w�miOoOJ Z o' wi,, iiow zd!"mu_uzWomaao pew;w. i wNio-m_iaiai \-ogo<m"LLii;_Y xo� Nzwpm0-" ao_` Vwr �7No'-� zs tiNa Uk io `,.aaa nor' i1wiopo w lnUoa� aaaJxz _Wwo- - Na�'ri '` -oo-000�' aJY isz `ouewwwwonrzn=3 aJ"'-§ oOHFoi� rn=moV .;r< No.pd2' "n- o oI.`° GciLLO¢a-, w..O�dxicc00N .U .-.r ¢3OilnZa=OroWZ.xrWQOd rZw •cr,xz LU oz Q x Q N 1-=J N W ;__ILL ~G Z Z.W O 1 3 r �a W<z O O r c> 2 o o-o o o Q o Y�116 I I I r , Ti i'i I i i 'I I r,Hn wH 0 o m m m m m m m m m c o a oo g n o c m o m mRri - m _ nnm '.H _ NPR = � � gee ac m a w a s W a s a a W W 16 00000m�om �` u' 3 0 0 0 0 0 o m m m o u'o N F N N .e' n °J o 0 O tali N N N N N u J J m m o m o o m oo m o m z m a o o m o0 a s N N z z z z z z z z z N z N } I N N N N I I Null I N 1 1 N 1 w w w i w m e m m m m N N N e '� O>>O O F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - -- 0 0 0 0 - E. Ja J WJ Q J wJ Z N n e N m e- m m O - i O O p y� N N N N a. ¢K K\K <¢ W J W x 3 3 2 z 2 m¢¢J 1 i M1 Z N n e v'm 1-m m 51 rI 1� A Page 1 of 2 NANCY ECKERT From: ARIC SCHROEDER Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 1:40 PM To: NANCY ECKERT; NOEL ANDERSON Subject: FW: Review of List for Required Notice Chris is suggesting that the notice reference section 368.7(1)(d). I think we are planning on just sending out the one notice for both sections, so it should probably say something like "this notice is being sent in compliance with 368.7(1)(c) and 368.7(1)(d) of the State Code". Or something like that. Aric From: Chris Wendland [mailto:chris.wendland@cbwhlaw.corn] Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 11:02 AM To: ARIC SCHROEDER Subject: Re: Review of List for Required Notice Aric: On the mailing list, you show the applicant as Elk Run Energy Associates, LLS -- should be LLC. (I know, it's nit-picky). Why is DOT on the list? You seem to be on top of the process, but I'll add a probably needless reminder to make that notice is also published pursuant to 368.7(1)(d) and that notice is also published regarding rezoning. Chris Wendland Original Message From: ARIC SCHROEDER To: DON TEMEYER ; NOEL ANDERSON ; NANCY ECKERT ; JIM WALSH ; Chris Wendland ; MAYOR HURLEY Cc: Mark Milburn ; Nadza Jusufovic ; Steve Weidner Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 3:44 PM Subject: Review of List for Required Notice To all: Next Tuesday is when the notice as required by State Code 368.7 (1)(c) and 368.7 (1)(d) will be mailed out. We will be including a cover letter(Nancy is working on) as well as a copy of the petition for annexation. Also I thought I would include the attached map and list of individuals receiving the notice. Please review the attached list and let me know if you see any errors or omissions. The list is broken down into different categories so you can see why a name is on the list (I plan to delete this from the copy of the list that will go with the letter). We went ahead and included the consenting owners to the petition, even though we would not have to. Also, we are sending Mr. Bell a notice to two different addresses, as the system still shows his address on Merle Rd, but his opposition letter that he submitted shows a Bauch St address. Also, under the non-consenting owners list, in addition to Mr. Bell, we included each of the property owners that apparently own a portion of Newell St. Steve McCann with the State City Development Board had indicated that they have not considered road right-of-way owners as non-consenting owners, but did note that there is an ongoing court case involving that issue. So, to play it safe and assume that they are non-consenting, we added them in. 4/16/2007 /) /1C-1- . - .0 . 7-67 i,-- 4" 0L kt- .,,1--.0 74,-CAe.-1 / Se.,24-4,-- ,0.-- Z _....---- /CP-g-,-tclea-ipt,IK-4-7g .-c--t-4' 11444e#4.44' ) )( ic ve 1--) 1,ft yl A Xi/ III- p _.e. 7 7Z) i - e__ --12.-e. ' (--,‘ Ce—arr-l-E:4 r Z ..S d, -0---,..e- --,---ed 7Eat ) 6,9' --44,,,,__4. ,e,_ ,, :rne.4 April 27, 2007 Members of City of Waterloo, Iowa City Council: Carolyn Cole,Harold Getty, Bob Greenwood, Eric Gunderson, John Kincaid, Ron Welper,Reggie Schmitt Subject: Rezoning to Accommodate LS Power's Request to Build a Coal-fired Power Plant Dear Council Member: You will soon be faced with the momentous task of voting whether or not to grant LS Power's re-zoning request to build a coal-fired power plant within the city limits of Waterloo. How you cast your vote will be a direct reflection of how familiar you are with four fundamental phases of electri ' -neration: • What is needed to generate the product electricity from burning coal. • How is the product to be moved from its origination point to waiting customersS /-'- • What auxiliary activities and/or ancillary functions are required to support this projectr • What is needed to .�• ect the citizens, property and the environment from harm, during and after construction? ,., For your consideration, I have enclosed a list questions that reflect "unknowns" about this project as raised by myself, and others. This list is not all-inclusive. Answers to one question will inevitably lead to others. You may already have answers to many of these questions. If so, very good. However, if you do not, please understand that many of your constituents do not and are looking to you to act as their advocate in obtaining them. Driving the staff recommended truck routes, examining the proposed major train crossings, physically visiting the property and attempting to view the anticipated route of the transmission line has piqued my curiosity and raised my awareness about what I do not know and has created many questions for me. Where issues as complex as the building of a power plant are involved, the ability to acquire all ible data is an illusion. Perhaps the number of questions can never be exhausted but at least the major onesswill be on the table waiting for answers. Time is required to obtain answers. It is a valid position to postpone a decision while gathering more information rather than risk making a bad one. The validity of a decision is exponentially enhanced the more that "unknowns" become "knowns." "The key to wisdom is frequent and assiduous questioning. For from inquiry comes doubt and from doubt,the truth." (Abelard, 1079-1142) If you feel that your knowledge base about projects such as this proposed power plant is limited, I recommend as a starting point reading the following two books: • Big Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future—Jeff Goodell • Coal: A Human History—Barbara Freese There is soon to be a convergence of events that may influence your deciding "not to decide" now or in the near future concerning this project. They are: 1) The federal government is in the process of developing, along with numerous other countries (India, Japan, China, etc.), "clean coal" technology that will, if N Q successful, make the type of technology proposed to be used at this Waterloo 1,5 e oo power plant, obsolete (http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/cleancoal/index.html), 2) The Supreme Court has reinforced the Environmental Protection Agency's obligation to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions (http:/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachuetts v. EPA) which will include regulating emissions from coal-fired power plants and 3) Legislation has been introduced by the new congressional leadership which will require coal-fired power plants to substantially reduce their CO2 emissions (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi- bin/query/F?c110:5:./temp/—c110Oklzpl:e35901). Given this convergence a reasonable person would not be remiss to ask, "What's the rush to give approval to a technology in our backyard that may soon be replaced . by something even better?By waiting would we not be in a position to have the best of all worlds rather than being stuck with an outdated and harmful 19th century technology?" Perhaps in your quest for answers, the Planning, Programming&Zoning(PP&Z) staff can be helpful. Their information contribution to the PP&Z Commission at its recent meeting, given the importance, complexity and enormity of this project was, to be kind, cursory at best. They can do better. It was evident that not only /✓.' were minor issues being glossed over but major ones as well and manyimportant ignored. Accepting as authoritative, answers from LS Power in response to is raised issues were publicmpi comment, without expe rehuttal, as well as two studies (The Winninger Realtor pCommercial,d"Anal isof the Effect of LS Power's Proposed Elk Run Energy Station on the Surrounding Real Estate" and s EarthTech Company's, "A Forecast of the Impact on Transportation Facilities") paid for by the applicant as the only source on a subject, is not in the best interest of responsible and objective decision-makin . To quote a former President, "Trust but Verify." g Where the public good and private profit are at odds, one should keep in mind the economic parable, the "Tragedy of the Commons" in which a limited and/or fragile common resource is originally shared equally and is cared for by all, for the benefit all. When a majority portion of the common resource is acquired and abused by one or a few within the greater society, without consideration for that greater society, then the benefits will accrue to the few but only for a limited time. The majority derive a relative small and short- lived benefit. Eventually the resource is depleted to the detriment of all. As applied to the building of a coal fired plant using old-age technology the tragedy is that short-term economic benefits are derived but are off- on, 'set by long-term detriments to both humans and the environment from which neither may recover and which �� economics can never repair. I would hope that you members of the City Council do not repeat the mistakes of the PP&Z Commission. Questions are vital and debate and argumentation the life-blood of consensus. I trust that should any of you find that you do not have enough data to make a rational decision that you have the courage to mentally (DV' back, take a deep breath, and regardless of any real or imagined pressures, either vote step decision until such time as you do have the requisite data or,thatyou simplytooting making any abstain from voting at all. As an elected official you have not only a responsibility but an obligation as well to give your best and unstinting r;p ,\'efforts while exercising due diligence to render as sound and rational a decision as possible. One that is ongruent with the City's Mission Statement, to wit: "As a progressive community, the City of Waterloo _5 shall provide its citizens the most conducive environment to live, work, pursue business opportunities, play and raise a family." In essence, your every effort should be directed to benefit the community in all aspects and to "do no harm." The citizens of the Cedar Valley as well as those of Waterloo look to you act as an reasonably, prudent individual would in your deliberation. y Please have this letter and enclosure made part of the minutes of the public meeting concerning annexation and re-zoning of this project, which is anticipated to take place May 7, 2007. Also, please feel free to contact me with any questions at 235-0704 or e-mail at thornv6128 msn com. Sincerely, N. E. Thornsberry 704 Sheridan Road Waterloo, IA 50701 Enclosure cc: Mayor Timothy J. Hurley 2 LS POWER'S REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND RE-ZONING QUESTIONS CONCERNING ISSUES UNKNOWN A. General C S p 1. a. Why did not LS Power make application for a county zoning change rather than trouble itself with having the property in question annexed to the City and then re-zoned? b. Where is the added value that being in the City brings to the table, from LS Power's perspective? 2. What regulations of the Zoning Ordinance indicate that re-zoning considerations should not, as suggested by the Planning, Programming and Zoning staff, include environmental concerns? City ordinance Title 2, Chapter 1, 2-1-4B that addresses the City's Comprehensive Plan states in 04 that "The plan shall be made with the general purpose of guiding and accomplishing a coordinated, adjusted and harmonious development of the city and its environs which will, in accordance with present and future needs, best promote health, safety, order, convenience, prosperity and general welfare, as well as efficiency and economy in process and development." 3. How is it that the Council can risk possible future litigation by abrogating its fiduciary responsibility to "promote the health, _s_g_e_q and general welfare of the population or, as stated in Jothe City's Mission Statement, to "provide its citizens the most conducive environment to live, work, pursue business opportunities, play and raise a family"by not considering the environmental impacts of this power plant? City Ordinances Title 8, Chapter 4, 8-4-2B, "Storm Water Management" and Title4, Chapter 6, "Air Pollution Control", address the City's requirement to involve itself in these two environmental issues. ,-` ) 4. Will a contract delineating the terms and conditions that both j fd t , �--` required to adhere to for the life of the plant, be entered into? LS Power and the City will be --- - 5. Why has not the City Forester (City Ordinance Title 7, Chapter 5, 7-5-2) been called upon to 0 give an opinion concerning the effect of the emissions from an coal fired power plant upon flora within the city? 6. a. What are the credentials of the EarthTech Company that prepared the study "A Forecast of -p the Impact on Transportation Facilities" (a.k.a. Transportation Study) for Elk Run Associates, LLC (a.k.a. LS Power); a report that the Planning, Programming and Zoning (PP&Z) staff lent great credence to without determining whether or not there is an opposing view to the sumptions used within the study? iTe b. What methodology was used to develop their conclusions? 