A bevy of leaky sewer pipes and related sewage spills were at the heart of a lawsuit settled out of court this week between the City of Santa Barbara and locally based water quality watchdog Santa Barbara Channelkeeper. The settlement, which guarantees that the city will spend some $26 million over the next five years on replacing the most troublesome old pipes from its vast underground network (256 miles of sewer mains, to be exact), fund efforts to raise public awareness, and provide training for various low-impact development features such as rain gardens.
Driving the lawsuit, which was officially filed last April, was the city’s sordid run of sewage spills in 2009 and 2010, 42 and 35, respectively. And while the city was well aware of and already working to remedy the problem via its annual practice of replacing roughly one percent of overall pipe inventory and specifically cleaning out the more leak-prone sections, this week’s settlement not only guarantees that those improvements will continue but also that the rehabilitation and replacement projects will be essentially doubled for the next half-decade with specific attention given to the worst offending pipes. City’s Public Works Director Christine Andersen pointed out this week that the annual work already taking place reduced the number of spills in 2011 to 12 events and, thus far this year, 4.
“This is a banner day for Santa Barbara’s creeks and beaches, and for the citizens and visitors who enjoy them and the wildlife that depend on them,” exalted Channelkeeper Executive Director Kira Redmond on Tuesday. The terms of the settlement are now subject to a comment period from the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and barring any unforeseen setbacks, the terms will be read into the record in Federal District Court in 45 days.


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
$400,000.00 extortion payment to Channelkeeper and their lawyer that comes directly out of your monthly sewer bill. The City Council acknowledging that City staff is not competent to do their jobs without Channelkeeper's oversight? Nothing to be happy about.
sbreader (anonymous profile)
March 28, 2012 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Seems to me that the City is so desperate to fund salaries and pensions they are ignoring basic services that need to be provided unless sued.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
March 28, 2012 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We take for granted how water and sewer systems have truly improved the quality of life and have safely supported an ever growing city and world population.
I am very surprised to see that the city had a policy to replace/upgrade 1% of the system a year. Translated, it assumes that the system originally had a 100 year lifespan. Very questionable considering the old standard practice of terra-cotta sewage pipe in a geologically active region and actually planning for leakage to help recharge the water table.
Of all the taxes/fees we pay, the water and sewage tax is one of most vital. To paraphrase something my mom would have said "quit complaining, you have no idea how to carry water from the stream or use an outhouse in the winter"
passagerider (anonymous profile)
March 29, 2012 at 2:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I would like to see the Spreadsheet on the Depreciation of the underground Sewer and Water Systems of Santa Barbara.
I predict that the age of the overall system would be shocking, and still they want to continue to develop and make new connections.
howgreenwasmyvalley (anonymous profile)
March 29, 2012 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Cities are starting to realize that there is about a 20% water loss due to leakage. The percentage goes up with the age of the town. So as the west heads into another drought cycle, there is actually a opportunity to save water and put people to work. Probably cheaper than dams or desalination.
passagerider (anonymous profile)
March 29, 2012 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)