The city bought a little more time, possibly as much as a year, in its ongoing skirmish with a state regulatory agency over the future operation of Seaside Lagoon.
The City Council Tuesday night unanimously approved a staff recommendation asking the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board to delay the requirement for a new battery of water tests until 2012. If granted, the move would allow the city to operate the lagoon unchanged this upcoming summer season while it seeks legislative or legal redress that could remove the body of water from the agency’s jurisdiction.
“I think the recommendation is sound and I support it,” said Mayor Mike Gin. “I think all of us up here would like to keep Seaside Lagoon open as is.”
“This gives the water quality control board the ability to allow us to work with them for a year,” said City Attorney Mike Webb. “It may or may not work.”
The city is at the end of a decade-long struggle with the LARWQCB. The regulatory agency last year threatened more than $21 billion in fines for water quality violations under the Clean Water Act, but eventually issued only $51,000 in fines and issued a new permit intended to keep the lagoon open through 2013. But as part of that agreement, the city was required to undergo a new testing regime, one that became much more rigorous – and expensive – when the LARWQCB added an array of metals last fall.
The council has drawn a line in the sand regarding metals testing. The new tests would cost $55,000 and expose the lagoon to more potential fines. Councilman Steve Diels said the water board was guilty of a “gross misapplication” of the Clean Water Act.
“They are asking us to test for metals that we don’t put in the lagoon,” Diels said. “You could just go to the lagoon and see – we don’t put metals in the lagoon. It’s obvious for anybody to see, visually…We take water from the ocean, put it in the lagoon, swim in it, and put it back in the ocean.”
“If we end up having to have metals in the testing, that will be the nail in the coffin,” said Councilman Matt Kilroy.
Since 2005, the city has paid nearly $362,000 in fines for violations for the water leaving the lagoon in its outflow back into the harbor, mostly for a silt-like substance called Total Suspended Solids that the city’s tests show already exists in the water drawn in from the ocean. The lagoon uses water drawn in by the AES power plant for cooling purposes; the city chlorinates the water for use in the lagoon and de-chlorinates it before discharge back into the ocean.
The council in the last month has explored various options – including operating the lagoon in violation of the water board’s requirements (an option Webb repeatedly and emphatically called “a bad idea” Tuesday night in light of $10,000 a day in possible fines) and filling the lagoon’s water feature with sand.
The lagoon, which attracts between 80,000 and 100,000 visitors each summer, like most recreational facilities operates at a deficit – last year, the facility brought in $370,000 in revenue versus $650,000 in expenditures.
But nearby businesses argue that the lagoon is central to the seaside economy.
Tom Schiff, executive vice president for marina leaseholder Decron Properties, said the 100,000 visitors a year both create vibrancy in the harbor and have a large “spillover” effect in businesses throughout the city.
“Since when is it a mission of a park to be a money making venture?” Schiff said. “Parks aren’t about making money, and if we run a little deficit, or a moderate deficit, or maybe even a big deficit, it may be worth it.”
John Fisher, the owner of Ruby’s Diner, said his business makes $150,000 during the lagoon’s three month season. Ruby’s has a window open on the lagoon. Fisher said the lagoon’s closure would bring his entire business into question.
“We only make money really those three months a year, and to have this happen obviously would be devastating for us,” he said.
Councilman Pat Aust said that the city is facing the worst economic times in its history, however, and is limited in how much more liability it can accept at the Seaside Lagoon.
“We are sensitive to what it means for businesses, but it’s a lot of money for us to pay for this testing and then be liable for fines,” Aust said. “We can’t sustain that, as well.”
The city had faced a Feb. 7 deadline to begin complying with the new testing regime. City staff met with LARWQCB staff over the last week, however, and following the council’s action may be given more leeway while it is determined if the city’s requests can be granted.
Gin and City Manager Bill Workman last week met with Congresswoman Jane Harman as well as federal Environmental Protection Agency representatives in Washington D.C. to explore possible solutions that would remove the lagoon from the jurisdiction of the water quality control board. Among those possibilities, Workman said, would be to gain a new classification for the lagoon – as a beach.
“I am hopeful for the next couple years – I think we will get resolution to this, but we’ve got to stay the course and keep doing the things we are doing to convince people this is worth saving,” Workman said. “…We are essentially a beach; a little bit of a unique beach, but a beach.” ER