7. Why did the PP&Z staff accept as the only input the decidedly limited in scope study of "property D prope values" which was focused only on land immediately adjacent to the proposed plant site rather than including the entire city, ward by ward? 8. Why were there no independent studies commissioned by the City concerning"Transportation" and"Property Values"as provided for by City Ordinance Title 2, Chapter 1, 2-1-7? 9. Why has not the PP&Z staff provided a comparison of technologies used to generate electricity using coal? 6-- 1 1 10. Has consideration been given to requiring this plant to use a combination of Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle technology, scrubbers and carbon sequestration as a prerequisite to obtaining a zoning change? ''�q- 11. Why is it necessary that rezoning occur prior to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources Gv rendering a decision on the viability of the technology to be used by the proposed plant?12. Is the property in question being rezoned prior to being officially annexed or is annexation to occur first? April 27, 2007 NET Page 1 of 8 13. Has there been any data forthcoming from any responsible agency concerning the impact of the plant upon flood control? 14. (WCF Courier— 4/9/2006)Has the state's City Development Board. ruled on Ms. Morgan's (a property owner whose property abuts the land purchased by LS Power for their plant) objection to annexation? 15. (WCF Courier— 4/9/2006) Why would there be a need to "annex land along the railroad that passes through Morgan's land? How is it possible that the City could annex property that is a railroad right-of-way through private property? 16. (WCF Courier—4/9/2006) Given his reluctance on this date to have his property annexed, has Mike Oberhauser now agreed to annexation? 17. Will annexation of these large parcels require a change in the City's Comprehensive Plan? If so, when will that process begin? 18. (WCF Courier— 4/25/2006) The statement of record was made that "LS Power's first priority has been to get its application before the Iowa Utilities Board. That has happened." A year has passed; what is the status of the application at the state level? 19. (WCF Courier — 5/12/2006) On this date, the LS Power representative stated, "In our communications with a number of different entities who require power in this area, we identified Iowa - Eastern Iowa in particular - as a good market that had a need for baseload power." What is "baseload power"and what does the statement mean? 20. a. (WCF Courier — 11/10/2006) Is the Greater Cedar Valley Alliance study on the regional economic benefits of the power plant as prepared by David Swenson, an associate scientist with the Iowa State University Economics Department available to the public? b. Has it been used by the City to support its arguments in favor of the plant? c. Did the study weigh the costs of human, animal, flora and physical infrastructure deterioration over the life of the plant? 21. a. (WCF Courier— 12/20/2006) From the Courier, "The Chambers (the Greater Cedar Valley chambers of commerce in Waterloo and Cedar Falls) conditioned their support based on an evaluation of all environmental considerations and an accommodation or mitigation of transportation issues, specifically as they relate to coal train shipments coming through Waterloo- Cedar Falls to supply the plant." Was this evaluation used by the PP&Z staff in preparing its recommendation to the PP&Z Commission? b. What environmental considerations were used? c. Are both the public and the City Council to be made privy to this Chamber of Commerce evaluative data including identification of those that prepared it and the methodology used for preparation? 22. The mayors of at least four Iowa cities have signed on to abide by the "U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection agreement."Why has not Mayor Hurley joined into this agreement? 23. (WCF Courier—4/25/2007& 4/26/2007) What to believe, whom to trust? Concerning Elk Run Energy Associates' (a.k.a. LS Power) Vice-President's letter to the Iowa legislature; was his offer of monies to UNI to support biomass fuel research, with the caveat that it would only be forthcoming if the Iowa legislature does not pass the "renewable energy mandate", a miscommunication, as stated a day later by the project manager of LS Power or, is it a true reflection of the business practices of this company and an indication of how far they might go to deflect any legislation that might negatively impact the company's "bottom line?" Can they be trusted? Are they truly a company that negotiates with honesty and integrity or, will they, to accomplish their ends, resort to any undesirable tactic? April 27,2007 NET Page 2 of 8 B. Economics 1. Financing a. (WCF Courier — 1/22/2006) Does LS Power have long term contracts from prospective purchasers lined up,prior to beginning building, work on a plant, so as to p g?ctive b. What protection does the City have if LS Power should not be able guarantee complete financing? and cannot find a buyer? p the project c. Is the City providing any incentives for LS Power to construct the plant and then to operation, e.g., tax payer dollars, tax continue improvements, etc., etc?y credits, reduction in utilityfees, paying for road 2. Re-Sale of Plant a. (WCF Courier - 1/22/2006) "LS Power does not intend to sell current projects completed." However, should that happen, what are the original terms and conditions agreed to between LS Power and the City? p J when b. Are there any terms and conditions that would apply only upon re-sale? c. (WCF Courier — 1/22/2006) Who would be responsible to meet the original terms conditions of construction if the plant were sold prior to completion? and d. (WCF Courier — 1/22/2006) If the plant is sold prior to completion by LS Power and new buyer should default, what bonding requirements will be in place to at least allow for c the up of any construction(plant, sub-station, roads, transmission lines, etc.)? a clean 3. Taxes a. It is generally understood that power plants in Iowa will be taxed only on profits. If what specific section of the Iowa Administrative Code is applicable? true, b. Has there been an exploration of bringing renewable energy sources into the City to the tax base rather than allowing an electricity generating plant that relies on non-renew prnp up to be built? able energy C.Ancillary Building 1. Does the rezoning of the property to accommodate the building of a power plant also building of an electrical sub-station? include the 2. What is a switchyard/substation? Is it for LS Power to generate its needs? own internal electricity 3. a. (WCF Courier--4/14/2006) Who regulates the building and operations of the electrical sub- station to be built in Dunkerton?b. Will re-zoning to build the sub-station be needed? c. In this instance would a Waterloo city permit be required? 4. a. There will be above ground storage of diesel fuel and gasoline at the lant si governmental entity regulates this type of storage? p to What b. Will the rezoning of the property provide for this type of storage? c. Is a city permit required? D. Off-shoots of Generating Electricity 1. Water will be used to cool the turbines. Will that water generate steam and if so will i by the City as a source of building or street heat? t be used 2. Could the heat be used to produce cooling? 3. (WCF Courier— 1/22/2006) Should ancillary business be opened adjacent to the plant have access to the heat? p twill they April 27, 2007 T Page 3 of 8 E. Community Member 1. (WCF Courier— 1/22/2006)LS Power established a trust fund for economic development when building a power plant at Cottage Grove, Minnesota. a. Will a similar trust fund be established for Waterloo? b. In what amount? c. With what, if any, conditions? 2. If a trust is to be established, is its establishment in contractual form? 3. (WCF Courier— 2/8/2006) Since LS Power plans to "hire a private firm experienced in power plant operations to staff and run the facility," how does then would LS Power "be a part of the community"(WCF Courier— 1/22/2006)? F. Health and Environmental Concerns and Federal and State Regulations 1. (WCF Courier — 2/8/2006) While no federal impact statement is required since the plant is being built with private funds, does the EPA have any regulatory oversight vis-à-vis the Clean Air Act,the Clean Water Act, or any other federal regulation? 2. What are the state and federal requirements for the suppression and control of coal dust durin shipment via rail and during storage at the plant? g 3. Has LS Power made public the amount of emission discharge of carbon dioxide, sulfur, mercury, etc. will occur during operation? Will these discharge amounts meet EPA Clean Air, Clean Water standards? 4. Are there specifications from LS Power as to how it intends to meet any such future state and/or federal requirements? 5. What penalties are in place should the plant owner elect not to upgrade the plant based upon future legislative requirements? 6. Was the County's Department of Public Health asked to give a factual and objective opinion as to the immediate and long-term effects of plant emissions upon the health of Black Hawk County citizens? 7. What organizations,(city, county, state, federal) were asked to provide input concerning potential impact on health and the environment? 8. Will there be any"hazardous"materials stored at the plant site? 9. Is there a contractual requirement that LS Power use only one kind of coal versus another, e.g., bituminous vs. anthracite? G. Payroll 1. (WCF Courier — 2/8/2006) LS Power has stated that the annual payroll will be in the neighborhood of $7,000,000 annually—spread over some 100 employees at the plant—once operations begin. Has there been a verification of this payroll number by having LS Power provide a listing of both the job titles that would be employed and what their present annual salaries are? 2. Is it possible, that given the advances in telecommunications, this plant could be operated from a virtual location geographically removed from the plant site thereby leaving a miniscule number of employees on the premises and subsequently reducing the size of the annual payroll? 3. What written guarantees are there for the City concerning maintaining this payroll during the life of the plant? H. Operations 1. (WCF Courier—2/8/2006) "LS Power intends to hire a private firm experienced in power plant operations to staff and run the facility." Does the City have a say in what firm might be used? April 27,2007 NET Page 4 of 8 Relying on the reputation of LS Power as a reputable firm to run the plant is one thing. To trust that an unknown entity will be as reputable is quite another. 2. (WCF Courier—5/12/2006)At the 5/11/2006 public meeting, Mark Milburn, project manager with LS Power, stated "that the plant will have a selective catalytic reduction system to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, a dry scrubber system to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions and a halogenated activated carbon injection system to remove additional mercury emissions not captured by the previous systems. The plant would also contain a fabric filter designed to remove particulates from the exhaust gas." Is the technology described the most up-to-date technology for generating electricity using coal-fired plants? 3. Will there be a requirement to have the plant burn a significant amount of bio-mass along g with 4. Coal Shipments a. LC Power plans to bring coal from the Wyoming Powder River. Why is that to be allowed given Iowa Administrative Code 73.6? b. Rail Transit (1) (Source: Earth Tech Company's Transportation Study: Executive Summary, page 1) A detailed explanation of the last sentence is needed which states, "It was determined that any additional rail traffic, although minimal in comparison to the up to eight trains per day on various lines throw Waterloo, would increase the frequency of delays and blocked crossings, but si�au�ce of the im act d_ epends upon the route selected." (2) How does the above statement square with City Ordinance Cha ter 6 7- _ "Obstruction of Crossings?" p 6 3, (3) Who will be responsible for monitoring the railroads compliance with City Ordinances Chapter 6, 7-6-1; "Speed of Trains"and 7-6-3 "Obstruction of Crossings?" (4)(a) Section 4.4.1, Option 1 states that "as many as 12 intersections would be blocked simultaneously." Yet in Section 4.4.3, last paragraph, last sentence, it is stated that "The total length of trains serving the proposed ERES would be longer than most of the current trains servinghe Waterloo area, but would not involve stopping or switching operations that are experienced with some of the existing rail traffic."Are not these two statements in conflict? (b) In reality will there not be the usual stop, start, stop, start, slow down, speed up, all of which will greatly impact negatively the estimated nine (9)minutes for an entire train topass bya crossing? (5) Is there a federal or state limit on the number of cars that constitute a coal train? (6)Are there federal or state speed limits associated with the type of material and/or weight per car that are allowed? (7) With the increase in the number of trains per day will a change to the speeds addressed be needed in City Ordinance Title 7, Chapter 6, 7-6-1? (8) With the changes in our emergency and disaster awareness brought about by 9/11 and Katrina, what is being done, given this increase in train traffic, to advise first responders as to which rail crossings are blocked and what alternative routes to hospitals, from fire stations, etc. are available for crossing? (9) Who has what responsibility to clean up a coal spill within the City limits? (10) (Source: Earth Tech Company's "Transportation Study; Mitigation Measures", page 2) Explain the phrase construct connecting trackage to allow continuous movement of trains withou switching."What are the ramifications of this statement? t (11) Other than merely unloading the coal at the plant site in "an enclosed facility," what will LS Power do to additionally mitigate the amount of dust and noise at the site? April 27,2007 T Page 5 of 8 (12)Are there state and/or federal regulations that must be adhered to so as to minimize potential for spontaneous combustion? the (13) Will coal trains share the rail sidings with trains making deliveries to other companies such as John Deere? (14) If yes to #12, what is anticipated will be the impact on street crossings? crossing traffic at major (15) Section 4.4.1, 1st paragraph, of the Earth Tech Company's Trans ortati implies that negotiations with various providers (e.g., p on Study negotiating with the railroads and what do the negotiations entail? meanies) are in progress. Who is (16)LS Power says they can control the train egress from the plant. Will the out only move through Waterloo at night? outgoing mg trains (17) (WCF Courier 7/16/2006) Railroad officials say they can handle the traffic—one train in every other day and one empty train out the next and bringcoaladditional t. Is this guaranteed?By whom,how? in at night. Is (18) An unnamed "Captain of the Waterloo Police Department commented additional rail traffic would not significantly impact their (the that the A� unnamed Captain and does he/she speak "onpolice) operations. Whois be left to the Chief of Police to comment at the upcomingCity Council meefor the Police ting on rtmeot the would subject?"