Getting Down ‘n’ Dirty on the Sewage Waiver

Those of you not up to speed on “conventional activated sludge” or “underwater transport mechanisms” or even “Class A bio-solids” might have been scared away from Wednesday night’s meeting at the Orange County Sanitation District.

A little too technical, perhaps?

It was for me, until an environmentalist at the microphone said early on that the debate boiled down to “doo-doo in the deep.” That’s a language we can all understand.

Luckily, being an ignoramus on the subject didn’t stop me from attending and, come to find out, I stumbled into a historic night.

And nearly four hours after it began, those of us with strong wills and sturdy bottoms were rewarded with a sudden-death kind of outcome, in which La Palma Mayor Paul F. Walker broke a 12-12 tie with a “yes” vote that left a legacy for our children or wasted a lot of money. If you’re keeping score at home, the 12 votes to continue the waiver all came from inland cities.

Such were the stakes as the district’s countywide board debated whether to ask the Environmental Protection Agency to extend a waiver that exempts the district from “secondary” treatment of all sewage instead of just some, as is now the practice. All sewage receives “primary” treatment before being dumped in the ocean.

Environmentalists framed the debate in near-apocalyptic terms in discontinuing the waiver. My notes show remarks like “I beg you” or “From the bottom of my heart, I implore you.” The head of a state lifeguard association said the membership felt “absolutely compelled” to speak against the waiver. Another speaker didn’t want to discuss the law or science but to speak “from the heart.”

The other side was a bit more amorphous in philosophy. It appeared an amalgam of people who either aren’t convinced it’s wise to spend the money to upgrade the sewage treatment, who think it would cost businesses or residents too much in increased sewer fees, or who think that dropping the waiver would limit the district’s decision-making.

Even Blake Anderson, district general manager, believed to favor keeping the waiver, characterized the impending decision in historic terms. He put it on a timeline with such other seminal Orange County moments as the purchase and development of the Irvine Ranch and of the openings of Disneyland and Knott’s Berry Farm.

He then wished the board “good luck” in whatever it decided.

The passion behind the policy springs from whether you believe the partially treated sewage dumped into the ocean is responsible for the beach closures in recent years. Environmentalists argued that it is, but, beyond that, wonder why a tourism-oriented county near a beach settles for a lesser level of sewage treatment than almost all other water districts in the county.

“The surfing industry has a timetable to it,” before pollution ends the fun, one man said. “The ocean is not going to last.” He gave it about another 10 years.

Skeptical board members suggested the partially treated sewage isn’t responsible for the foulness of beach waters. The scientific studies aren’t conclusive, they argued.

Seal Beach representative Patty Campbell virtually snorted her retort: “To say we don’t have enough information is like Philip Morris saying smoking doesn’t cause cancer.”

Board member Russell Patterson from Villa Park said a “yes” vote would handcuff the district to outmoded treatment methods. “To me, it’s [spending] $271 million so we feel good.”

So it went for the 2 1/2 hours that board members spent going around the table, airing their views. Finally, at 9:35 p.m., Orange County Supervisor Tom Wilson called for a vote on board member Brian Brady’s motion to commit to secondary treatment of all sewage and discontinue the waiver when it expires next summer.

“If we leave here with the W-word on our lips, we’re heading for a train wreck,” Brady said. (Puzzled minds fretted a few seconds before settling on “Waiver.”)

After their victory, environmentalists celebrated.

Not among them was Brea representative Roy Moore. He wanted the board to commit to secondary treatment but also retain the waiver. “It’s win-win,” he grumbled, irritated that the winning side played on the perception that the waiver was bad public relations.

“They said we couldn’t leave the room with the W-word because people would be [ticked] off,” Moore said. “Who gives a [bleep] if they’re [ticked] off?”

On a night devoted to sewage, Moore’s choice of words seemed oddly fitting.

*

Dana Parsons writes Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. Reach him at dana.parsons @latimes.com.