Santa Paula City Council: Fire, Water and Money

By Sheryl Hamlin

After an invocation by Al Guilin, Deacon of San Sebastian Church, Mayor Procter called the June 22, 2015 Special Council Meeting to order. Seeing no public comments, Mayor Procter asked Fire Chief Araiza to provide an update on the fire in the riverbed that started earlier in the day and reported in the Citizens Journal here.

River Incident Fire

Chief Araiza said the fire started at Peck and Corporation around 1:00 pm on Monday, June 22, 2015 with Station 82 responding. Heavy winds blew fire to Acacia and Dartmouth.  The fire was upgraded to “heavy brushfire” category. It became in the jurisdiction of Ventura County who took control when the unified command was formed. Homeless encampments were threatened by fire. A command post was established at the Santa Paula Airport, which was expected to be shut down through the night. The fire included 140 acres with concern for homes on Laurie Lane, Leucada and Acacia Roads. Heavy winds blew the fire to Dartmouth and even to Dove Court near Hallock. 150 personnel are on the scene from multiple county, municipal and federal agencies including CalFire, Fillmore Fire, Ventura County Fire, Ventura City Fire and the Ag Commission. Flames spiked 30 to 40 feet, as seen in this Fire Department picture. The bamboo burns like candles, he said. Animals were evacuated. The 12^th Street Bridge is open and they continue to work in the river bottom finding more homeless encampments. Three fixed wings from the Forest Service are dropping chemicals and three “choppers” are in service providing aerial surveillance. It is too early to determine the cause of the fire. There is a voluntary evacuation site at the Community Center. The Agriculture Commission is moving horses to private property for safety with the services of the Red Cross and the Ventura County Animal Services. One fire fighter was hospitalized after stepping on hot ash burning his boots and feet. He is not in serious condition. The Chief warned all citizens if and when they see a fire: DO NOT GO NEAR THE FIRE SCENE TO WATCH.  There was an accident on 126 due to fire gawkers. STAY AWAY FROM A FIRE.

To watch the update as of 9:00 am Tuesday, click here.

Water Issues

Santa Clara Waste Water Pipeline Ruptures

Also on Monday, about 280,000 gallons of waste water was dumped in Oxnard around 11:15 am on Monday, June 22, 2015. The Santa Clara Waste Water Company (SCWW) located on Mission Rock Road just outside of the Santa Paula city limit where a previous explosion put several fire fighters out on medical leave and damaged property, was testing a 12 mile, 10 inch pipeline, which ruptured near Wooley and Rice in Oxnard. The Council asked Brian Yanez, Interim Public Works Director, to research why SCWW was allowed to send water to Oxnard, where such deliveries had been previously halted. Mr. Yanez will report as soon as he has the information. Vice Mayor Hernandez says they are waiting on a brief from the City of Oxnard.

City Council Subcommittee on Water and Sewer Rates

In 2014, the city of Santa Paula hired consulting firm MBS to create new water rates. Several public meetings were held. Two members of the council subcommittee were Rick Cook and Bob Gonzales, both of whom are no longer on the council. So two new members were chosen. Council Member Tovias volunteered saying he had longevity with the issue and he suggested Vice Mayor Hernandez also be on this subcommittee for his association with the past. Both accepted and will serve. The full report of that study is available on-line here. Recall that subsequent to this 2014 study, the city purchased the waste water treatment facility by issuing municipal bonds. Because the bond investors were guaranteed a specific financial proforma, the rates cannot be lowered, but conceivably a rate rebate could be incorporated into the new study.

Water Softener Buyback Program

According to the staff report, the problem can be summarized as follows:

In order to comply with requirements set forth by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB), the City of Santa Paula is obligated to reduce the salinity content (chloride) in the wastewater as it flows to the Water Recycling Facility.

Because the city percolates the treated water from the waste water treatment facility, the existence of the high salinity contaminates the soil and may make the groundwater unsafe. The regional Water Control Board has set a limit of 110 mg/L (milligrams per liter) of chloride in the water. Santa Paula is now at 142 mg/L which is too high according to the water board. Since 2006, it has been unlawful to install the self-regenerating water softening appliance (SRWA) where salt is used in the ion-replacement process.

It is estimated that 250 SRWA’s produce 28 mg/L of chlorides, according to the staff report. The city would like to remove 50 per year over the next three years at a minimum, thus potentially lowering the chlorides 17 mg/L over three years which puts the city in striking range of the 110 mg/L. The alternative is spending millions to solve the problem at the waste water treatment facility. Mr. Yanez proposes to use $150,000 from the waste water fund for the buyback program. A resident must document ownership of the SRWA and a city inspector must verify that such appliance is indeed installed. Then the homeowner must contract with someone to remove the appliance. The city will provide information about the program and alternatives to the SRWA in future water bills. They will begin compiling a list of homeowners with such appliances. Homeowners who volunteer can potentially qualify for $800 in rebates.

Vice Mayor Hernandez pointed out that the solution at the plant would cost millions of dollars. However, the removal of the appliance at the residence will cost the homeowner potentially thousands, if a service is contracted. Council Member Gherardi indicated that her service costs $40 per month, which is $480 per year. If one lives in a home for 20 years, this equates to $9,600 extra costs.

The alternative is to live with “hard water” as Mr. Yanez said, but that means reducing the life of appliances, tiles, fixtures and clothing washed in hard water. Some nutritionists say that hard water is beneficial for the body. Each homeowner must research and weigh the costs and benefits or hard versus soft water.

The rebate program was approved.

2015/2016 Budget

Budget sessions for the 2015/2016 session have consumed most of the last few months of council meetings and have been reported several times, most recently here. The 2015/2016 General Fund budget was balanced with a slight positive of around $10,000 but in actuality, looking at revenues versus expenses, the General Fund is negative. Only by carrying over about $200,000 in the 2014/2015 General Fund is the 2015/2016 positive. Since this fund has not yet been audited and cannot assume to contain cash and or receivables with 100% collectability, the budget contains risk. Additionally, the funding for the Fire Department, which has existed thanks to grants, is at risk. For these reasons, Council Member Tovias voted ‘no’ to approve the 2015/2016 budget with all others voting ‘yes’ in a roll call vote.

There was never any discussion about the Enterprise Funds during the budgeting process. Questions about these funds will be relevant when the subcommittee on water and sewer rates meets. The adopted budget will be posted on-line here in the near future.

=================================================