?t best (19)(a)Delivery of coal to the plant could possibly be through any or all of the nearbyc of Cedar Rapids,Dubuque and Cedar Falls. Have these cities been apprised of the n cities to be hauled and of the anticipated increase in coal carrying nature of the cargo (b)If so, do they have a g train traffic? (20) Concerning Section 4.4 4 of the Earth Tech Company's Fire Chiefs of Waterloo and Cedar Falls "go on the record"at the upcomingCityCouncil Transportation Study, will the consider annexation and rezoning of this project elaborating further on what a e bein meeting to as their"comments?" (21) Concerning Section 4.4.4 of the Earth Tech Company's T g passed off as four representatives of EMS "go on the record"at the upcoming CityTransportation meeting Study,n abo the on their comments? g Council meeting and elaborate (22)(a) Section 4.4.6 speaks to the possibility of needing a"new railroad connection." is involved in building such a connector? on." What (b) Who will pay for it? (c) Who will maintain it? (d) Who will hold public hearings and where before approval to construct such a connector is begun? (23)(a) (WCF Courier 7/16/2006) "Potential impacts from rail traffic consideration as LS Power negotiates with several railroads on a coal deliverycontract. Several maybe a carriers could provide service. Negotiations could extend into the construction agreements may not be reached with carriers by the time state regulatory officials have to take action on the project."What are the penalties if these negotiations are not completed process. Final (b) Does the City Council intend to take up the annexation and rezoning issue knowing the outcome of these negotiations? c. Truck Transit g prior to (1) What will be the size and type of the trucks carrying the Coal Combustion-By-Products (CCBs)to the quarry site? y Products (2) Section 5, item 2. Which will it be, the trucks covered or enclosed? (3) What is the load limit for the trucks carrying CCBs? April 27,2007 NETPage 6 of 8 (4)Are all existing streets designed to carry the loads in the anticipated volume for the time that the plant exists? (5) Who will pay to pave Newell Road? (6) Who will be responsible for maintaining the roads along the route(s) selected the CCBs? The PP&Z staffs statement (Earth Tech Company's Transportation PP&Z staff) that "the recommended transportation route will to move are currently used as truck routes" is misleading in that while p °n Study used use existing streets and roadways s that the traffic others do not, e.g.,Newell Road and several miles of IA21 (HawkeyeeR ad) car). heavy truck (7) Will traffic control at the intersection of IA21 and the westbound exit from to be upgraded for efficient traffic control? US218 need (8) Same question as #6 only at the intersection of IA21 and E. Orange Road so as to accommodate Hawkeye Community College traffic? (9) What will be the penalty for a deviation from a selected route(s) alongwhich the CCBs? Who will monitor compliance? to move (10)Are these CCBs considered hazardous material and subject to state and/or for the transport of such material? (11) What are the hours of operation for truck ingress andfederal rules d. Noise egress? What decibel level of noise will be allowed to emanate from the plant, at what monitor? hours and who will I. Turbine Cooling 1. a. How will the wastewater from the Waterloo Water Works reach thepower the Waterloo Water Pollution Control Plant is located at 3505 Easton Ave. SW sand pits, some distance and across the Cedar River from theplant plant given that b. Will there not be a need for a new pipeline designedof the Mitchell Avenue site. basis? to carry that volume of water on a daily c. Will the acquisition of a new right-of way be needed? d. Is yes to #1 c above, what will be done if a new right-of-way is needed and a property owner whose property is being sought refuses to give the right-of-way? 2. Out of the 12 — 15 million gallons per day of water at the plant will use to cool many of those gallons will be dumped into the Cedar River? 3. How will the cooling water discharge get from the plant to its turbines, how 4. Who will be responsible for monitoring the wastewater the plant will river? discharge into the 5. Will holding ponds be used at the plant site and if so, who will monitor for water contaminates, leakage,mosquitoes, etc.? J. Transmission Line 1. a. What are the regulations applicable to the building of a high voltage transmission b. Who regulates? g line? 2. Have all right-of-ways to build this line been acquired? 3. If a property owner will not provide a right-of-way what is to be done, bywhom, 4. Who will maintain the line? when? 5. What legislation spells out the distance a high voltage line must maintain from a property or a residential dwelling? April 27,2007 NET Page 7 of 8 6. (WCF Courier 5/12/2006) How is it possible that LS Power "has the possibilityof government and subject to certain rules including eminent domain?" Is this not an exclusive right of hearings? c udsn g public 7. (WCF Courier 5/12/2006) Should eminent domain be exercised how will "fair be computed? compensation" 8. (WCF Courier 5/12/2006) Why have not the PP&Z staff obtained expert consultation substantiate the statement of Lawrence Willick, Assistant Vice President for LS Power, so as to burying transmission lines underground, to wit: "underground lines don't dissipate heat concernind creates a safety concern for anyone digging near the lines. Also, the environmental impact is smaller P very well and when the lines are above ground. Its much more disruptive to digand bury to use the tower." p the transmission lines than 9. (WCF Courier 5/12/2006) Mr. Willick, stated that the lines currently beingproposed designed to handle everything from the plant. "We're not planning any other lines from said. Does this mean into p posed were perpetuity and will the City get this assurance in writing? the plant," he K.Disposal of Coal Combustion By-Products (CCBs) 1. How will the CCBs be disposed of at the quarry? 2. Who regulates what can be disposed of into the quarry? 3. How will the heavy metal-laden coal ash be kept from leaching into ground water and eve ntually creeks, streams and rivers? 4. How will the CCBs be kept from rising into the atmosphere? 5. How will CCBs be kept within the confines of the truck during transit? April 27,2007 T Page 8 of 8 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 1:47 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: vote No Annexation (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) Original Message From: melaniegriffith@cfu.net [mailto:melaniegriffith@cfu.net] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 1:46 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: vote No Annexation I am writing to ask you to VOTE NO TONIGHT. DO NOT ANNEX THE LAND. By voting NO, you will be voting FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE CEDAR VALLEY. You will be voting 1. FOR More Jobs 2. FOR Safe Food, Healthy Kids and Clean Water 3 . FOR Global Cooling 4 . FOR Keeping Iowa A Leader in Alternative Energy 5. FOR The Highest and Best Use Of The Land In Question VOTE FOR MORE JOBS: LS Power will contribute less than 100 jobs once the plant is built. A wind turbine factory being built in Fort Madison will contribute 250 jobs and won?t have the problems of daily coal trains coming in and out of town. Let?s wait for a better offer than a merchant coal-fired power plant selling more to others than it gives to us. VOTE FOR SAFE FOOD, HEALTHY KIDS AND CLEAN WATER Coal-fired power plants are the largest emitters of airborne mercury in America. Mercury is very poisonous. A single teaspoon can poison a 50 acre lake so fish cannot be safely eaten. Mercury causes nerve damage, kidney damage, liver failure, fatal heart disease and has been linked to autism, dyslexia, blindness and uncontrolled aggression. Coal plants also produce large amounts of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide particles. These pollutants have been linked to the rise in asthma among children. The effects of these pollutants are felt the most within a 30 mile radius. Is this the kind of business we want for the Cedar Valley? VOTE FOR GLOBAL COOLING Coal-fired power plants are the single greatest emitters of CO2 . Let?s become part of the solution rather than allow a plant to be built so it can sell energy for profit while contributing to Global Warming 24/7. VOTE FOR KEEPING IOWA A LEADER IN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY LS Powers proposed plant would use the dirtiest and least modern technology available. Techniques already exist for ? cleaning? coal and sequestering the CO2 (gasification and liquefaction) but LS Power keeps claiming they are too expensive. TECO has been running a lucrative gasification plant in Polk County Florida for the past 10 years. If we?re going to allow a plant on the proposed site, it would make more sense for it to be an ethanol plant or wind turbine manufacturing plant or anything else relating to alternative energy, not a plant using coal from another state and one that does not even use the latest technology. LS power recently raised a huge fuss when a bill was proposed that would require it to use the minimum 8% renewable energy now required of our local utilities. Is this the kind of company we want to deal with? VOTE FOR THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THE LAND IN QUESTION This valuable agricultural land in a rural/residential setting should be left as is or used for a business that would 1 Page 1 of 1 MAYOR HURLEY From: Kelly Wolf[Kelly.Wolf@vgm.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 4:49 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY Subject: Electricity -Yes! Dear Mayor and City Council: I am in favor of your approval on the electric power plant project being debated tonight. I can't be there to give my opinion so I hope this email reaches you in time. It seems to me that "greenhouse gases" and "global warming" are subjects best left to scientific experts in our government agencies set up for just the purpose of reviewing these things and setting fair standards. Your job here is to set the zoning correctly and be sure that they get the necessary approvals for their final plans before building anything. This electric plant is needed or it would not be built. Everyone, for or against the project, uses electricity and until someone comes up with a pollution free alternative that people are willing to build (and pay for) we are going to have to do the best we can with coal and other available fuels. Thank you for your careful work on this project and for helping to bring the plant,jobs and help with taxes that goes with it being here. Very truly yours, Kelly D. Wolf 2006 Wes Drive Wateloo, IA 50701 319-610-8330 5/7/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 11:10 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; Linda Laylin Subject: FW: Merchant Coal Plant (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) Original Message From: pam [mailto:pame@cfu.