Letter to the MSD Board, and More Letters to the Editor

Below is a formal letter I submitted to the Montecito Sanitary District General Manager for distribution to the full Board of Directors regarding an issue that affects us all.

Because California’s open-meeting laws limit how board members may discuss District business outside of properly noticed public meetings, I am also sharing this letter directly with the community. My goal is to ensure that residents have access to the same information provided to the Board, allowing everyone to stay informed, ask questions, and make their voices heard before any final decisions are made.

Thank you for your continued engagement in our community.

Date: October 27, 2026

To: President and Board of Directors, Montecito Sanitary District (MSD)

Cc: General Manager; District Counsel; Clerk of the Board

Subject: Requested Board Review of Capital Project Options, Alternatives, and Funding Compliance

Dear President and Fellow Directors,

In carrying out my responsibilities as an MSD District director and Board Treasurer, I request a separately agendized Board review of the current alternatives-evaluation process, specifically regarding how different wastewater management strategies are being prioritized.

To ensure protection of public funds and maintain full transparency for our ratepayers, it is important to provide a documented, balanced explanation of all long-term options. To help clarify our path forward, I would like the Board to address the following structural concerns regarding the 2-person Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project ad hoc, which has sole and exclusive access and control over both Southland negotiations and contract decisions, and later, exclusivity over negotiations and contracts with the City of Santa Barbara. This ad hoc concentration of power raises a barrier to full Board transparency.

Prioritization of options: The ad hoc’s primary focus has remained heavily centered on the option to rebuild the wastewater treatment plant, rather than evaluating multiple pathways concurrently. Please detail all contacts made with the City of Santa Barbara for regional treatment with dates, attendees, subjects, intentions and outcomes in the last 3-years.

Status of the regional alternative: The viable alternative to deliver the District’s wastewater to the City of Santa Barbara appears to have been placed on the back burner, delaying a comprehensive, side-by-side comparison of both options.

Review of proposals: The Finance Oversight Committee was provided with the Southland agreement in 2025 without a comparative review of other available proposals, such as the alternatives developed by ENGIE in 2023 to 2025. Did the District receive written or oral proposals from both Southland and ENGIE (or other potential bidders)? Why was the Finance Oversight Committee provided only the unsigned Southland agreement in 2025, without information on ENGIE’s negotiations, proposal or alternatives?

Timeline of alternative assessments: The evaluation of the Santa Barbara alternative option was delayed for more than six months, and it remains unclear what specific project scopes, authorization dates, or additional costs influenced this timeline.

Deliverables and expenditure tracking: With approximately $1.7 million allocated to the Southland study agreement, the District needs a clear summary of amounts paid, outstanding engineering drawings, and finalized deadlines to ensure a comprehensive presentation can be made to the full Board.

The Southland agreement commencement/start date was September 10, 2025. The Board received draft materials of Southland’s agreement shortly before its April 22, 2026 meeting—nearly seven months after the start time of the agreement. The expiration date of the Southland contract date is July 31, 2027. At that time, is it the intention of MSD management and/or the ad hoc to add a new build, no bid extension to the Southland agreement to construct whatever specs Southland has developed in its first twenty-two months (a seeming conflict of interest)?

This request seeks clarification of procurement, compliance, transparency, and any potential ethical or conflict-of-interest concerns. A thorough review of these points will help ensure the District chooses the most fiscally responsible and operationally sound strategy for our community. Thank you for your time and collaboration on this matter.

Sincerely,

Dorinne Lee Johnson
Montecito Sanitary District Board of Directors and Treasurer SB LAFCO Commissioner

MSD Plans

Since a neighbor shared her political opinion with the Butterfly Beach Association list, I felt compelled to research the topic and share an unbiased perspective as a fellow neighbor. I have no conflict of interest with the Montecito Sanitary District (MSD), nor did I ever expect to be researching how our local wastewater is treated.

