The scene inside the small council chambers at Santa Paula City Hall reminded some wags of a wedding, the guests sitting on the bride's side or the groom's.

On the left sat the forces of Veolia Water, the multinational French company poised to build the town's $58 million sewer plant by the end of 2010 to avoid $8 million in pollution fines.

PERC, the Costa Mesa company also chasing the job, filled seats on the other side. Despite the city staff's repeated recommendations for Veolia, the men from PERC were still fighting hard for Santa Paula's hand.

PERC founder Johan Perslow showed up in shirt sleeves, telling of his past as a Swedish immigrant. The company's New York financial partner had already brought up his own boyhood in Salinas, a town he compared to working-class Santa Paula. He promoted PERC as a good match because of the known financing.

"In considering a 30-year relationship, it's important that you know who your partner is," said financier Philip Dyk.

In the end, after hours of discussion, proposals and counterproposals, PERC won the battle Tuesday. But some are questioning whether it should have. Veolia offered a lower cost, by $22 million, and more experience for the largest city public works project in recent history, officials said.

"I thought this was a huge slap in the face to the ratepayers of Santa Paula," Councilman John Procter said a day after the 3-2 council vote.

The majority, composed of Mayor Bob Gonzales and councilmen Ray Luna and Ralph Fernandez, praised the total package that PERC offered. They were impressed with the masonry construction over Veolia's metal buildings, the compact design, an offer to equip the plant for expanded capacity, lower electrical consumption, a buy-back offer after five years and PERC's persistence. But the core issue was that PERC guaranteed the financing, the three men said.

"Because there was some ambiguity on that note, I had to go with what I thought was the best way to go," Gonzales said.

"It was a no-brainer," Luna said.

Council members on the losing side, though, suggested that favoritism may have trumped facts.

Not only is Veolia a veteran in the technology to be used in the plant, but its deal was much cheaper, Procter and Councilman Gabino Aguirre said.

An engineering consultant found both Veolia and PERC were qualified. But Veolia operates 15 plants in the nation with the technology to be used in the plan, and this would be PERC's first, city officials said.

There is no evidence in campaign records that Fernandez, Luna and Gonzales had reason to favor PERC, and all said they made the decision that is in the community's best interest.

But in a meeting in mid-July, Procter and Aguirre did not want to limit the selection process to PERC. It was at that same meeting that Fernandez made a motion to negotiate exclusively with PERC for 30 days. PERC Vice President Steve Owen had promised a $35 million plant and bills likely averaging $45 a month.

The average monthly bill for a single-family home will total $51 by 2010 under either Veolia or PERC, city estimates show. But the PERC plan would cost more in later years: bills would reach $71 by 2013, $7 more than with Veolia. Bills will average $120 by 2040, $50 more than with Veolia.

Owen showed the council a memo from a Los Angeles law firm, saying Santa Paula could negotiate with PERC without inviting proposals from other vendors.

Luna indicated support, but the motion died after city attorney Karl Berger told the council that would run afoul of a 1996 state law.

"The law requires a competitive negotiation," Berger told the council. "That means you need to negotiate with more than one firm."

Fernandez said he was interested in moving the process along at a time when not much seemed to be happening. The council opened the field to other qualified bidders, later narrowing the competition to four.

Then in December, two vendors dropped out, leaving only PERC and Veolia. Although letters from the firms indicate no reason for dropping out, Gonzales said he had heard that they complained the process was fixed. The allegation angered him, he said.

"There is no fix in any way," he said.

A day after the council's decision last week, lawyers for Veolia questioned the process in a letter to the city's legal counsel.

City Manager Wally Bobkiewicz said the attorneys expressed concerns, but declined to divulge additional information on the advice of the city's legal counsel.

Both companies priced the construction at roughly $58 million, but city finance director John Quinn said the disparate financing put the total prices far apart.

The result: PERC's proposal would cost $149.7 million over 30 years and Veolia's $127.4 million.

PERC guaranteed to finance the project and accept all the risk. Veolia would leave that up to the city, so Santa Paula could issue municipal bonds at a probable lower cost.

Many cities finance large public works projects by that method, Quinn said. Although not risk-free, the rate over the past 20 years has spiked over 6 percent during only one year, he said. It will be locked in once the bonds are approved, he said.

"We have been assured we will be able to get a 30-year fixed interest rate bond," he said. "I have four underwriters who have given me that assurance."

Fernandez said the gamble isn't worth it.

"I want to know what I've got and be secure in that," he said.

He expects the agreement finally negotiated with PERC will be very close to what Veolia offered. The final pact is due to be presented to the council by May 5.