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 11: 06 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Merchant Coal Plant Mayor Hurley, The economic and environmental effects of a merchant coal plant on the Cedar Valley would be devestating. Thousands of citizens oppose this socially unjust and environmentally destructive proposal. Personal gain for a few will lead to long term financial, health, and environmental costs - costs which will be borne by the families in this community. Why not promote the Cedar Valley as a community that makes smart and responsible choices rather than dumb and reckless ones? Squeezing a dollar from the lungs of our children is unspeakable. Pam Echeverria 1 NANCY ECKERT From: MAYOR HURLEY Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 7:59 AM To: COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT Cc: DONNA CUTLER Subject: FW: Land Annexation Hard copy: Ron Welper John Kincaid Original Message From: renata sack [mailto:rudsack@mchsi.com] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 5:07 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY Subject: Land Annexation Honorable Mayor Hurley: I would like to ask you to vote for tabling the question of land annexation scheduled for discussion on Monday night' s council meeting. Please wait to discuss and decide this annexation for the purpose of building a proposed 750 megawatt power coal plant until after Ls Power has filed its proposal with the Iowa Utilities Board. I find it imperative that you would have all details and facts about this huge coal fired power plant before you before you make a valid judgment. A great number of Waterloo citizens have researched for the past year issues, concerns and facts about global warming. During this time, all throughout this country government leaders and common citizens have come to realize more and more the so serious impact of our, human beings' , actions on the environment. You believe that the EPA and the DNR will have the jurisdiction to wisely decide on the building of this plant. This is not so. The DNR has no legal powers and the EPA does not yet have the power to limit CO2 emissions. (Last month the US Supreme Court ruled that the EPA must set limits on CO2 emissions and institute some form of taxation of CO2) . The regulations for controlling all the other poisonous emissions are week in Iowa. LS Power plans to deposit the coal combustion waste in abandoned quarries. We all know that our quarries are made of limestone and limestone is porous, so by and by this noxious waste material will contaminate our ground water. There are no rules in place that the DNR must check this. Mercury will deposit itself in our streams, rivers and ponds and the fish will become too toxic for consumption. Cities, states, and countries are embracing conservation and new practices to alleviate green house gases. For example in London all city employees, including the mayor take public transportation. In Germany, a pig farmer took up a 5 million dollar loan and build on his land 10, 000 solar panels. He now produces electricity for 1500 homes and has a yearly profit of $60, 000. 170, 000 new jobs have been created in Germany through the business of solar energy. Please lead this community towards investing in renewable energy, in attracting industry and business producing new equipment, materials and methods. Please help this community to grow economically by making decisions in line with today's needs, utilizing newly developed technology. Do not allow us to go backwards fifty years and have an outdated albatross of a power plant loom in our city, abandoned and worthless. From 1999 — 2003 electric usage in Iowa did not increase. Iowa' s population is to increase only by 28000 by 2030. So you see, the LS Power electricity will be sold to other states and communities. LS Power will only use us as a dumping ground to make money for its investors. It is not a valid reason for annexation of private land. The $850, 000 the city would receive from LS Power do not compensate for the disastrous pollution of Iowa' s and the planet's environment. 1 LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 1 of 3 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER ry Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:30 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; Linda Laylin Subject: FW: LS Power for Waterloo -Vote No (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) From: Jim Ruff [mailto:jimruff©cfu.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:11 PM To: DONNA CUTLER; REGINALD SCHMITT; CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD GETTY; BOB GREENWOOD; ERIC GUNDERSON Subject: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Mayor Tim Hurley and Waterloo City Council Members: Subject: LS Power — Vote NO I would appreciate if you would vote NO for the construction and operation of the proposed coal-fired power plant in the city of Waterloo. There are many reasons to oppose this plant including: • The conversion of 375 acres of prime farm land to an industrial power generation site. This is not the vision of the citizenry of Iowa as we strive to lead the nation with renewable energy. Along with the our fertile soils, Black Hawk County is blessed with an abundance of groundwater reserves. LS Power's plan to mine this resource is another hidden cost to our county and state. Once gone, it cannot be replaced. • The heavy metal pollutant discharge and its long-term impact on the health of the citizens. Would the City Council of Waterloo favor this power plant if it was being proposed at Greyhound Park where the westerly winds would jeopardize the health and well-being of West Waterloo? That would not be the right choice for the citizens of Waterloo. When it comes to health and safety the citizens of Eastern Black Hawk County deserve the same consideration. • Increased production of greenhouse gases which increases the risk of global warming. Between 1990 and 2004, carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector increased by more than 28%. In addition, the electric power sector was responsible for more than half of the nation's increase in carbon dioxide emissions during that same time period. 5/1/2007 LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 2 of 3 • Several national politicians with campaign chests heavily financed by the fossil fuel and coal industry continue to insist that global warming is a myth. However, recent scientific studies conducted by the National Academy of Science and Engineering and the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported conclusive data that links the rise in global temperatures to greenhouse emissions. • Coal-burning power plants like the proposed by LS Power will accelerate this trend. While coal-fired power plants produced 51 percent of the U.S. Electricity in 2004, they emitted 83% of the carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation. As of June 2006, power companies are proposing to build approximately 150 new coal-fired power plants in the United States, They would increase the annual electricity-related carbon dioxide pollution by an additional 25% above 2004 levels. This translated to a 10% increase in overall U.S. carbon dioxide pollution. There are commercial alternatives! • Why Iowa? Why Black Hawk County? What East Waterloo? It is apparent that Northeast Iowa is not the prime user of the electricity. A recent article in the Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier highlighted that the 2006 population in the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Metropolitan Statistical Area had decreased by 0.9% since the 2000 census. What is the local or North East Iowa need for the output from a 750 MW polluting power plant? Is this the type of economic development needed for Waterloo and Black Hawk County? It seems logical that it should be built close to the natural resource or close to the point of use. But where are the coal resources? Iowa's richness is the greatest farmland in the world. It just doesn't make sense to destroy these God- given sustainable resources to enrich LS Power's profitability. • How much do we really know about LS Power? Their Website indicated they are a privately-held, investor group based in New Jersey. Who are their owners and their corporate managers? Do they really care about the health of the citizens of Black Hawk County? I have requested additional corporate information from LS Power but they failed to respond. Is that the type of corporation we want in Black Hawk County? Perhaps we should investigate the status of class action lawsuits in other regions of the country where LS Power is proposing to build similar coal-burning power plants. Yes, they are there and some are based on power plant proposals in racially disadvantaged areas where the citizens have little political power. • Again, how much do we know about LS Power? I just read in tonight's Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier that LS Power has written a letter to state 5/1/2007 L'S Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 3 of 3 legislators urging them to reject legislation that would require coal-fired power plants to invest in renewable energy. What's the rest of the story? LS Power indicates that research money might be available to UNI provided the state legislator gives LS Power a free pass on this legislation. According to the article , Rep. Bob Kressig was "dismayed" and stated "I don't think it is proper." A polite way of describing corporate blackmail? • With a projected life span of 40-50 years, new power plants should be built with the Best Available Emission Technology (BACT). The LS proposal is obsolete technology. We should be demanding the facts on the technology alternatives such as Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC). The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency requires applicants to study IGCC as part of the BACT process. Why settle for less in Iowa or Black Hawk County? LS Power is also planning natural gas power plants, a much cleaner alternative. A quick study of the proposed power plants seems to indicate the natural gas plants are closer to major cities while the coal are favored in rural areas of Iowa, Texas, Nevada, Arkansas and Georgia. The powerful influence of corporate influence on local economic development and governing bodies? • Inadequate traffic and transportation infrastructure - We do not have the transportation infrastructure to support a power plant of this magnitude. I work for John Deere and had job assignments that required several times a day commutes between the John Deere Product Engineering Center in Cedar Falls to the tractor assembly factory in Northeast Waterloo. I had waited many times for as long as thirty minutes for freight train traffic. It will only get much worse with longer and more frequent coal trains with the power plant. This is not progress! Finally, having lived in the Cedar Valley since the late 70's, I take great pride in the Iowa quality of life. I am a recent colorectal cancer survivor. If another power plant is built in this county, I can assure you that Cedar Valley will not be my retirement choice. Again, a NO vote to LS Power is a vote for the Northeast Iowa Quality of Life! Sincerely, Dr. James H. Ruff 5/1/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:26 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; Linda Laylin Subject: No to coal fired power plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Received a voice message on Sunday morning from Ron Lepsch of 467 Devonshire. Mr. Lepsch said: "There are a lot of us in Waterloo that do not want that coal-fired power plant in the Waterloo area or in Black Hawk County. We got rid of the John Deere foundry smoke and they got rid of their power plant. We have cut the emissions down dramatically in Waterloo in recent years. Now you are going to turn around because you think it is going to add to the economy. Ah, it is going to make people move away-- it is going to deter from the economy. NO to that coal burning power plant." Donna Cutler Mayor's Office City of Waterloo, Iowa 715 Mulberry Street Waterloo, Iowa 50703 319-291-4301 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 8:22 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; Linda Laylin Subject: FW: Coal Fired Plant- Please don't build it (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: Joan Webster-yore [mailto:webvor@mchsi.com] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 10:22 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: RE: Coal Fired Plant - Please don't build it As a resident of the Cedar Valley and Black Hawk County, I urge you to oppose building the coal fired plant here. In the long run this plant will cost our community much more than any short term financial gain in both an economical and environmental sense. Thank you, Joan Webster-yore 1 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 8:12 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: coal plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) From: Linda Kimball [mailto:mzlindarose@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 7:45 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: coal plant Dear Mr. Mayor, On behalf of my husband, Charles, and myself, I am imploring you to STOP the attempt to bring a coal producer to Waterloo! Coal will destroy the quality of air and do nothing but pollute the environment of our city. PLEASE do NOT let this happen to Waterloo. /s/ Charles N and Linda R Kimball, 552 Martin Road, Waterloo Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos. 5/2/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:51 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: coal plant - email from Lois Fleuette (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Lois Fleuette [mailto:ljfleuet@netins.