New Council, Old Impasse as Sewer Fee Fails Again

THOUSAND OAKS —  With everyone from state water officials to local contractors demanding action, the City Council has nonetheless failed once again to resolve its seemingly endless impasse over the $75-million plan to upgrade the Hill Canyon Wastewater Treatment Plant.

In her first meeting dealing with the divisive issue, newly elected Councilwoman Linda Parks refused to support the $2.50 monthly sewer fee increase proposed by city officials as an interim measure to end the stalemate and comply with the demands of the State Water Resources Control Board.

“If we’re so caught up in the fact that we need to raise sewer rates to move forward . . . we’re being foolish,” Parks said, arguing that there had to be other ways to pay for the waste-water improvements.

The increase, which was also opposed by Councilwoman Elois Zeanah, requires a four-fifths vote under state law.

The State Water Resources Control Board warned Thousand Oaks in a letter earlier this year that its aging sewer plant no longer meets health and safety requirements, and that city officials must approve a timetable to upgrade the facility by Dec. 31 or pay back $12.5 million in water-quality grants.

Thousand Oaks is also in danger of losing its state permit to operate a sewer plant, which could result in a state-imposed moratorium on growth.

According to a consultant, Thousand Oaks has already lost an estimated $4 million by failing to move forward with the sewer plant upgrade. And the city is being sued by a developer because it has not worked out the financial details of the upgrade, which could result in even more losses.

Moreover, although they cannot find consensus on how to pay for the sewer plant upgrade, council members previously hired a company to construct a $6.6-million portion of the project, and the work is in progress.

In order to pay the firm--and avoid a breach-of-contract suit--council members must raise sewer fees right away, according to city officials.

Since the City Council could not agree to do that, council members instead voted 3 to 2 to act on a suggestion by Parks and borrow $2.3 million from another city fund to pay the contractor--without deciding how they would repay the money.

The situation angered Mayor Judy Lazar, who lashed out at Zeanah and Parks after reluctantly agreeing to the loan to avoid a court battle. Councilmen Andy Fox and Mike Markey opposed the borrowing plan.

“I will personally lobby with legislators, with Sacramento, to change this four-fifths requirement,” Lazar said. “We are being held hostage by two council members in a situation that is so outrageous. . . . I am livid over this.”

In a 30-minute speech, Zeanah continued her vehement opposition to the plan, calling the state’s $12.5-million threat a bluff trumped up by city officials and her political opponents on the council.

Once again, she explained that she could not support the sewer fee increase because she believes it would make existing Thousand Oaks citizens shoulder the load of a sewer plant expansion that, in her view, should be paid for entirely by developers.

“There is tremendous pressure on the part of [city] management staff to council members to approve these recommendations . . . ,” Zeanah said. “The proposal is to shift the burden of funding from developers to residents and small businesses.” City officials contend that that due to state law, improvements to sewer plants must be paid for by existing as well as future residents. The law requires that improvements to waste-water plants be divided between current residents, who pay in the form of higher sewer fees, and future residents, who assume the cost of sewer connection fees from developers as part of the cost of purchasing a new home.

But Parks said that in other instances, Thousand Oaks has been able to fund sewer improvements completely with connection charges. She wanted to know why it could not be done this time.

And Zeanah noted that the law does not specify how much current residents should pay, saying only that there needs to be a fair distribution of costs between them and future users.

A visibly flustered Fox pointed out that several experts, including a waste-water consultant and an independent auditor, have concluded that every other California city has had to split the costs of sewer plant upgrades to comply with the law.

“Is there anyone in the state of California--and I ask this with all sincerity--whose opinion you would trust . . .?” Fox asked Zeanah. “Can we fly someone in here?

“Fair-minded people must ask the question: Is Thousand Oaks the only city in California that has figured out they can charge developers for all of this?”

Council members eventually voted 4 to 1 to have a study session next year to continue mulling over the issue, which is the crux of the stalemate.

“Until we decide how to allocate the costs, we’ll not go anywhere,” Lazar said.

The City Council approved an increase in developers’ sewage connection fees earlier this year, raising them from $3,900 to $5,300 for each residential unit. But Zeanah and former Councilwoman Jaime Zukowski refused to support the $7.35 sewer fee hike city officials proposed to pay for the rest of the $75-million upgrade. The City Council later approved a $1.80 increase, but that just covers operating costs and will not pay for ongoing work, according to city officials.