Mayor Questions Costs of Sewage Treatment Plan

Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan raised the stakes in an emotional environmental debate by suggesting this week that the city should re-examine its commitment to providing advanced treatment of ocean-bound sewage.

Arguing that the court-imposed treatment has caused water bills to skyrocket and hampered the local economy, Riordan wants to study whether the city should scale back a $1.6-billion expansion project at the Hyperion Treatment Plant in Playa del Rey, according to a top aide.

“Going to [advanced treatment] is a major financial commitment on the part of the city,” Assistant Deputy Mayor Chris O’Donnell said. “The mayor is concerned about higher sewer service fees. Our high rates put us at a competitive disadvantage compared to other cities.”

The city is funding Hyperion’s expansion through a sewer service charge, which appears on homeowners’ water bills and has soared 238% since 1987, according to the Los Angeles Board of Public Works. For the average homeowner, that charge now stands at $20 a month.

Advanced or secondary sewage treatment removes practically all organic and inorganic solids remaining in waste water after primary treatment.

If the city backs away from advanced treatment, it would represent a significant blow to environmentalists, who say that advanced treatment, which now affects about half the ocean-bound sewage, has already improved water quality in Santa Monica Bay.

Many environmental activists are still smarting over the recent House passage of the amended Clean Water Act, which would loosen some guidelines on sewage treatment and wetlands protection. That legislation faces a Senate vote later this year.

Some City Hall insiders predicted that the mayor will face an uphill battle in reviving the treatment debate. Los Angeles has weathered years of bitter litigation over the issue, finally agreeing to a federally backed consent decree in 1987. That decree required the city to provide advanced treatment of all ocean-bound sewage by 1998.

Backing away from advanced treatment would require the city to ask the judge to renegotiate the consent decree, Los Angeles City Councilwoman Ruth Galanter said. In effect, the city would be back where it started eight years ago.

The mayor would probably need City Council approval before backing away from advanced treatment.

“If you asked me if I think [the mayor] would get the votes to back away from full secondary, I’d say, no, I don’t think so,” said Galanter, whose 6th District includes the Hyperion plant.

Galanter, who recently reaffirmed her support for advanced treatment, said she was perturbed that the mayor did not consult with council members before announcing his intention to revisit the issue.

“It’s hard enough to settle these problems the first time around,” she said.

A spokeswoman for Councilwoman Laura Chick, who chairs the council’s environmental committee, said that any policy shift would need to be thoroughly studied before approval.

Environmental groups quickly condemned Riordan’s desire to revive the issue.

“It’s incredibly disturbing that the mayor and City Hall are even considering going back on their word to go with [advanced] treatment at Hyperion,” said Mark Gold, executive director of the environmental group Heal the Bay.

Lisa Weil, policy director of American Oceans Campaign, said: “It’s outrageous to suggest businesses are leaving because of this. Santa Monica Bay used to be fraught with pollution problems . . . [now] beaches are safer [and] [advanced treatment] has brought more tourism.”

Rep. Jane Harman (D-Rolling Hills) said the citizens of Los Angeles have already voted on the issue twice, approving two bond measures to pay for the project. “Our local economy needs clean and safe oceans and beaches. Pulling the plug on Hyperion’s secondary treatment would be truly shortsighted,” she said.

“Hyperion is a key facility in my congressional district,” she added. “I expect the mayor to consult me before he acts.”

Times staff writer James Rainey contributed to this story.