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:32 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: coal plant i oppose the coal plant for health and envirnomental reasons please do not support this plant being built in our area lois fleuette 411 e 2nd st waterloo, iowa 50703 5/2/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 3:55 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: coal fired energy plant-comments from Hudson resident (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPLER) Original Message From: Diane Schulz [mailto:DSchulz@hudson.k12.ia.us] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:51 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: coal fired energy plant I hope the council will oppose the construction of a coal burning energy plant in the Cedar Valley. I am a resident of Hudson, a resident of the Cedar Valley, and a sixth grade teacher. Our Cedar Valley leaders need to consider the long term effects of such a plant. We, as adults, need to look out for the future of our children. Please oppose the coal fired energy plant and instead be futuristic and think about alternative energy sources for the sake of the entire Cedar Valley, but especially for the sake of our children. Most sincerely, Diane Schulz 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:06 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: Phone call from Lorene Burnes, 2629 E. Fourth Street - opposed to coal plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Ms. Burner left the following voice message: "I am opposed to bringing coal to Waterloo. This is not a good idea. When I grew up in East St. Louis, my family burned coal. I had a sister and an uncle that died from tuberculosis and always felt it was coal that did it. I do not like the coal. Please vote against this. I am elderly and totally disabled and cannot come to the meeting. God bless you." Donna NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:45 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: opposed to coal burning plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: Stacy Lee [mailto:mrsstacylee@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4 :43 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Dear Mayor Hurley, I am writing to let you know that as a concerned citizen of the Cedar Valley I oppose the construction of the coal burning plant in Waterloo. I am very concerned about pollution, about the use of non-renewable resources, and about the wear and tear on roads due to truck traffic. I believe the Cedar Valley can do better than this! Please look for companies that offer alternate energy sources that are beneficial to our future. Thank you for reading this mail. Stacy Lee Need a break? Find your escape route with Live Search Maps. http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?ss=Restaurants-Hotels-Amusement%20Park&cp=33 .832922 --117.915659&style=r&lv1=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=1118863&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01 1 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:40 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: The coal plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) From: GENEBUR@aol.com [mailto:GENEBUR@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 8:37 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Cc: schmittreginald@johndeere.com; CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD GE! I Y; BOB GREENWOOD; ERIC GUNDERSON Subject: The coal plant Mayor and City Council Members, As citizens of Black Hawk county we feel we must not sit quietly by and watch this coal plant brought into our Cedar Valley to pollute with emissions that will reduce the air quality of our area. We have lived here all our lives and feel the trade-off for a new few jobs doesn't make sense. The barrage of train traffic and the worsening of our so-far fairly clean air doesn't justify this. There are other ways to meet energy needs that are clean wind energy, etc. that won't pollute our air. Besides we understand most of the energy generated will be sold to outside places. Please consider this and think of the future of our children and grandchildren. Gene and Mary Burry See what's free at AOL.com. 5/3/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:41 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: coal plant (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Sandy G [mailto:sandyspage_1999©yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 12:51 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: coal plant We are against the Coal Plant being built in Waterloo. Thank you. Richard and Sandra Gutknecht 1948 Pinehurst Lane Waterloo, Iowa 50701 232-0440 Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell? Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos. 5/3/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 8:43 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; BOB GREENWOOD; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: coal fired plants coal fired plants (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: herkelsam@mchsi.com [mailto:herkelsam@mchsi.com] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 7 :44 PM To: DONNA CUTLER; REGINALD SCHMITT; CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD GETTY; ERIC GUNDERSON Cc: Joan Webster-yore Subject: coal fired plants Mayor Hurley and Waterloo City Council: Just a short note to express my concern about the possibility of a new coal fired electric generation plant in Waterloo. I am recently retired from working in Waterloo. My wife, Karen does work in Waterloo, and I have other family members who work in Waterloo. On the news the other night, Ron Steele reported on an air quality study done in eastern Iowa with Waterloo and Iowa City receiving a "C" and Cedar Rapids receiving a "D" grade for air quality. Is there a reason why anyone would want to support putting more pollutants into our air knowing that we are just barely making the grade now? Attached is a photo of stacks from a Tampa Florida area coal fired generation plant that I visited in January this year. 309 Ardis St. Hudson, IA 50643 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:26 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: decision (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: Porter House [mailto:porterhouse@mchsi.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 7:12 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Cc: CAROLYN COLE Subject: decision Dear Mayor and Ms. Cole: I am sending this note to urge you, as elected officials of the city, to attend to the message being sent by large numbers of Waterloo residents. I would venture that if the issue came to a public referendum, the number of concerned citizens would prove to be the majority. This message is to decide against the construction of LS Power' s coal-fired generation plant. According to a recent series of articles in Scientific American, we are about two years away from a working prototype of a zero-emission coal plant. The technology for containing emissions and pumping them beneath impervious bedrock is already present, and being exploited by the oil industry. Please make a progressive decision to hold off on the coal plant until such technology, and carbon emission caps, are in place. Unlike many environmentalists, I believe we will need to rely upon coal until other alternatives are found. However, we must encourage the energy industry and policy-makers to construct technology and a policy climate that assures the safety of our environment for future generations. We cannot create this type of environment if we give in to current market forces and trade immediate gains for the long-term health of our communities. Please do the responsible thing and vote no, at this time, for LS Power's proposal. Sincerely, Dr. Clark Porter 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:26 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: LS Power Plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: ed [mailto:edman99@butler-bremer.com] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 10:15 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: LS Power Plant It is beyond me, Mr. Mayor, how anyone can sign on to support this coal plant when LS Power has not even provided comprehensive data regarding emission levels. All we have are their assurances and good intentions - and the road to hell is paved with them and so are mismanaged and polluted areas around this country and globe. I'd really like to know the self-interests that are driving people to support this plant because the economic benefits are NOT a good return on a 1.3 billion dollar investment. I really don't think the people who are most vocally pushing for this project are acting in the best interests of the Cedar Valley - and I don't live in Waterloo but I live close enough that I am well within the footprint of that plant and the harm that it will spew into our environment. I am not ready to take on blind faith the assurances of a multi-billion dollar merchant coal corporation that exists only to maximize profits and I would hope that none of our elected officials would do so either. Below you will find my op-ed piece that, unfortunately, the Waterloo Courier did not publish. I close with this thought - "if we keep on doing as we have always done, we will get as we have always got" That' s no longer a sustainable plan. We need leadership and vision- we need better than we're getting. Gene Turner, Tripoli, IA Gov. Culver recently called for Iowa to become a leader in the production of clean, renewable energy. In direct contradiction to that call we have the proposal by LS Power to build a 750megawatt coal-fired power plant just east of Waterloo. The negative consequences of that plant will have far-reaching effects for the whole region. All of us should ask if this coal plant is in the best interest of the Cedar Valley. For good reason, states around the country have put severe restrictions on coal-fired plants. They contribute 40% of the CO2 emissions in the United States, more than any other source. Idaho officials have placed a moratorium on new coal plants — the governor there has said the dangers of coal-fired power plants clearly outweigh any economic benefits. California, New York, and Illinois have mandates to greatly cut emissions. There are over 150 coal-fired power plants under development in the US. Only two dozen of those have made any mention of using the most modern technologies so as to limit environmental damage, such as coal-gasification. The majority of those plants, including the LS Power plant, go no further than current regulations mandate. We are told that a plant built to current regulations will ensure the safety of our community. Yet there is widespread agreement that current regulations are inadequate and will face major reform in the coming years. Currently 16 states are suing the EPA for 1 failing to control pollutant emissions. So the developers look to Iowa to build their 750mw facility. Originally they were up front in saying that the power produced would be sold out of state. That proved a very unpopular position and now they say most of the power will be sold in Iowa although Iowa utilities have publicly stated that they see no immediate need for this new capacity. We need to be very clear about the scale of this plant relative to the needs of the surrounding area. There are fewer than 60, 000 residential households in all of Blackhawk County. Average household consumption in the area is slightly less than 900 kwhrs per month A 750mw plant produces 750 megawatts per hour at full capacity. No plant operates at 100°% efficiency but at an industry typical 75 - 80o capacity, this plant will be producing enough electricity to power more than 450, 000 average homes. That makes it very clear that the output of this plant far exceeds local needs. The power is meant for elsewhere. There is no local need for a plant of this scale. None. But the developers push it, with little regard for the consequences, seeking only to secure the project ahead of any future regulations. The detrimental effects of the LS Plant will be our legacy. The negative health consequences of a coal plant of this scale are well documented Mercury emissions from the plant will find their way into our waters and environment. We' ll have consumption advisories on our fish even as we try to promote a chain-of-lakes in the area. The filtering technology will create toxic waste to be disposed of. Our infrastructure will strain under the load of coal-filled trains moving constantly through the area, holding up traffic, causing delays. Those many tons of coal will not move through the area without leaving their mark. Property values will be adversely affected. Even the alleged economic benefits are dubious at best. It may be true that it will generate considerable economic activity during its construction but only 100 full-time jobs will result for long-term benefits. One hundred full-time jobs at the plant and a handful of support jobs, is a very poor return on a $1.3 billion investment. Toyota recently announced plans to build a $1.3 billion assembly plant in Mississippi that is expected to employ 2, 000 people. That' s a good return on 1.3 billion. There is real dereliction on the part of the city officials and others to be fully informed of the ramifications of this project. There is too much at stake here to be persuaded by the payoff of a few million tax dollars and a hundred plus jobs. We have the ability to be leaders in the production of renewable energy. Already Iowa, on a per capita basis, leads the country in wind energy. We could use that same technology to augment local need. We would have no 750mw coal plant blighting our landscape like a cancer, no coal-filled trains running constantly, no mercury falling from our skies, and no greenhouse gas emissions. And, of course, no inevitably rising costs for fuel needed to power the turbines. This plant is not needed and it will not benefit the people of this area. Its potential for harm is too great. Those who push for this plant are not acting in the best interest of the Cedar Valley. 