View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

CORRECTION: SCV Sanitation District to discuss rate hikes

Corrects date of meeting in subheadline: District is expected to recommend increases Wednesday

Posted: May 6, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: May 6, 2014 1:34 p.m.
 

The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District meets at City Hall this Wednesday to take up the issue of rate increases to underwrite chloride removal from local wastewater.

Sanitation District staff members are expected to recommend a series of rate increases over six years’ time to fund the process of reverse osmosis, ultraviolet light treatment and deep-well injection to reduce chloride — a naturally occurring substance that with sodium makes up common table salt — in water dumped into the Santa Clara River.

State water quality regulators insist the district reduce chloride to 100 milligrams per liter of water in the river at the Los Angeles-Ventura county line — a level demanded by downstream farmers who say salt in the water harms their avocado trees.

After years of wrangling, Sanitation District officials have reduced the cost of wastewater chloride treatment from an initial estimated half a billion dollars to the currently estimated $130 million system — a reduction made possible in part by Santa Clarita Valley residents’ willingness to give up salt-discharging water softeners in their homes.

The rate increase to single-family residences is expected to be about $100 a year, but that increase would be phased in gradually over six years’ time under the plan expected to be submitted to the district’s three-member board Wednesday. The rate-setting process needs to be complete by July.

Sanitation District officials hope to win some concessions from state water officials, along with grants and other funding assistance, that could further reduce the costs of wastewater chloride reduction.

The meeting is set for 6 p.m. Wednesday at Santa Clarita City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd.

Comments

src: Posted: May 6, 2014 9:02 a.m.

If the farmers don't like it, they should treat their own water like many of us residents to on our own. It's a "cost of doing buisness". Maybe they could even get a subsidy for it. lol!


Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 6, 2014 11:18 a.m.

The Sanitation District will not disclose it to the public, but this nearly 400 million dollar tax increase is subject to initiative and referendum, just like the bill board proposal.

The Signal story, and the "information" from the Sanitation District does not reveal the following:

1. The amount of interest to be payed back by everyone will be more than 50 percent higher than previous versions.

2. No disclosure of the total amount of interest has been released.

3. The rate of interest, which will now be for a 30 year loan, instead of a 20 year loan, has not been disclosed to anyone.

4. The Sanitation District speaks as if a 30 year loan from the Rural Infrastructure State Revolving Fund will be certain. Something else not disclosed. The Sanitation District doesn't have a bad credit rating, it has no credit rating at all.

5. As has been the case for years, no information about what the business community will have to pay has been disclosed to anyone. Supermarkets, restaurants, auto repair shops, Laundromats, health spas and 40 more categories of businesses will have huge increases with this tax. These costs will result in higher prices for every person in Santa Clarita.

6. There are so many ways to beat this, that the list cannot be included here.

Perhaps the Signal will write about a few of them.


17trillion: Posted: May 6, 2014 11:42 a.m.

Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam
Scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam, scam,


17trillion: Posted: May 6, 2014 11:45 a.m.

If we don't comply with this epic theft, the penalty is $3,000.00 per day or 1 million dollars per year or 4 dollars for every person in the water district. I may not be a really smart person, but I would rather pay 16 dollars a year for my family of four than 100 dollars a year. And as a bonus we get the pleasure of giving those that mandate such things the middle finger. One million dollars a year would last 130 years, not counting interest, to fight this idiocy. If only our leaders had some sack......


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: May 6, 2014 12:10 p.m.

Unfortunately, our local elected leaders have no interest in their citizens. That's the problem. "Kellar and the Rockin' Grannies" are too busy lining their pockets.


chefgirl358: Posted: May 6, 2014 1:59 p.m.

This is another thing we should get a petition going to get put on a ballot. This has to be one of the biggest taxpayer hoodwinks in recent history, at least for our general vicinity.


Lotus8: Posted: May 6, 2014 2:44 p.m.

17trillion does some interesting math. I'm in agreement.

Allan_Cameron also makes some great points. It is probably cheaper to pay the penalty each year until we save up enough money to fund the improvements than it is to pay some high interest rate on borrowed money.

Just like the billboard issue, I'm afraid we have elected some folks who just aren't interested in fighting for what is right, but merely what is convenient for them and then trying to limit the information that gets out. Sad.


17trillion: Posted: May 6, 2014 2:56 p.m.

Allan, you seem to have a good pulse on this issue. What say you on just paying the stupid penalty? Tell the State and the avocado growers to pound salt!


lars1: Posted: May 6, 2014 3:35 p.m.

Our "city leaders" are behind this scam.
they have NEVER discredited the false chloride levels imposed on us.
they have resolved that a "water treatment" plant is absolutely necessary, and that the citizens should pay for it.

the "water treatment" plant's only purpose is to provide fresh water for newhall land and farms 20,000+ new home development: NEWHALL RANCH.

the chloride limit was imposed over 20 years ago, and has not been an issue, until NOW.

why?

they say the farmers crops have been damaged by the excessive chloride in the water. if the water has been that way for 20 years. where is the damage?
newhall land and farms has started building the 20,000+ homes NOW.
nlf need water NOW.
nlf has bought off the "city leaders" to get what they want NOW.
that is why this issue is here NOW.


Cam: Posted: May 6, 2014 6:11 p.m.

Your readers should check Proposition 218 and the Protest Process. This increase is for funding the state-mandated chlorine(salt)compliance project. It requires a Proposition 218 notice to all impacted property owners. On that notice of public hearing there is a section Proposition 218 and protest process. Just follow the directions and have it submitted before the Public Hearing June 30,2014. It must be in writing. JUST SAY NO


missyJk: Posted: May 7, 2014 9:14 p.m.

how do we unite and stop this propaganda we don not want any sewer increases...next the handouts will be for water flowing to the beaches when ours flows to the farmers...