However, MSD’s operations do affect us all. They impact our local neighborhood where the plant and pipes are located, as well as the water quality at our beaches, particularly Butterfly Beach. And, of course, we are all affected by the costs being passed to us customers. The current plant on Monte Cristo was built in 1961 and expanded in 1981.

I thought this would be just another side of the issue, but what I discovered was surprisingly interesting. Currently, there are two main perspectives on this issue:

(1) Incumbents want to build a new plant at its current location, still without recycled water and (2) The challengers (Montecito Clean Water Group) want to connect Montecito sewage lines to Santa Barbara’s El Estero Resource Center plant.

New Montecito Plant Option:

Montecito already has the highest Sewage Treatment costs in the area. Plus, substantial increases are on the way. There will be a 14% increase on top of those rates going into effect this year and another 14% increase has been approved by the MSD board for each of the next four years. 

A consultant was hired for $1.7 Million last year to provide the proposed new plant’s design, but that project isn’t due to be completed until 2027. So the cost to build a new plant has not yet been established. But what the project doesn’t seem to include is replacement/extension of the discharge pipe in front of Butterfly Beach or any recycling of water.

The current MSD treatment facility uses an 18” cast iron pipe installed over 60 years ago to discharge treated wastewater 1,500 feet off the coast of Butterfly Beach at a depth of about 35 feet. Given its age and material, there are concerns regarding the structural integrity of this pipe. Discharge may not even be making it to the end of the pipe considering the likelihood of cast iron pipe deterioration in salt water. Notably, the discharge pipe replacement is not part of the new facility cost and I haven’t seen any discussion of it or cost estimates. 

Connect to Santa Barbara El Estero sanitation facility:

The Montecito Clean Water group says they have a better idea with a much lower price tag. Let’s pipe the sewage to Santa Barbara’s El Estero plant where they have excess capacity anyway. Since Coast Village Road is already connected to El Estero, it may be possible to tap into that system with about a mile of new pipe, pump station and storage to allow for nighttime pumping to the city’s facilities.

The El Estero discharge pipe stretches over five times longer into the ocean and over twice as deep to provide safer and cleaner beach conditions. It also provides recycled water for outdoor use at parks, schools, the zoo, golf courses, homeowner associations and construction projects for dust control. The discharge through the city’s 42” outfall pipe is treated to secondary standards as is MSD.

The MSD track record, however, has been spotty at best. For example, MSD has been fined for serious effluent violations and as recently as April of 2026, MSD test samples exceeded coliform levels by 700%. These violations and probably others have occurred without any public notice that I am aware of. 

Heal the Ocean agrees that consolidating sewage treatment to one main system in Santa Barbara has many environmental advantages. City of L.A. Sanitation serves 29 neighboring cities and agencies besides L.A. City itself. Each area/city doesn’t need its own treatment plant, but they still maintain their respective sanitation department for important tasks of sewer collection and flow management. 

Below is a link to learn more, and attached is a summary flyer that compares plans. I have not been able to find fault with the comparison. 

After doing the work to dig into the MSD election, I am favoring The Montecito Clean Water group of Floyd Wicks, Chris Francis, and Woody Barrett. Do your research and be sure to vote. www.montecitocleanwater.com

Best regards,

John Sanford, Montecito Resident

Strong Recommendation

The Eric Friedman described in the MJ endorsement of its chosen candidate for Santa Barbara Mayor is unrecognizable to me. “Cautious.” A “technocrat.” “Compromised.”

The MJ is right that it takes a special person to lead successfully as Mayor in a “weak Mayor” system like Santa Barbara’s. I’ve watched Eric Friedman lead on our City Council and its Finance Committee for nine years. He is smart, kind, deliberate (and funny!). He says what he means and he means what he says. He has the highest integrity. And he listens and learns and focuses on solving problems, rather than using the Council as a platform for partisan political pontification.

I strongly recommend a vote for Eric Friedman for Santa Barbara Mayor.