2 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:34 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linia Laylin' Subject: FW: Power Plant Zoning (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID From: JimenezRE@aol.com [mailto:JimenezRE@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 6:19 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Power Plant Zoning Dear Mr. Hurley - I am a resident of Waterloo and I have serious concerns over the Power Plant being considered for Waterloo. I strongly believe that this coal fired power plant is a mistake for Waterloo. It is a very short sighted economic solution. Waterloo will in the long run be left with a huge pollution problem no matter what type of regulations are put in place, while other states will benefit from the electricity generated and New Jersey will get the profits. Think of the legacy you will leave to future city mayors and councils who will have to face the problems of higher pollution, health problems for future generations and negative impacts to farming. I do not support the re-zoning of the 345 acres. I believe there is better use for this property. Iowa has such a natural resource in the strong winds we have in this area. I believe the best economic solution is tapping our wind and turning to renewable energy for better economic return. Did you realized that there are more jobs to be made by turning to renewable energy? Renewable energy is a much better long term solution for Waterloo and a much better investment for our area, it woulc create many more jobs than the coal burning power plant and it would not have the pollution affects for our area that a coal fired power plant would have. Please do not support annexation of this property for the purpose of a coal fired power plant. Thank you, Rebeca Jimenez 1922 Winston PI. Waterloo, IA 50701 See what's free at AOL.com. 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:38 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: coal plant (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Atanner41©aol.com [mailto:Atanner41@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 10:36 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: coal plant Mr Hurley as we our your constituets and surronding area that add to the revenue of Waterloo by buying all of our products in the city of Waterloo we are opposed to the coal plant. Vote no on this as I and my other friends and acquaintences are opposed to this, we feel this will hurt the economy of Waterloo not help. This will be a deterent to new business coming or thinking of coming to Waterloo, also it will keep individual families from moving here because of the polution this will bring and other various problems. Vote no for your families and the poeople that elected you to this office!!! Thank you Tawni & Rich Hernades 110 Hunter Ridge Dr. Raymond, Iowa 50667 Joyce and Carrol Jenson 172 Gray Street Elk Run, la 50707 Ardis Tanner 174 Gray St, Elk Run, Iowa 50707 Allan & Sue Sonnack 173 Gray Elk Run Iowa 50707 and other consitiuents of Waterloo that do not want this coal plant THAT SIGNED PETITIONS AGAINST THIS AND ASKED US TO SPEAK FOR THEM. Thank you See what's free at AOL.com. 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:41 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Lirda Laylin' Subject: FW: Opposition to Coal Plant (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Dick Lynch [mailto:dlynch©cfu.net] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 11:11 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Opposition to Coal Plant Hi Tim, My wife and I are opposed to the coal plant in the Cedar Valley. We need to level off CO2, not increase them. Let's be proactive and work on renewable sources of energy that will be environmentally, friendly. We owe it to our grandchildren and their grandchildren. Dick Lynch 5/7/2007 'lay 7, 2007 Page 1 of 2 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:19 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: LS Power Plant (hard copy to Ron Welper and John Kincaid) From: Jo Martin [mailto:jomartin@mchsi.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:15 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: LS Power Plant For the Mayor and City Council May 7, 2007 Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council: I am adamantly opposed to the annexation of land for the LS Power Plant, an out-of-state company which will only pollute our air and water, pose a danger to the health of our citizens and in general contaminate our environment. Allowing this industry in our community will cause our existing residents to retire elsewhere and discourage others from locating here in the first place. The negative effect on our environment and the loss of future population outweighs the 100 jobs that might be created and limited revenue it might provide. There may be many more people that leave the community because of this proposed plant. Once this plant gets built, there will be no turning back. We will suffer the dire consequences permanently. The citizens of Waterloo and the surrounding areas deserve better. Over 4,000 people have signed a petition against this proposed plant. Please listen to these constituents and deny this annexation. Sincerely, 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:59 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Proposed Coal Plant (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) From: DenFlory©aol.com [mailto:DenFlory@aol,com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 10:36 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Proposed Coal Plant As a resident of Waterloo, I have taken time to consider the proposed benefits and hazards of the LP coal fired plant. I am deeply concerned that we do not yet know what type of plant will actually be built - other than it may burn swtich grass and other biofuels. We have not heard an accurate determination of CO2 emissions from the company. Even more concerning are the heavy metals, including mercury, emitted into the air that will drip throughout the land and water in our county and up to 100 miles away. Mercury is hazardous to the development of normal brain and nervous tissue. Developing children and animals will be effected by your decision to allow this plant to be a part of our community. Please, demand full disclosure from the LP company and consider our future generations whel you make your decision. Sincerely, Denise Flory See what's free at AOL.com. 5/7/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 12:28 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: Voice message regarding power plant from Waterloo resident (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Juanita Williams, Nurse and resident of Waterloo, left voice message to encourage the mayor to oppose the annexation of the land for the power plant. She is Concerned about the health impacts. Has been doing research for a masters level epidemiology class at University of Iowa. Studied particularly the health impact of coal fired power plant emission. Has found most definitely increased asthma attacks, asthma and respiratory death, cardiac heart attacks and death for women specifically related to coal fired power plants, even those that meet with regulatory standards in the communities that have been studied. We do not have detailed emission data and the environmental and health impacts of this particular plant. Believes there is some suspect as to why that has not been released after 18 months. If they say it is going to be cleaner, they must know that detail and they are not releasing it for reasons that maybe will impact us to think more seriously about allowing this to be built in our backyard. I want to encourage you to think about the long-term effects and what kind of a community this leaves for future generations -- our own children and grandchildren. Are we leaving the place in better shape than when we found it if we build a plant like this that negatively impacts the health of ourselves and or our children. Believes that the economic benefits are really not that great if you weigh out increase health care costs that are specifically associated with disease that results from coal fired power plant emissions, like the one that would be built here. Thank you for your year and thank you for your activism. Appreciate everything you do to keep the economic benefits balanced by the health impacts and the environmental impacts. Because believes if we think of the sake of everyone involved, there is better economic investments than something dirty and diseased producing facility like this. Thank you for taking this into consideration. i Page 1 of 2 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 1:18 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Refuse Land Annexation for LS Power Plant (hard copy to John Kincaid and Ron Welper) From: Fred and Anne Freese [mailto:fredandcrabby@mchsi.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 1:11 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Refuse Land Annexation for LS Power Plant Dear Honorable Mayor Hurley: As someone who purports to be concerned about my fellow humans and planet passengers, I urge you to reject the annexation of land for LS Power's coal-burning power plant. It seems unconscionable to knowingly allow ourselves to be courted and won by a corporate business whose process will further eviscerate the once pristine life-supporting quality of our earth's air, water, and soil. Now, when there are alternative means of managing our energy needs, we need to be part of the solution, not consciously contribute to the devastation fossil fuels have wrought. This past April 3rd, the U. S. Supreme Court in the Environmental Defense vs. Duke Energy case ruled in favor of the Clean Air Act. The American Lung Association's "friends of the court" statement seems supremely relavent: "We wanted to ensure that the court understood that the type of pollution these coal- burning power plants produce has severe health effects, including inducing wheezing and asthma attacks, triggering heart attacks and strokes, and increasing the risk of premature death." Joining in that statement were such august bodies as the American Thoracis Society, the American College of Chest Physicians, the Association for Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, National Association for the Medical Direction of Respiratory Care. Yes, there are other trade-offs--incomes for a few people vs. further smudging of our image and discouraging other businesses from locating here; knowingly allowing pain to be inflicted on our fellow citizens; increasing health costs for many; increasing physical and emotional suffering (direct and indirect); diminishing buying power due to health expenses and damage to homes; increasing number of missed days of work; diminishing value of retirement portfolio capitol investment (home); diminishing pride in their homes and neighborhoods; additionally devastating the social status of our African- American, Mexican, and Latino residents; diminishing learning ability leading to diminished earning power and financial dependence; further real degrading of the air, water, soil; adding another poor example to the world. Waterloo struggles to rise above its blue-collar image. Thousands of dollars and millions of hours have been spent to raise the quality of life here and to attract businesses with better paying positions and professionals. I don't understand shooting ourselves in the foot by accepting a coal-fired plant. So, today, "the buck (also) stops here". We Iowans are some of the better educated in these "united states", in this "First World""representative democracy" of caring citizens. If we do not become a part of those speaking out for our neighbors, who will? If we do not become part of slowing the degradation of our environment and our community now, when will we? 5/7/2007 Page 2 of 2 I URGE YOU NOT TO ALLOW LS Power to further exacerbate the health and social and political and energy problems of this world with Waterloo's blessing. PLEASE DENY THEIR ANNEXATION REQUEST! Jacqueline Anne Freese 927 Sheridan Road Waterloo, IA 50701-4945 5/7/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 2:01 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER Subject: Phone message to Mayor and Council (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) 1:55 PM - 5/7/07 Cary Purcell, 710 Black Hawk Road called --wants Council to vote no to power plant. 1 Power Plant Project Page 1 of 1 MAYOR HURLEY From: Michelle Lindquist[michelle@vgm.com] Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 4:33 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY Subject: Power Plant Project Dear Mayor and City Council: I am in favor of your approval on the electric power plant project being debated tonight. I can't be there to give my opinion so I hope this email reaches you in time. It seems to me that "greenhouse gases" and "global warming" are subjects best left to scientific experts in our government agencies set up for just the purpose of reviewing these things and setting fair standards. Your job here is to set the zoning correctly and be sure that they get the necessary approvals for their final plans before building anything. This electric plant is needed or it would not be built. Everyone, for or against the project, uses electricity and until someone comes up with a pollution free alternative that people are willing to build (and pay for) we are going to have to do the best we can with coal and other available fuels. Thank you for your careful work on this project and for helping to bring the plant,jobs and help with taxes that goes with it being here. Very truly yours, H A. • 614 Hanna Blvd Waterloo, IA 50701 319-233-2191 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 8:17 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; Linca Laylin Subject: FW: annexation and rezoning (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: RVMdt©aol.com [mailto:RVMdt©aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:02 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: annexation and rezoning I am terribly disappointed in your stance in regard to the proposed coal plant. At this time there are still too many unanswered questions for a decision to be made. Questions concerning traffic, cost of infrastructure for the city to accommodate the cost of building a waterline, sewer, and roadways and other essentials have not been fully addressed. We all can perceive the added health risks to our community. They are well documented. Even our insurance premiums will go up as our community will be flagged as an "at-risk" area for health problems by the insurance industry. Any new company or businesses that provide health care benefits for their employees will surely factor this in when deciding whether or not to locate in the Waterloo area. A coal plant will not be an asset to the city of Waterloo but a stifling death sentence for future economic growth and a burden for the taxpayers. Surely not the "gold mine" you perceive it to be! Sincerely, Regina Marquardt Waterloo, IA. