Archives

Search Archives

Transforming Secondary Education: New $100 million initiative to improve education quality across the nation.
Learn More »

Recent Spotlights »

View all Archives - Governance »

Innovating America







within the terms of the law. And that achievement, Arcata's planners reasoned, would exempt their town from a state policy to phase out the discharge of municipal waters to most of the state's bays and estuaries.

Footnotes

Footnote :

* Ironically, it was a course on how to write an environmental impact statement, a good way of teaching resource majors the basics of federal environmental law.

THE DEBATE INTENSIFIES

Alexandra Stillman had wondered from the outset why the regional sewer treatment plant had to be so big, and she and her colleagues on the council had wanted to look at alternatives. Council members had other concerns, however. "There were so many other things happening at the time," Stillman recalled in August 1989. "Criminal justice planning, a new bus system. So we had to divvy up the responsibilities among the council."

Stillman drew the sewage treatment responsibility. The Humboldt Bay Water Authority (HBWA), formed in January 1975, was overseeing plans for the regional system. But by the fall of 1976 inflation had driven estimates of construction costs to $52 million. In addition, knowledgeable citizens in Arcata were projecting that the system's operating costs would be prohibitive, in part because of the energy it would consume, in part because of its potential for negative environmental impact. They feared, among other hazards, accidental rupture of the underwater collector lines.

These projections put new pressure on the City Council to name a Marsh Task Force charged with revising its earlier plan for an independent treatment system. The task force marshaled the evidence in favor of the Arcata plan, including a ruling by a regional board in the San Francisco area that marsh treatment could meet water-enhancement requirements and a state policy, adopted in 1977, encouraging projects employing "used" water to create natural habitats.

But the council was subject to another, countervailing pressure. David Joseph, Executive Director of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, and his staff, hoping to stop Arcata's dawdling about the regional system, had imposed a construction moratorium on Eureka and Arcata until their sewage treatment capacity was increased. Eureka, much more growth-conscious than Arcata, would not feel the pinch as soon as its smaller neighbor to the north—it still had some limited sewage treatment capacity available. Arcata, on the other hand, had none, and although promoting growth was not uppermost in Arcatans' minds, a prolonged period during which new building was prohibited would put political pressure on the council to get on with the regional plan.

ESCALATION

Even so, Assistant City Engineer Stephen Leiker, who is from San Jose, and a number of his friends and teachers from Humboldt State saw the dispute over the "giant water treatment scheme" as a growth issue and a home rule issue as well as a technological issue. "We learned [in San Jose]