1. THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AND SALT, DIESEL AND TRUCK STORAGE FACILITY WILL ADD UNACCEPTABLE MASS AND INCREASE DRIVING FORCE IN A LANDSLIDE AREA WHICH THE CITY’S OWN TECHNICAL CONSULTANT HAS CHARACTERIZED AS “PROBLEMATIC.”

2. THE CITY COUNCIL’S INVESTING MORE THAN $1.7 MILLION IN TRSSD FUNDS IN A BUILDING WHERE, UNDER THE BEST OF CIRCUMSTANCE, THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT WOULD TAKE A MINIMUM OF 20.7 YEARS IS NOT PRUDENT AND CONSTITUTES A CLEAR BREACH OF THE CITY COUNCIL’S PUBLIC DUTY TO SERVICE DISTRICT RESIDENTS.

3. BUILDING A “NON-HUMAN OCCUPANCY” PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING (THAT MUST HAVE AN OCCUPANCY RATE OF LESS THAN 2,000 PERSON-HOURS PER YEAR WHICH REQUIRES IT TO BE UNOCCUPIED THE REMAINING 6,765 HOURS IN THE YEAR) IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING HIGH END RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, CONSTITUTES AN UNWISE LAND USE INCONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S OWN ORDINANCE, AND CREATES AN ATTRACTIVE UNOCCUPIED NUISANCE FOR CHILDREN AND THIEVES.

4. THE RESIDENTS OF THE SERVICE DISTRICT ARE ENTIRELY SATISIFIED WITH THE CITY’S CURRENT DELIVERY OF SERVICES AND NO PUBLIC SAFETY OR OTHER NEEDS ANALYSIS EXISTS TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENDITURE OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THIS PROJECT. ON THE CONTRARY, LOADING TRAVERSE RIDGE ROAD AND RESIDENTIAL STREETS WITH NEVER BEFORE SEEN HIGH VOLUME DIESEL TANKER TRUCKS AND SALT DELIVERY TRUCKS TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING INCREASES REAL RISKS TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND HUMAN HEALTH.

5. WHILE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MAY HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALLOCATE TRSSD FUNDS TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IN THE SERVICE DISTRICT, SUCH AN ALLOCATION IS ILL-ADVISED IN THE FACE OF SERVICE DISTRICT OPPOSITION, AND MAY CONSTITUTE AN ABUSE OF THE DISCRETION AND AUTHORITY ENTRUSTED TO YOU BY THE SERVICE DISTRICT.

FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH ABOVE, AMONG OTHERS, THE UNDERSIGNED RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL FORMALLY CEASE FURTHER ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IN THE SERVICE DISTRICT.