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 5/1/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 9:06 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Coal Plant-Another email from frje Echeverria (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID From: frje Echeverria [mailto:frje@cfu.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 6:54 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Coal Plant Dear Mayor Hurley Your position on the coal plant looks solidified: the economic benefits are more important than health dangers. You have not promoted open public discussion of the risks. I urge you consider the long range effects of this plant and look beyond the glitz of promised growth, profit,and progress. frje Echeverria 5/2/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:26 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: opposed to LS Power plant- Carole Yates - Cedar Falls (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: carole yates [mailto:carole.yates@cfu.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:23 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: opposed to LS Power plant Mayor Hurley, Please consider the dire health issues involved in building a coal-fired power plant in Waterloo. Mercury emissions are poison and other emissions will get into the water supply. Sincerely, Carole Yates Cedar Falls 1 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:07 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Support of Elk Run Energy Station -email from Corey Clark (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) From: Corey Clark [mailto:CoreyC©mylsb.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:00 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Support of Elk Run Energy Station. Good afternoon Mayor. With the May 7th meeting to discuss the annexation and rezoning request for the Elk Run Energy Station coming up, I just want to express my personal support in favor of this project. Based on reviewing the facts, I feel the pros greatly outweigh the cons. Thus, I encourage you and others involved to see this project through to its ultimate successful conclusion. Thanks much for your time. Corey Clark 3321 Inverness Road Waterloo IA 50701 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:This e-mail message,including any attachments,are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the addressed recipient(s).Any unauthorized review,use,disclosure or distribution is prohibited.If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ===PROTECT YOURSELF FROM INTERNET CRIME!=== Please DO NOT send any of your vital account information via email.This includes account number,login ID or passwords.This is NOT a secure form of communication. 5/2/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2:51 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Coal Plant (hard copy to john kincaid and ron welper) From: Vbquardt [mailto:vbquardt©mchsi.com] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2:41 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Coal Plant We live in Evansdale but feel we have the right to voice what we think about the coal plant. we don't want it near here or in Iowa. We are against the annexation and rezoning of the property in the city limits. We can't vote in Waterloo, but we do vote in city, county and state issues. Verdale and Berniece Marquardt 5/4/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2:06 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Request Your Consideration (HARD COPY TO JOHN KINCAID AND RON WELPER) Original Message From: Bobbie Fox [mailto:bobbie.fox@uni.edu] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2 :04 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Request Your Consideration Mr. Hurley, Please consider the harmful effects a large coal powered plant would have on the residents of our community and the entire Cedar Valley. I ask you to vote AGAINST the building by LS Power of such a plant in Waterloo. Thank You, Bobbie Fox 1 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2:51 PM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Coal Plant (hard copy to john kincaid and ron welper) From: Vbquardt [mailto:vbquardt©mchsi.com] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2:41 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Coal Plant We live in Evansdale but feel we have the right to voice what we think about the coal plant. we can't want it near here or in Iowa. We are against the annexation and rezoning of the property in the city limits. We can't vote in Waterloo, but we do vote in city, county and state issues. Verdale and Berniece Marquardt 5/4/2007 Re: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 1 of 5 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:32 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: LS Power for Waterloo -Vote No (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Jim Ruff [mailto:jimruff©cfu.net] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 7:34 PM To: ERIC GUNDERSON; DONNA CUTLER; REGINALD SCHMITT; CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD GETTY; BOB GREENWOOD Subject: Re: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Dear Mr. Gunderson, Mayor Hurley and other Waterloo City Council members: Subject: LS Power Plant — Vote NO In response to a question to me from Eric Gunderson, I have conducted an investigation and can provide some data concerning emissions from CFU Utilities. Mr. Steve Bernard, Director of Customer Service and Business Development at Cedar Falls Utilities, was kind enough to provide CFU data. Unfortunately, I was not able to get any data from the University of Northern Iowa. I have analyzed the CFU data and have attached three graphs for your review and consideration. In summary: . Using EPA reporting data, the CFU power plant in Cedar Falls is very small in comparison to the larger facilities in Iowa. In fact, the CFU Cedar Falls power plant is one of the smallest reporting units in Iowa. Its average power output was 24-megawatts compared to the 673-megawatt Mid America power plant in Council Bluffs. If the LS Power Plant is built, it will be 31 times the size of the CFU plant. I share your concern about the pollution dumping from the CFU facility. Do we really want the equivalent of 31 of these facilities in Black Hawk County? • Graph #2 illustrates 2005 EPA data on the CO2 pollution from the various power plants in Iowa. According to EPA data, the CFU facility discharged 1428 tons of SO2, 630 tons of NOX and 159,931 tons of CO2 into our "clean air". Again, do we really want to multiply these numbers by a factor of 31? • Graph #2 supports Mr. Gunderson's concern that the CFU Power Plant is not the best technology and has been dumping pollution into the air. EPA data 5/7/2007 Re: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 2 of 5 indicates that it discharged 2.67 lbs of CO2/kW-Hr which is among the worse in Iowa. This graph also indicates that the emissions/kW-hr improves slightly as the plant size increases but even the best coal-powered plants, approximately 2 lbs of CO2/kW-Hr will be discharged. This is approximately 3X the CO2 rate from natural-gas power plants. It is impossible to understand or predict the heavy metal (mercury, etc.) , NOX, SO2 and CO2 emissions from the LS Power plant because they have never stated on record what technology they will be using or their projected emissions levels. They have stated that they will be using current technology. What exactly do they mean? From a clean air perspective, that's approximately 7.2 million tons of CO2 emissions discharged into the "clean air" of Black Hawk County. Why not use natural gas which is the preferred technology for a majority of their new power plants? LS Power will state that their proposed plant will meet current Iowa and U.S. Federal environmental air quality standards. That is probably true, but what about future regulations. Global warming trends have been scientifically linked to the increasing levels of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere. Currently CO2 is not considered an atmospheric pollutant. However, on April 2, 2007 the US. Supreme count ruled that gases that cause global warming are pollutants under the Clean Air Act and that the U.S. Government has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide (see attachment: 040207 - Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency). What does that mean for the proposed LS power plant? It means pulverized- coal facilities will not be cost-effective in the near future compared to newer technologies that are already being implemented. For example, Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle power plants being constructed in other parts of the world and even in our border state of Illinois are much more effective for carbon sequestration. The LS Power plant appears to be a dinosaur while it is still in planning stages? The May 8, 2007 Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier stated a potential consequence, "the Air Quality Bureau of the DNR states whatever individual pollutants the LS Power Plant emits could make it more difficult for other air- polluting industries seeking to locate in the Cedar Valley. This will be an even bigger issue with the recent Supreme Court ruling. Again, I ask for your NO vote to LS Power at the upcoming Waterloo City Council meeting. Sincerely, Dr. James H. Ruff From: ERIC GUNDERSON <ERIC.GUNDERSON@WATERLOO-IA.ORG> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:28:48 -0500 To: Jim Ruff <jimruff@cfu.net> Conversation: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Subject: RE: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No 5/7/2007 Re: LS Power for Waterloo -Vote No Page 3 of 5 Mr. Ruff,you have some very good points, I have a question for you?What have to done to close the UNI Power Plant and the CFU Power Plant? Both are very old and out of date and have been dumping pollution into the air for the past 50 years. From: Jim Ruff[mailto:jimruff@cfu net Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:11 PM To: DONNA CUTLER; REGINALD SCHMITT; CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD GETTY; BOB GREENWOOD; ERIC GUNDERSON Subject: LS Power for Waterloo-Vote No Mayor Tim Hurley and Waterloo City Council Members: Subject: LS Power — Vote NO I would appreciate if you would vote NO for the construction and operation of the proposed coal-fired power plant in the city of Waterloo. There are many reasons to oppose this plant including: • The conversion of 375 acres of prime farm land to an industrial power generation site. This is not the vision of the citizenry of Iowa as we strive to lead the nation with renewable energy. Along with the our fertile soils, Black Hawk County is blessed with an abundance of groundwater reserves. LS Power's plan to mine this resource is another hidden cost to our county and state. Once gone, it cannot be replaced. • The heavy metal pollutant discharge and its long-term impact on the health of the citizens. Would the City Council of Waterloo favor this power plant if it was being proposed at Greyhound Park where the westerly winds would jeopardize the health and well-being of West Waterloo? That would not be the right choice for the citizens of Waterloo. When it comes to health and safety the citizens of Eastern Black Hawk County deserve the same consideration. • Increased production of greenhouse gases which increases the risk of global warming. Between 1990 and 2004, carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector increased by more than 28%. In addition, the electric power sector was responsible for more than half of the nation's increase in carbon dioxide emissions during that same time period. . Several national politicians with campaign chests heavily financed by the fossil fuel and coal industry continue to insist that global warming is a myth. However, recent scientific studies conducted by the National Academy of Science and Engineering and the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported conclusive data that links the rise in global temperatures to greenhouse emissions. 