2 Supervisors: Spend More on Pollution

Alarmed by mounting reports that Orange County rivers, creeks and beaches are fouled by pollutants, two supervisors have endorsed a plan to spend $1.1 million from the general fund, four times what was spent last year, to combat urban runoff and protect sensitive watershed areas.

“This is the time to make a major decision,” said Supervisor Jim Silva, who is otherwise a fiscal conservative.

This week, Silva and Supervisor Tom Wilson, who together represent 409,000 residents living in the county’s six coastal cities, took a step to the environmental forefront.

“This is our opportunity to truly make an impact in our county,” Wilson said.

For decades, coastal cities have borne the brunt of pollution, including last year’s high bacteria levels that closed a popular stretch of Huntington Beach for two months. But the county is gearing up for a regional attack on water quality, creating a new governmental arm, and taking the unprecedented step of seeking additional funding this year to improve water quality.

During 1999, all or parts of one or more county beaches were closed for 231 days to recreational use. At the time, the county spent $250,000 to combat runoff. In addition, the county coastline was cited as among the worst in the state, with 502 postings and closures last year, in a study released Thursday by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The county plan, presented by Vicki L. Wilson, director of the county’s huge Public Facilities and Resources Department, was endorsed as a “top strategy” by all five supervisors this week but no funding was allocated. At a retreat on Thursday, Wilson proposed the $1.1-million figure.

Strategy for Passage Already in Motion

Silva and Wilson expressed confidence that they can persuade the board’s other members to vote for the funds later this year. Part of the strategy is already in motion: a new office, the Watershed and Coastal Resources Division, within public works, to handle urban runoff as a regional rather than coastal or city issue. The new division, headed by Larry Paul, who formerly was manager of coastal facilities, will include a 24-person staff. Coastal facilities includes piers and buildings on beaches, but not the water itself.

The new emphasis is part of an overall five-year environmental plan that could cost nearly $72 million from county, state and federal sources.

“Urban runoff is a result of the effects of urban development,” said Vicki Wilson. “What we have to do . . . involves changing behavior. We have to get people to change the way they do things, like washing their cars in driveways, dumping used motor oil down storm drains, over-irrigation and . . . . pesticide use in agriculture.”

Neither she nor the supervisors talked about requiring new developments in the county to completely divert runoff away from the ocean, as other counties and cities have proposed.

Some of the strategies being talked about include reaching the public at an early age, with instruction on the causes and hazards of ocean pollution. In addition, the new division’s staff will link with the business community to explain the economic disadvantages of having dirty ocean water.

With the state’s regulatory agencies cracking down, the county is attempting to launch its plans now rather than wait and be subjected to stiff fines.

Recent Fines Were the First in Years

Recently, the state Regional Water Quality Board based in San Diego fined Laguna Beach $60,000 for eight sewage spills that closed beaches over an 18-month period. It is the first time in years that the regional board has imposed fines on an Orange County city for sewage spills.

The water board is considering several more actions against Orange County agencies, including expanding a “cleanup and abatement” order against potential polluters, such as cities that drain into Aliso Creek in South County.

A recent Aliso Creek study found elevated bacteria counts, unstable aquatic life and high water temperatures downstream from development, which may contribute to a decline in plant life and animal species.

Part of the county’s funding could be used to develop a scientific technique for “source tracking,” which could pinpoint whether bacteria is caused by animals or humans through DNA tests and other means.

The county Health Care Agency’s laboratories have estimated that it may take three years to develop a suitable test.

*

“We’re in the same situation we were in 10 to 15 years ago with the [federal] Clean Air Act. This is just the start for urban runoff,” said Vicki Wilson.

The hard part will be modifying the public’s behavior and attitudes.

On the way to a recent meeting, Silva said he saw a gardener with a leaf-blowing machine near an intersection. “I don’t think people look at that as a direct connection to our beach pollution, but it is,” said Silva, noting that the machines blow gasoline-laden dust and other pollutants into storm drains.

Some cities have curbed leaf blowers because of noise pollution, but Silva said they may need to crack down even more.

Supervisor Cynthia P. Coad said she is also a believer in cleaner streets. Last spring she pushed to start cleaning residential streets in the county’s unincorporated areas at a cost of $474,237.

In one month of street sweeping in the North Tustin area, Coad said 60 tons of debris were collected--” everything from dead opossums to Coca-Cola bottles.”

Coad said she is inclined to favor the $1.1-million figure in combating runoff. “It’s essential to the economy of our county to have clean beaches.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Focus on Runoff

Urban runoff that pollutes the county’s beaches will no longer take a back seat under a plan to spend $1.1 million in county funds to combat pollution. In addition, a new county section, Watershed and Coastal Resources Division, was created to improve water quality in the county’s 13 watershed areas that eventually drain into the Pacific Ocean.