Carmel talks trash about a restauranteur before approving plans for his trash storage.

How many Carmelites does it take to measure a trash bin?

At the Carmel City Council meeting on July 3, it took one chief of police—Paul Tomasi, utilizing a tape measure on a large blue Greenwaste bin near the podium—with three city council members and one mayor quibbling from the dais about dimensions of bins and an enclosure to keep them out of sight.

Watching from the audience was restaurant owner David Fink, who had his own tape measure to refer to as the debate wore on about the fate of the trash enclosure behind his downtown Carmel restaurant, Cantinetta Luca.

After much measuring and quibbling that went on for approximately an hour and a half—as well as a few harsh tongue lashings from city officials directed at Fink—the Council finally approved a trash enclosure, smaller than the one Fink had access to for the previous 12 years.

The saga of the Cantinetta Luca trash enclosure has been going on for several months, creating a dustbin full of rancor and acrimony for Carmelites watching the drama unfold.

It started back in November, after Fink received approval from the Carmel Planning Commission to build a condo on top of the restaurant.

The only catch: He had to get retroactive approval of an encroachment permit for his trash enclosure built in 2006 and located in city-owned Picadilly Park located next door. At the time, Fink said he believed his building plans for the 110-square-foot enclosure had been approved 12 years earlier, and it was the first he was hearing about the need for an encroachment permit.

The process became fraught with controversy, after Mayor Steve Dallas and Councilmember Carolyn Hardy unsuccessfully tried to recall the condo approval to the council. The Planning Commission's decision was allowed to stand, but the matter of the encroachment permit was still unfinished.

The council took on the permit at a February meeting, with Councilmember Jan Reimers recusing herself because a family business sits near the park.

Leading up to the meeting, Fink’s attorneys objected to Dallas taking part in the decision, because Fink claimed Dallas told another restaurateur, Rich Pepe, that Fink would never get another project approved in town. Dallas denies the accusation.

The council voted 3-1 to deny the encroachment permit—Councilmember Bobby Richards the lone "no" vote—leaving Fink scrambling to find a place to stash the restaurant’s trash. He sued the city in March, demanding the city negotiate for a new enclosure.

Fink told the Weekly a few times since then that the city was negotiating with him and an agreement was imminent. Meanwhile, court hearings were pushed back three times to allow the two sides to settle the matter.

On July 3, the two sides seemed ready to settle and put the whole trashy affair behind them. But at least three city officials wouldn’t let it go without roundly chastising Fink before it was done.

First, City Administrator Chip Rerig angrily rebuked Fink and others for sending “heat-seeking missiles,” in the form of letters and emails criticizing planning staff. “I’m deeply offended,” Rerig said, at one point apologizing “for the Irish coming out of me.”

After the public hearing portion of the meeting closed and before Council deliberations began, City Attorney Glen Mozingo issued a scathing and lengthy commentary about a letter the city had received from attorney Nevin Miller on behalf of Fink. “Don’t get me wrong, I’ve always been a great fan of fiction, but in this case we need to look at facts,” Mozingo said to open his remarks.

He contended that Fink never had a right to the trash enclosure in the first place and that Fink built an enclosure four times the size of what was originally planned. He also pointed out that the enclosure blocked a rear fire exit door, and that the day Mozingo looked at it, the enclosure was padlocked.

Customers trying to escape a fire “would walk out into an inferno,” Mozingo said.

In April, the city demanded Fink tear down most of the enclosure immediately to unblock the door; he complied.

Hardy criticism came next. “The city has bent over backwards trying to make a compromise, so much so we all have backaches," she said.

“Now he comes back, and this is a person I feel always that if you give him an inch he takes a mile."

She and others also chastised Fink for storing more than just trash bins in the enclosure, displaying recent photos showing a cluttered space filled with wood, a ladder and other items.

In the end, the Council unanimously approved a 32-square-foot enclosure. Fink must pay all permit fees, build the new structure by Aug. 2 and rescind his lawsuit against the city.

Fink also agreed to give to the city the restrooms that he built in the park—and that he has allowed for public use. He is also giving the city all water and sewer rights.

The saga of the trash enclosure may not be over yet. Fink says he won’t comment on the Council’s decision until the enclosure, designed by committee, is built. He still has to make sure his four bins for waste, recycling and organics—plus a can for used grease—all fit.

Keep those tape measures handy and stay tuned.