The City Council unanimously directed staff Monday to pursue a two-step voting process for a proposed $125 million sewer project aimed at helping fire-damaged beachfront properties rebuild, though Mayor Bruce Silverstein raised concerns about the fairness of the vote that will ultimately decide the project's fate.
The proposed 5.5-mile wastewater collection system would serve 461 waterfront residential and commercial properties along Pacific Coast Highway between Carbon Beach Terrace and Getty Villa Drive. The area was heavily impacted by the January 2025 Palisades Fire, which damaged 67% of residential and 40% of commercial properties in the project zone.
Rather than processing waste locally through septic systems, the new infrastructure would transport wastewater to the Los Angeles Hyperion Water Reclamation Plant for treatment.
Council Member Marianne Riggins made a motion directing staff to pursue a "bifurcated" approach requiring two separate votes from affected property owners. The first vote would fund approximately $10 million to $12 million in preliminary design and engineering costs. A second vote would follow later to approve the estimated $125 million construction phase. Mayor Silverstein seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
"Let's go find out how much it's going to cost and then give people a second chance to vote on it," said Council Member Doug Stewart, who recommended the two-step approach.
Under California's Proposition 218, assessment district votes are weighted by each property's share of the total assessment rather than one vote per property. Only property owners who cast ballots are counted, with a simple majority of votes cast required for approval.
Silverstein expressed discomfort with that threshold, particularly given that many affected properties are now vacant lots following the fire.
"You might get 10% or 20% of the assessed properties as the entirety of who's voting, and therefore seven and a half or 8% of the assessed properties control the decision," Silverstein said. "That's crazy."
The mayor said he would support the initial design phase vote but signaled he would push for stricter requirements before the larger construction vote.
"I'm gonna be insisting on a more stringent vote," Silverstein said. "I may get outvoted, but I'm going to do that."
Brian Forbath, a senior partner at Stradling Law Firm serving as the city's bond counsel, confirmed the council could impose additional voting thresholds beyond the constitutional minimum. He noted that Manhattan Beach requires 60% approval before proceeding with similar assessment districts.
The project offers potential cost savings for property owners. Individual assessments are estimated at approximately $300,000 per property, significantly less than the $625,000 to $1.5 million cost of replacing private septic systems and constructing protective seawalls.
Council Member Steve Uhring voiced strong support for the project.
"This thing is going to have a huge benefit in cleaning up the ocean," Uhring said. "Whether they need it or don't need it, they can help us make that ocean cleaner, safer, better for everybody."
The council intentionally limited the project to beachside properties affected by the fire, excluding the land side of Pacific Coast Highway. Council members emphasized the sewer is meant strictly to help fire victims rebuild their properties, not to expand capacity in the city.
"We're not going to change the whole city," Uhring said.
Financing the project presents challenges. Forbath said the bonds would likely be unrated debt given the lack of completed homes on many affected properties.
"A property that's occupied and built with a home on it and people living there is much more valuable security for investors than a vacant parcel," Forbath said.
The city is pursuing Clean Water State Revolving Fund financing, which offers low-interest loans at roughly half the state's general obligation borrowing rate. The city successfully used similar financing for its Civic Center wastewater treatment plant.
Council Member Marianne Riggins urged staff to finalize interim septic solutions so property owners can begin rebuilding before the sewer line is completed.
"I don't want people waiting until 2031 to start building," Riggins said.
Staff estimated it would take approximately six to nine months to reach the first property owner vote. The full project timeline spans roughly 54 months if funding is secured and no major issues arise during design or construction.
Tatiana Holden, interim public works director, noted that the Governor's Executive Order suspended permitting requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act and Coastal Act for rebuild properties, potentially shortening the timeline.
The city has already spent approximately $200,000 on preliminary design work. Following Monday's direction, staff will issue requests for proposals to hire a design consultant and assessment engineer before returning to council with cost estimates for the first phase.
The project's fate will ultimately rest with property owners in the proposed assessment district, not the council.