5/7/2007 Re: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 4 of 5 . Coal-burning power plants like the proposed by LS Power will accelerate this trend. While coal-fired power plants produced 51 percent of the U.S. Electricity in 2004, they emitted 83% of the carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation. As of June 2006, power companies are proposing to build approximately 150 new coal-fired power plants in the United States, They would increase the annual electricity-related carbon dioxide pollution by an additional 25% above 2004 levels. This translated to a 10% increase in overall U.S. carbon dioxide pollution. There are commercial alternatives! . Why Iowa? Why Black Hawk County? What East Waterloo? It is apparent that Northeast Iowa is not the prime user of the electricity. A recent article in the Waterloo/Cedar Falls Courier highlighted that the 2006 population in the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Metropolitan Statistical Area had decreased by 0.9% since the 2000 census. What is the local or North East Iowa need for the output from a 750 MW polluting power plant? Is this the type of economic development needed for Waterloo and Black Hawk County? It seems logical that it should be built close to the natural resource or close to the point of use. But where are the coal resources? Iowa's richness is the greatest farmland in the world. It just doesn't make sense to destroy these God-given sustainable resources to enrich LS Power's profitability. • How much do we really know about LS Power? Their Website indicated they are a privately-held, investor group based in New Jersey. Who are their owners and their corporate managers? Do they really care about the health of the citizens of Black Hawk County? I have requested additional corporate information from LS Power but they failed to respond. Is that the type of corporation we want in Black Hawk County? Perhaps we should investigate the status of class action lawsuits in other regions of the country where LS Power is proposing to build similar coal-burning power plants. Yes, they are there and some are based on power plant proposals in racially disadvantaged areas where the citizens have little political power. • Again, how much do we know about LS Power? I just read in tonight's Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier that LS Power has written a letter to state legislators urging them to reject legislation that would require coal-fired power plants to invest in renewable energy. What's the rest of the story? LS Power indicates that research money might be available to UNI provided the state legislator gives LS Power a free pass on this legislation. According to the article , Rep. Bob Kressig was "dismayed" and stated "I con't think it is proper." A polite way of describing corporate blackmail? 5/7/2007 Re: LS Power for Waterloo - Vote No Page 5 of 5 . With a projected life span of 40-50 years, new power plants should be built with the Best Available Emission Technology (BACT). The LS proposal is obsolete technology. We should be demanding the facts on the technology alternatives such as Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC). The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency requires applicants to study IGCC as part of the BACT process. Why settle for less in Iowa or Black Hawk County? LS Power is also planning natural gas power plants, a much cleaner alternative. A quick study of the proposed power plants seems to indicate the natural gas plants are closer to major cities while the coal are favored in rural areas of Iowa, Texas, Nevada, Arkansas and Georgia. The powerful influence of corporate influence on local economic development and governing bodies? . Inadequate traffic and transportation infrastructure - We do not have the transportation infrastructure to support a power plant of this magnitude. I work for John Deere and had job assignments that required several times a day commutes between the John Deere Product Engineering Center in Cedar Falls to the tractor assembly factory in Northeast Waterloo. I had waited many times for as long as thirty minutes for freight train traffic. It will only get much worse with longer and more frequent coal trains with the power plant. This is not progress! Finally, having lived in the Cedar Valley since the late 70's, I take great pride in the Iowa quality of life. I am a recent colorectal cancer survivor. If another power plant is built in this county, I can assure you that Cedar Valley will not be my retirement choice. Again, a NO vote to LS Power is a vote for the Northeast Iowa Quality of Life! Sincerely, Dr. James H. Ruff Subject to the requirements of the Iowa Open Records Act, this message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Subsection 2510-252, as amended, and contains information intended for the specified individual(s) only. This information is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:36 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: LSPPowerPlant (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Betty Seamans [mailto:kikiseam@mwsupernet.com] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:43 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: LSPPowerPlant Dear Mr. Hurley I am asking you to consider not annexing in this property to the city at this time. Please consider what is best for all concerned, As a property owner and investor in the city of Waterloo Ito want to see the city grow this is not the way. I have been told by some Other investors that they feel this will stop other important business to come to our city. Please take more time to look into this Further before we have a business that will not help but hurt us. Thank you, Lowell & Betty Seamans 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:37 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; DON TEMEYER; NANCY ECKERT; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Coal plant (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: Tslindawhite@aol.com [mailto:Tslindawhite@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 7:29 PM To: DONNA CUTLER Subject: Coal plant Dear Mayor Hurley: I am writing to urge you to vote AGAINST annexation and rezoning of the farmland on Newell St that is the site of LS Power's proposed coal plant. This plant is a terrible idea for residents of Waterloo and the entire Cedar Valley. There are serious health and environmental issues, landowners who don't want to sell, and a huge out-of- state company (LS Power) with a lack of integrity and no interest in the welfare of our community. (Bribing legislators with money for UNI only means LS Power is interested in their own deep pockets. They should abide by laws other power companies in Iowa must abide by.) Every time LS Power is asked what the emissions from the plant will be, they say they don't know yet. I find it hard to believe LS Power has no idea what the toxic output of their plant will be. It is irresponsible for you to approve it, especially when they are not forthcoming with information on this and other topics. Again, please DO NOT ANNEX AND REZONE this valuable farmland. Thank you. Sincerely, Linda White ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 5/7/2007 Page 1 of 1 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:39 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; COUNCIL MEMBERS; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER; 'Linda Laylin' Subject: FW: Power plant not Good idea (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) From: chris22872@aol.com [mailto:chris22872@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 10:27 AM To: DONNA CUTLER; schmittreginalda@jonhdeere.com; CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD Gt I I Y; ERIC GUNDERSON Subject: Power plant not Good idea Dear Mayor Hurley, and city council members, I write to you this morning in regard to to the upcoming council meeting regarding the proposed coal fired power plant east of Waterloo. I want to urge you to protect our health and the health of our children and grand children, by voting against this proposal . LS power has stated many times that the power generated by this plant will be sold out of state, they have also stated that they have no interest in burning Biomass along with the coal. Cleaner coal technology is available and has been proven to work, however LS is not going to use this technology either. I would like to share with you an experience I had personally with an Elk Run energy rep. not too long ago. I stopped to talk to a gentleman from LS Power, Elk Run energy at a display they had locally. I asked about the easements needed for the transmission lines and was told that all the options for the easement have been signed and that one of the first to sign was my Father. When I told the gentleman who I was and that my father had not and will not sign their option he conveniently remembered an important meeting he was late for and could not talk to me any further. I believe this goes far in saying how this company does it's business. I urge you to do the right thing and vote against this plant. Thanks for you consideration, Chris Sadler AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. 5/7/2007 NANCY ECKERT From: DONNA CUTLER Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:40 AM To: MAYOR HURLEY; NANCY ECKERT; DON TEMEYER Subject: FW: Council Meeting 5/7/07 (HARD COPY TO RON WELPER AND JOHN KINCAID) Original Message From: Olivia Northey [mailto:obnorthey@dybb.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 11:03 AM To: DONNA CUTLER Cc: CAROLYN COLE; HAROLD GETTY; Bob Greenwood; ERIC GUNDERSON; REGINALD SCHMITT Subject: Council Meeting 5/7/07 Mayor Hurley and members of the Waterloo City Council: I am writing this letter to express my opposition to LS Power' s 750 megawatt Coal Plant. My husband and I both grew up in the Cedar Valley, I in Cedar Falls and He in Waterloo. When looking to purchase a house two years ago, we looked for a small acreage in a country setting, while still remaining close enough to Waterloo to be a part of the community. The house we purchased, we thought was the best of both worlds and the perfect place to raise our future family. The house we purchased is on the corner of Raymond Rd and Newell Rd, '4 mile from the proposed power plant site. I am hoping we don't end up regretting our decision to remain a part of the community of Waterloo, instead of moving to a smaller community, due to the outcome of the Power Plant Proposal. We have been opposed to this proposal from the moment we heard about it for several reasons. The number one reason is the environmental issues. As much as LS Power wants to talk about the "cleanest burning coal plant" there really is no such thing. With as much as we know already about the detriment to the environment that these plants cause combined with the new information that comes out everyday, why would we want to expose our community to this? Waterloo/Black Hawk County already received a rating of C on air quality, do we want this to go to an F like Linn County? I also have many concerns about mercury from the coal getting into my water supply, a question I asked Mark Milburn last spring at the Sullivan Brother' s Convention Center meeting and he couldn' t give me an answer as to how they would prevent that from happening. Mercury is a neurotoxin that has absolutely NO benefits to the human body or the environment. It causes Autism as well as many other problems in children. Are my children going to be able to play outside in my back yard without being blanketed with coal dust from the power plant or the trucks driving by? I feel that the answer to that question is a "wait and see" , unfortunately that is not a good enough answer in regards to the health of my future children. I also have concerns about the train traffic. To get from our house to town, there are several routes you can take, and almost all of them cross train tracks. Are we going to experience problems on a daily basis to get to work, restaurants, grocery shopping etc? Most of the money we do spend on food, gas and shopping, we spend in the city of Waterloo. If we have trouble getting to town due to the trains, we may be forced to spend this money in other communities. The train traffic also brings up concerns on if emergency vehicles will be able to reach us if necessary. If the electricity is really needed, for OUR area, not to be shipped elsewhere, why not build a wind plant. I realize they are extremely more expensive to begin with but the benefits outweigh the cost in the long run. I can tell you, from living out here, there is plenty of wind to be harvested. I know that Mayor Hurley believes this to be "a gold mine" per his comments at the Planning and Zoning meeting last month, however if you weigh the long term effects on the health of our children, grandchildren and community I don't believe that it is. I'm all for economic development in the Cedar Valley, however, there has to be better alternatives then a coal plant. When the Casino wanted to come in, we took it to a vote to see if that is really what the community wanted; why not do that for this? The most frustrating part of this whole proposal is the fact that the citizens of the Cedar Valley and Black Hawk County have no say regarding what goes on in their back yard. 1 In closing, at your meeting this Monday please remember that there is more to this proposal then money, there are many, many downside' s to this plant being built here. If nothing else, please delay the approval of this for further environmental research done by a third party with NO interest in the plant being built one way or the other and for further research on the actual costs to the infrastructure versus money going to be received by the city and county. Thank you for taking the time to read this Olivia & Chad Northey 938 N Raymond Rd Waterloo This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. 2