February 7, 2010
Letter to Cambrians,
What are we getting for the $733,000?
The CCSD (the Army Corps of Engineers) has plans to drill up two ten sites and install several test wells at Santa Rosa Creek where it enters the ocean at Shamel Park, which is estimated to cost $733,000. This expenditure is likely to lead to a desalination plant, which will lead to further expenditures. (Estimated at over $21,000,000.) The testing will have impacts on the environment, as will the potential desalination plant. The “Proposed Negative Declaration” filed by the CCSD on January 4, 2010 (may be January 14, can’t tell from poor quality of posted document) woefully underestimates the potential and known environmental damages from the proposed test drilling.
I object to the testing, on grounds of the heart–the effects on the life, human, plant and animal. I also object on the grounds of the head, that is of the cost, when other solutions would cost less and with less negative impact.
Since the approximately 3800 residences in Cambria use about 75% of the water, the cost for the testing to each residence, if divided up would be $145.
Points of the heart
Thousands of sea birds depend upon the estuary for water, food and respite. The sand bar at the mouth of the creek creates a lagoon where many species of fish breed, which in turn feed birds, otters, wildlife and us.
Construction of test wells and a desalination plant will increase the levels of toxins on the beach, in the ocean, our air, and in our water. Toxic mercury from old mines would likely be released and becomes highly toxic when it comes in contact with oxygen. Leaks from equipment and pollution from their engines threaten our air and land.
Over the long term, should a desalinization plant be installed, a large plume of salt and at least 25 known carcinogens would be spewed out into the ocean, resulting in a dead area in the ocean and continued contamination. Sea water contains pollutants which would have to be counteracted by the process.
Reasons of the Head: Fiscal Irresponsibility of the Plan
The proposed desalination project is sized to allow for every household to use 18 units bimonthly. Our actual average per household use is about 9 units bimonthly. Why? Such excess production is costly.
CCSD hasn’t told us how much we can expect our water bills to go up. Because they will go up. A DWR estimate from 2003 on the cost of desalinated water may range between $1160 to $1,600 per acre-foot of water, much more than the current cost to pump from the creeks. Cambria uses an average of 60 acre feet per month, about 700 per year. One acre-foot is approximately 326,000 gallons, or 436 CCSD units. The average family uses about .19 acre feet per year. This translates into a cost of $58,000 to $128,000 a month for Cambria or a cost to the average household for water of between $29 and $64 per water bill.
I experienced a doubling in water bill while living in Santa Barbara in the 90s after they built a desalinisation plant. The plant is no longer in service due to high maintenance and operation costs.
Of course these figures are estimates. However, my conversations with a water engineer indicate that if anything they are underestimated, due to the cost overruns of such mammoth projects.
Fiscally Responsible Solutions
What makes the desalinization project even more problematic is that there are less costly solutions.
• 30% to 50% of water used by Cambrians could be saved by installing grey water systems in each home, at a cost of between $500 for a minimal system to an average of $4000. 1466 homes in Cambria could have the minimal grey water system installed for just the cost of the testing!
• expand the rebates program, about to run out of the measly $2000 allocated for Cambrians to install low water usage toilets.
• conduct water audits by a professional, which would including installing low-flow fixtures, establishing detailed water usage in Cambria, providing education about conservation, and maintaining an awareness throughout the community about the urgency for conservation. I would cost approximately. All residences in Cambria could be audited by hiring three auditors for three months which would cost approximately $24,000. If all residences in Cambria had up to date water friendly toilets and fixtures, we could save 40% or more of our water usage, without changing any of our habits!
• Look into developing ponds or storage tanks up Santa Rosa Creek. (Dr. Jim Brownell conducted such a study, available in the Cambria Library, largely ignored!)
• Install an updated wastewater recycling system. A local plumber estimated that the current system uses over 50% more water than an updated, ecologically superior system would require.
• Improving the sewage treatment plant to provide recycled wastewater (also known as reclaimed, tertiary standard, California Title 22, (‘purple pipe’) could save 2 to 3 units per month for each household.
In conclusion there are too many reasons, both of the heart and the head to go ahead with the costly text drilling at our precious Shamel Park or with the plan for building a desalinization plant with so many better solutions available.
Do not let fear or greed rule the day.
Sincerely,
Valerie Bentz
Cambria resident since 2000
Cambria residents who refuse to allow their fellow owners of Cambria property to have water under any circumstances are the greedy ones. Greed can be defined as an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves. As it sits today, existing residents possess all the benefits of our property, enjoying it as their own open space. They refuse to allow the municipal water supply to be expanded so that we can have water meters, even though we offer to pay the whole local share. They angrily vote down a rate increase that would have them pay only a tiny fraction of the cost of expanding and maintaining the water supply, and buying back lots they don’t want homes on. They refuse to allow lot owners to bring our own outside water at our own expense. They refuse to compensate us for loss of property that we have paid fair market value for, and instead insist that we be required to maintain and pay taxes on property that they and only they can get any enjoyment of. I can’t even get a permit to camp out on my property that I own and pay taxes on.
This is about one thing and one thing only, and it is totally obvious that it is about the greedy desire to continue enjoying our property without having to pay for it. Keeping the water supply down is the means to that end.
Ms Bentz, please run your math again and count the value of our property that cannot be used.
Don’t even talk to me about greed. I have repeatedly offered for years to pay far more than my share to rectify the challenges facing Cambria. It is you who is possessed by greed, and the fear of change. You want to keep Cambria like you think it is, and you want to balance the cost of it on our backs. You think Cambria is a forest, but it is also a dense subdivision, and was so long before you ever went there or bought any property. You have no right to expect anything other than the full buildout of your neighborhood. If you don’t like Cambria as a dense subdivision, then you have the ability to change it by buying it back.
If you want my lot and right to build a home on it eliminated, step up and buy it. Otherwise I am not interested in your opinions.