The day after last Tuesday’s election, the Montecito Sanitary District board got its first look at how much it may cost to connect its wastewater system to Santa Barbara for treatment.
A preliminary cost memo — with very early, rough estimates — put that between $99 million and $120 million.
The sanitary district has its own wastewater treatment plant at 1042 Monte Cristo Lane, east of Santa Barbara. The question of whether to send the district’s wastewater to Santa Barbara or rebuild the aging plant had been a key focus of the fall election campaigns.
A summary of the cost memo came Wednesday out of a report from the board’s Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project ad hoc committee, composed of directors Carter Ohlmann and Rock Rockenbach.
The two said that information wasn’t released until now because one of the district’s engineering consulting firms was concerned about those numbers being used by a competing bidder in a potential future project.
Connecting to the city sewer near Por La Mar and Niños drives would cost an estimated $99 million, while extending the sewer line to the city’s El Estero Treatment Plant would be roughly $120 million, according to the analysis.
Those numbers don’t include the cost of stabilizing the district’s wastewater treatment plant, which was built in the 1960s, in the meantime.
Staff has been sounding the alarm about the state of the district’s plant as far back as 2004. At this point, roughly 29% of the plant is at or past its useful life. Some replacement parts are no longer manufactured and can be found only on eBay.
A summary of the memo put the cost of that interim stabilization at $6.8 million. Beyond that, decommissioning the existing plant could also cost $14.3 million.
The City of Santa Barbara has loosely indicated it would prefer to take in Montecito’s wastewater between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m., according to district staff.
To do that, the district would need a new wastewater station; a 2 million-gallon equalization tank to hold daytime sewage and a portion of the nighttime flow; odor control; a pump station with two pump sets; and a new electrical service and standby generator.
The memo summary said the district would also need two 18-inch pressurized force mains because public city records indicate the city’s existing 18-inch line would not be able to handle flows from both the city and Montecito.
The project would also include drilling near the Santa Barbara Zoo, near the Andree Clark Bird Refuge, and under the Cabrillo Boulevard and Channel Drive roundabout.
If the district does move forward with connecting to Santa Barbara — and everything goes perfectly — it would take roughly six years, per the memo summary.
That preliminary memo took into account potential routes, construction requirements, and infrastructure. Those numbers don’t include connection fees, annual treatment charges and permitting costs, to name a few.
Those are also very early estimates, board members stressed. Costs could come out to more or less.
Additionally, if the city can in the future recycle Montecito’s wastewater, the district board indicated they would want a financial credit or some other kickback.
The district also hasn’t actually formally talked to the city yet about the actual cost of taking Montecito’s wastewater.
The city wants the sanitary district to pay at least $100,000 to cover its staff time to look into the feasibility of connecting Montecito and Santa Barbara.
The board agreed to talk about that fee at its Nov. 18 meeting.
Board Election Focuses on District Future
The sanitary district election campaign focused on the question of whether to send the district’s wastewater to Montecito or rebuild the plant.
Ellwood “Woody” Barrett, Chris Francis and Floyd Wicks — running as a slate — had supported sending Montecito’s wastewater to Santa Barbara for processing.
Barrett is on the board, while Wicks comes from a decade-long stint on the Montecito Water District board. Preliminary election results show Barrett and Wicks winning seats.
A study looking at the full cost of rebuilding the district’s plant is underway. Wicks, Barrett and Francis had argued during the election that it would cost between $50 million and $100 million.
They argued it would be cheaper to connect to Santa Barbara than rebuild the treatment plant because “all that is needed is a short, one-mile pipe” to connect to the city.
The memo released Wednesday indicated that connecting to the city would require much more infrastructure than that.
The other two board candidates, Rockenbach and John Murphy, had told Noozhawk during the campaign season they wanted more information before strongly leaning one way or the other about the district’s future.
Both were appointed to the board — Rockenbach last year and Murphy in May.
Preliminary election results show Rockenbach on track to win a seat and Murphy losing out to Barrett. Murphy would step down once his term ends in December.
Conflicting Cost Estimates
At Wednesday’s meeting, Wicks during public comment challenged the memo’s numbers, arguing that it was “dangerous” to give out such early concept numbers “to the public.”
He called them “misleading in many ways.”
Barrett also pushed back on the numbers.
He pointed to a 2023 study that showed it would cost $23 million to connect Montecito’s wastewater to Santa Barbara. That number would just cover the cost of one pipeline, with the wastewater moved only by gravity.
“I don’t know how (the memo’s) numbers were generated,” he said.
Rockenbach said the numbers before the board were “better than nothing” and “better than any of the information that’s been flying around so far.”
Murphy pointed out that the district had heard costs with “varying degrees of confidence” ranging from $25 million to $158 million over the past three meetings.
“I’m glad that we have” these numbers, he said. “It’s better than what we had two weeks ago, but it doesn’t mean a thing. One thing I can guarantee you is the number is gonna be a lot higher than anyone thinks.”
To get more information on actual costs, the board must “pony up and pay” for the city fee and additional studies, board member Carter Ohlmann said.
The board is set to reconvene on Nov. 18 at 1042 Monte Cristo Lane. Meeting agendas can be viewed here.
