Sewage Spill Could Dirty Campaign

Instead of mud, politicians in this town may find themselves slinging sewage come November.

Still eight months from the City Council election, a recent sewer main break that sent 86 million gallons of untreated waste into the Pacific is shaping up to be the hot topic of the upcoming political season.

“I think they’re all gonna try to shift the blame, said Chuck Kuenstle, a Thousand Oaks resident who has followed city politics for the past 30 years. “One will say, ‘It’s your fault.’ The other will say, ‘No, it’s your fault.’ The finger pointing has already started. I mean, who wants to take the blame for something like this?”

But campaign finger pointing could only complicate the city’s efforts to defend itself against an ongoing federal probe also seeking to assess blame.

The spill, which occurred when heavy rains washed out a 30-foot section of a sewer line last month, is the subject of a federal Clean Water Act investigation that could ultimately result in fines from a civil or criminal case against the city.

“I think it will be very interesting to watch,” community housing activist Otto Stoll said. “All the people involved in the election are going to have to talk about it. But the incumbents can’t really blame each other without making it look like the city is liable [for the spill]. The current official line is that it was an act of God. That would preclude it being anyone’s fault except God’s.”

In this politically balkanized city, however, activists are quick to cast blame--and already calculating how the foul political fiasco will affect the three incumbents seeking reelection.

Critics of steely, slow-growth Southern belle Elois Zeanah believe the councilwoman’s intransigence in a two-year debate over upgrading the sewer system will prove her electoral downfall.

Meanwhile, Zeanah’s followers believe the sewer main break underscores the council majority’s willingness to scrimp on basic public services to fund the $64-million Civic Arts Plaza. That could hurt incumbent council members Andy Fox and Judy Lazar.

The duration of the federal investigation--and whether it results in indictments against any of the council members whose seats are up for grabs in November--could play a huge role in the upcoming electoral sweepstakes.

“It boils down to if indictments come, and when, and on what side of the issue,” said Herbert Gooch, an associate professor of political science at Cal Lutheran University. “There’s a set of imponderables here. All I know is it’s pretty heavy-duty, this set of accusations. Commencing a federal investigation is definitely serious stuff. I’m shocked by it.”

Among the many variables: Will the sewer issue die down by November? Is sewage sexy enough to drag voters to the polls? Will the nastiness of council politics scare contenders away? Or will the perceived weakness of the incumbents be a magnet for political neophytes?

And if the federal investigation continues through the electoral season, will council members heed their attorneys’ advice to zip their lips?

If those questions seem foreign, that is because federal agencies rarely prosecute local governments for violations of the Clean Water Act, the federal law governing water quality.

Because federal investigators have subpoenaed reams of city documents to determine whether the city was negligent in the sewer main break, the focus of the investigation is not immediately apparent.

Looking at the thousands of pages dating back at least a decade, federal investigators could find that money earmarked for sewer line upgrades was shunted elsewhere despite City Council wishes, some elected leaders say. Or, investigators could determine that city staff members incorrectly bundled routine maintenance of pipelines through a massive $75-million upgrade of a waste water treatment plant that required a rate hike.

Other officials are equally adamant the paper trail will prove that the council’s inability to raise rates during a two-year stalemate over the sewer upgrade left no money for routine repairs. If it had not taken two years to approve essentially the same sewer upgrade initially proposed, the pipeline that burst would have been replaced two summers ago, they say.

Where the election is concerned, a key issue will be the timing of the federal investigation, all sides seem to agree.

But statements from the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles--the lead agency in the federal probe--shed little light on the timetable. A probe could take months or years, depending on the information gathered and the city’s cooperation, a spokesman said.

If the federal probe is dropped, or resolved in the city’s favor by November, the sewer issue could leave voters’ minds, political buffs say.

A more likely scenario is that federal investigators would quietly continue to gather facts throughout the summer and fall.

In that case, any incumbents running for reelection would be wise to stay out of gutter--or sewer--politics, City Atty. Mark Sellers said.

“My advice to the council would be not to mention or discuss this matter while it’s pending before the U.S. attorney’s office or any grand jury inquiry,” Sellers said. “This is a matter where we need to be very careful with regards to any public comment.”

Another possibility is that by November the U.S. attorney’s office could convene a federal grand jury to look into the matter and subpoena top city staff members to answer questions on the events leading up to the break.

“Obviously, if the investigation is still pending this fall, it will definitely impact things,” Gooch said. “It becomes a political football. If it comes down to indictments, you’ll see a lot of backbiting and mutual recrimination by the people on the City Council. The longer the investigation takes, the more likely it is to invenomate politics this fall.”

Questioned about election strategy in the wake of the sewer main break, council members Fox and Lazar declined specific comment other than to say they would cooperate with the federal investigation. Fox said he did not intend to use the break as a political issue.

Those on both sides of last year’s failed recall attempt against Zeanah, however, are already writing letters to the editor placing blame for the sewer break and ensuing federal probe. At issue in the recall campaign was Zeanah’s unwillingness to support the sewer plant upgrade, which she considered too lavish, even after a variety of consultants backed the plan. The upgrade was eventually approved in its original form in September 1997.

Zeanah said she does not intend to raise the sewer spill herself, but she is prepared to retaliate if ambushed by political foes.

“Clearly, recall politics have turned into sewer politics,” she said. “The same people who ran the down and dirty recall will be the people who try to turn an environmental disaster into a political win now.

“If they turn this into an issue, it will give me a chance to talk about the issues I love to to talk about--fiscal conservatism, how the council is not holding staff accountable, and growth,” she continued.

Council members don’t have to declare candidacy until August, but it already appears very likely the three incumbents will run. Former council candidates Dan Del Campo--who narrowly missed being elected in 1996--and Cal Lutheran administrator Dennis Gillette--a candidate for office during the recall attempt--have already stated their intentions to run.

Other possible candidates include citizen activist Wayne Possehl, former council candidate Marshall Dixon and Planning Commission member Dave Anderson. Citing personal and financial reasons, all three say it is very unlikely they will enter the race.

Political scientist Gooch, who worked on Gillette’s council bid, believes the field could expand to 10 or a dozen by fall.

Housing activist Stoll, who supported recalling Zeanah, is concerned that the nastiness could mean a dearth of qualified candidates.

“I think the entire bickering and arguing activity has already turned good people away, because they don’t want to lower themselves to the sort of crap the council faces each week,” Stoll said. “The example of people being investigated by federal agencies during their term of office has got to have a chilling effect on anyone who wants to serve.”

Sewer politics or not, Councilwoman Linda Parks believes people who want to see better government will persevere.

“I don’t see that mudslinging will discourage anyone other than the fainthearted,” she said.