ELECTIONS / WATER BOARD : Campaign Spotlights Costly Water Plant

When the price tag for the road leading up to the Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant above the Santa Clarita Valley reached a million dollars, local critics of the Castaic Lake Water Agency were hardly surprised.

After all, they grumbled, it seemed fitting that the Taj Mahal--as they like to call the new plant--had a grand entrance.

By water treatment plant standards, the 30-million-gallon-a-day Rio Vista facility is top of the line.

Its science--using ozone instead of chlorine to purify water--is state of the art. Its architecture--Spanish-style tile roofs overhead and Mexican paver tiles underfoot--lends the place the air of a Mediterranean villa.

The plant, really a hilltop complex, certainly sports some Cadillac touches: golden oak paneling in the board room, panoramic views from the control room, a million-dollar water conservation garden.

But the luxuries come at a steep price. On top of the hefty $132-million cost, there is deep division in the community over who should pay for the plant and other steps the water agency is taking to prepare the burgeoning Santa Clarita Valley for another growth spurt.

“The question is, who’s going to pick up the tab for this?” said Allan Cameron, an outspoken critic of the Castaic Lake Water Agency and its new “palatial” offices. “This thing is a massive expenditure of public money,” he said. “If the voters are going to be on the hook for this, they should have a chance to say no.”

That’s precisely the message that Cameron and others hope to get across in Tuesday’s election, which is largely seen as a referendum on the water establishment. Four challengers are going up against three incumbents in a virtually unheard-of united campaign spotlighting the high cost of the Rio Vista plant, charges of conflicts of interests and the alleged spendthrift ways of the water agency.

A fourth incumbent bowed out early, declining to run because, he said, it wasn’t worth the grief.

“To have people criticize you day after day when they don’t know what the hell they’re talking about, it’s unbearable,” said Stephen J. McLean, a Metropolitan Water District engineer who ruled out a reelection bid. “And then, to have them cast themselves as the voice of the community and watchdogs of the agency is ridiculous.”

*

Mix in some volatile arguments over growth--and even emotional charges of a “Chinatown”-type collusion between the water agency and developers--and the result is a pretty spirited election season in a normally sleepy contest for seats on the local water board.

Running for reelection are Mary Spring, 67, a mediator and water board president; Richard Green, 44, a nursery owner; and Don Froelich, 53, manager of the Glendale Water Department.

The four would-be reformers are Randall Pfiester, 43, a research scientist; Michael Kotch, 44, an engineer; Paul Belli, 43, a business manager; and Jack Woodrow, 65, a retired marketing manager. Also vying for one of the four open seats are candidates Joe Daly, 62, a civil engineer; Richard Balcerzak, 57, a water engineer; and Peter Kavounas, 32, a water resources engineer.

Water agency officials complain that the reformists are running on platforms built more on conspiracy theories and no-growth agendas than on the truth.

“The main thing we’re troubled by is there’s a certain amount of rhetoric that comes out of these folks,” said Robert C. Sagehorn, general manager of the Castaic Lake Water Agency. “It’s spicy material, but it’s just plain wrong.”

But the other side says it’s hard to ignore the fact that the water agency is amid preparations for future growth, and that current residents are helping fund the expansion with their property taxes. Furthermore, they point to evidence that the agency plans to increase their water rates.

This is, planners believe, a valley that is but one-third built out. Twice as many people will put down roots here in the next 25 years, needing twice as much water, before this bedroom community will be considered fully developed.

Already, the area’s largest builder, the Newhall Land and Farming Co., has announced intentions to line up water for another 70,000 residents it hopes to attract to its future Newhall Ranch development.

The way to cope with all this growth--the obligation, as Sagehorn sees it--is to prepare today for the needs of tomorrow.

Hence the new plant, and a number of other steps taken by the agency such as water reclamation, acquiring outside water rights and an attempt at buying the retail Santa Clarita Water Co.

“What we’re doing is subsidizing the areas to be developed,” said Scott Franklin, a Santa Clarita resident and former chairman of the state Water Commission.

What really gets under Franklin’s skin, and irks others too, is that--in addition to the four elected seats--the 11-member water board has four voting members who are appointed by each of the four retail outfits that sell the agency water. One of those outfits is the Valencia Water Co., owned by Newhall Land and Farming Co.

These board members are not elected by the public, but they get to vote on rate increases and fees, matters that directly affect the pocketbooks of the area’s water customers.

“It’s truly taxation without representation. And that has absolutely driven me crazy,” Franklin said. “If I ever win the lottery, I’ll take that money and challenge this thing in court.”

When water agency officials, who must supply a region projected to hold 270,000 people by 2010, undertook construction of the Rio Vista plant, they did so without voter approval.

Instead, they turned to a means of financing called certificates of participation, which--unlike bonds--do not require a vote of the people before new debt is incurred.

The certificates are issued as securities to investors who buy them to profit from the interest paid.

Trouble was, detractors said, there was a perfectly good water treatment facility already in operation near Castaic Lake, the reservoir holding the bulk of the agency’s state water project supplies. That one, the Earl Schmidt filtration plant, boasted more than enough capacity to meet the water needs of the near future.

It was only when you looked to the distant future--and in particular the construction timetables of Newhall Land and Farming Co., cynics charged--that a greater need became evident.

“It calls to mind ‘Chinatown,’ ” said Cameron, referring to the classic film recounting a 1940s-era Los Angeles water grab that benefited wealthy developers. “You have an example here of life imitating art.”

Hogwash, says Ruth Newhall, a local historian and member of the Newhall family. “There’s no ‘Chinatown’ going to take place here,” she said. “That’s just ridiculous. I fail to see how that would happen.”

Likewise, a spokeswoman for Newhall Land and Farming Co., Marlee Lauffer, scoffed at the notion that the firm gets any special treatment from the water agency.

If, as “Chinatown’s” villain insisted, the only thing people really care about is the daily flow of water from their faucets, then arcane details of the public debate may fail to grab the interest of most voters.

But if the reliability of the water supply were threatened, or if water bills happened to increase, it might seize the public’s attention.

One of those two scenarios appears likely to occur, according to a document the water agency prepared for investors interested in buying its certificates of participation.

As incumbents boast of water rates held steady since 1985, the document details plans for hikes--from the current $145 per acre-foot to $186 per acre-foot in 1995-96 and $219 per acre-foot in 1996-97.

(There are 326,000 gallons in one acre-foot, enough to supply two average-size families for one year.)

The agency plans to use a portion of the rate hike money, the document said, to help pay for the new plant, a plan that strikes Cameron as “welfare for developers.”

“If they want a welfare check, let them go down to the public assistance office and apply for it like everyone else,” he says.

But Spring, president of the board and more than anyone a defender of the water agency, points out that the agency’s water rates have long remained well below the Metropolitan Water District’s $412 per acre-foot.

*

She, too, is perplexed by what she regards as the constant barrage of vitriolic attacks by a small cadre of inexplicably bitter critics.

“All of these so-called controversies probably mean something to half of 1% of the people here,” Spring said. “As long as that water flows out of the tap when they turn on the handle, what do most people care about who’s planning what?”

A lot, according to Ed Dunn of Canyon Country, one of the leaders of the movement to get new blood on the board.

“People are getting more and more concerned about their water supply and what they will have to pay for their water,” Dunn said. While new members would be unable to reverse construction of the Rio Vista plant, they could play crucial roles as taxpayer advocates, he said. “At least we can try to stop them from spending money foolishly in the future.”

* END OF SUIT: Water agency will withdraw lawsuit against city’s redevelopment plan. B11