Vtown123: Posted: May 7, 2014 12:38 a.m.

What proof are the farmers showing that the chloride levels are impacting their production?


Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 7, 2014 12:33 p.m.

There has been a vast amount of "fog" sprayed over all aspects of this issue. Oh heck, here is the truth. It is NOT "fog". It is deception.

Because of the work that I do in real estate development, unlike most folks who have other responsibilities, I HAVE to know all about issues such as this one. The huge hit on everyone that is not revealed is what the price increases will be as a result of the staggering tax. It will effect food prices at supermarkets and in restaurants. Hotel rooms will go up. Health Spa prices also. Auto repair, and many, many more (40 plus categories of businesses overall, minimum). The costs being quoted now "only 7 dollars a month more, to start", completely ignore the cost "pass through" in price increases everyone will pay.

Attend the meeting at Santa Clarita City Hall this evening (Wednesday, May 7), at 6:00PM, and ask this simple question. How much will prices go up in Santa Clarita Valley as a result of this nearly 400 million dollar tax?

Good luck in getting an answer.

In answer to a frequent question, why do we have to pay to decrease our chloride levels down to 100 milligrams per liter.

The common answer is that the Federal Clean Water Act, and the State of California implementing legislation, the "Porter Cologne Act", require that so called "beneficial users" of water receive protection from water pollution that causes them harm. Please see next post.


Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 7, 2014 12:50 p.m.

Farmers are specifically identified in the above named legislation as protected "beneficial users".

Our chloride discharge levels were set a few years ago at 100 milligrams per liter. It has been asserted that any level higher than this will damage crops downstream from us.

But is that true?

Lets see.

Ventura County has had heavy farming for more than 150 years. Santa Clarita has been discharging treated sewage water downstream for nearly 50 years. For most of those 50 years, the chloride levels in our discharges have been at 135, 175, and even 200. (No reptile, amphibian, mammal, including humans are harmed unless chloride is steadily at 250 or above).

This being the case, crops in Ventura should have been experiencing damage for a long time.

If people are damaged, what do they do?

Well, they complain to "water cops",(there are 6 agencies that have jurisdiction over water pollution), and, if they have suffered a loss of money, they sue in court to get it back.

Please see next post.


Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 7, 2014 1:02 p.m.

So, for nearly 50 years, who has been complaining, year after year, and how many farmers have sued to get their money back from "Santa Clarita Chloride damage"?

As far as lawsuits seeking money for damages is concerned??

The answer for nearly fifty years is:

ZERO!!!!!

Why? Well when you go to court to make a claim, you have to bring proof.

As far as "calling the water cops" is concerned how many times has that occurred in nearly 50 years?

None, until just the last few years.

The reason is that this is all about a catastrophic water shortage for people downstream from us, not chloride levels. Please see next post.


Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 7, 2014 1:15 p.m.

There is a whole lot more suppressed truth in and around this issue.

Here is just a bit more, part of what is a great deal more.

Next door to us, starting in the Simi Valley hills, is the Calleguas Water Shed Authority. Just like us, they discharge their treated sewage water downstream onto the Oxnard/Ventura plain, where this water irrigates the identical so called "salt sensitive" crops that receive our water. (These include avocados, orchids, strawberries.)

Calleguas, fully permitted by the State of California Department of Water Quality and the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, have a chloride discharge level legally set at 50 PERCENT HIGHER THAN OURS, AT 150 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER.

Please see next (and last for now YEA!) post.


Allan_Cameron: Posted: May 7, 2014 1:33 p.m.

When the Sanitation District is confronted with this reality, they only say that it is important to remember that the Calleguas Water Shed Authority is implementing its own mega million dollar chloride removal system.

The implication is that if they have to spend a lot of money, why shouldn't we?

This answer from the Sanitation District ignores the following fact:

When water emerges from the Calleguas treatment plant, it still has fully permitted chloride levels in it that are 50 percent higher than those proposed to be imposed upon us. No farmer downstream from Calleguas complains or objects.

We currently discharge at about 135 milligrams per liter.

If we were just given a permitted chloride level the same as Calleguas, (150) this "issue" would disappear at ZERO cost to anyone in Santa Clarita.

But, of course, this is about water shortage downstream from us, not chloride.

There is a great deal more to this. Stay tuned for other developments and information. Maybe even in the Signal. (There is always hope!)


lars1: Posted: May 7, 2014 3:09 p.m.

But, of course, this is about water shortage downstream from us, not chloride.


downstream from us is the 20,000+ home newhall land and farm development.
they have a water shortage, and just like all big business and developers,
they buy off our "officials, leaders" or other bs terms
to get what they want for FREE by making the public pay for it.


lmjenki: Posted: May 7, 2014 5:26 p.m.

I am extremely disappointed that the Signal has apparently utterly failed in it's obligations to provide us with the truth of what is going on here and clarification of whatever agendas are being quietly pursued. Hardly the stuff of Pulitzer prizes.

The old Signal editors from the "illegitimus non carborundum" days must be rolling in their proverbial graves.

I guess if we want real, insightful reporting we still have to go over the hill to get it, the Signal seems to have become the lap dog of the city council and assorted special interests.


lmjenki: Posted: May 7, 2014 5:28 p.m.

By the way, did anyone get a look at the jet that buzzed the valley just now? It seemed like two passes and it was loud and fast



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...