Ken Saxon

In Support of Devon Wardlow

I am a full-time resident of District 4 and am active in our community in a number of ways. In addition to having been in a leadership role in the Newcomers, I serve on the Riviera Association Board of Directors, as the Captain of the Mission Ridge Firewise Committee, as a Co-Caption for a Giving Circle or the Women’s Fund of Santa Barbara, and regularly volunteer at a number of nonprofits including Transition House. All comments are personal and do not reflect my affiliation with any organization or party.

While there are other good candidates for the District 4 Council, Devon Wardlow is by far the most qualified to handle the challenges that our community faces. Her five-year track record on the planning commission, including as chair, gives her the hands on experience that we need. Devon’s experience in working with cities and counties helping to craft public policies is an enormous asset and will help her to hit the ground running rather than learning on the job like some of the other candidates. She is fluent in the issues that face our community including fire risk, housing affordability, economic development, and traffic safety. And, she has a track record of working across interest groups and building consensus. I love that this product of Santa Barbara has returned home after having served in a national role in the Obama administration and is so committed to helping our community thrive. 

I am troubled by some of the things that I am hearing from my neighbors about the misinformation that is being spread about Devon and her candidacy. While she has advocated for her employers, she is not a lobbyist and has a track record of working on the side of issues that favor residents. She does not work for Flock, a traffic surveillance company, but for a traffic safety company, Obvio. The record number of endorsements she has received from the SB County Democratic Party to the Sierra Club, the SB City Firefighters Association, Planned Parenthood and many current and elected officials with diverse views speaks to her depth of support. 

Thank you for your endorsement of Devon Wardlow. I believe that she will best serve both the residents of District 4 and our city as whole on the Santa Barbara City Council.

Respectfully, Julie Chapman

Hey Montecito!!!

Stop dumping wastewater off Butterfly Beach! 

Please support Barrett, Francis, & Wicks for the Montecito Sanitary Board.

Ruston Slager Speedy Solutions

Several years ago a neighbor and I contacted City Councilman Eric Friedman on behalf of our homeowners association about the problem of cars speeding on Calle de Los Amigos. Eric immediately set up a meeting with appropriate persons on the city staff. He participated in the meeting and continued to monitor progress on our situation.

Ultimately the city installed improved signage, two traffic islands, and newly painted pavement markings. The speeding problem has gotten better, although some people still drive too fast and probably always will. But we appreciated the way Eric Friedman responded quickly to our concern and worked seriously with us to find solutions.

John Devereaux

No to Kristin Sneddon

Kristin Sneddon is absolutely the wrong person for mayor. She is a principal architect of the harshest, most punitive and most destructive rent control system in the state of California. I have attended numerous City Council meetings and have observed that she does not listen to anyone who disagrees with her. She blithely agreed to eliminate the state exemption from rent control for single family homes (mostly owned by small landlords). She will continue to erode property rights if elected. If you want Santa Barbara to be the poster child for the destruction of an American city by rent control, then she is your candidate. If you want stability and progress, vote for Eric Friedman. 

Jay Hartz

Affordability Requires More Than Sympathy

Affordability is on every candidate’s lips. I’m more interested in which policies they’re willing to change.

California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office has identified barriers to homebuilding as a major contributor to high housing costs. We have spent years making homes difficult to build, then wondering why they’re difficult to afford.

Carbajal supports buyer assistance and construction incentives. But I favor Bob Smith’s emphasis on expanding housing supply and examining additional land for development. I want more attention to what prevents homes from being built in the first place.

Protecting the coast matters. So does allowing the people who work here to build a life here.

The view is magnificent. The monthly payments are less photogenic.

What good is an environmental utopian dream if no one can afford to sustain it?

Nick Koonce

Right Mayor or Our Times

My support for Eric Friedman started when I observed the skill he showed in running meetings. Discussions are constructive, opinions are respected, and decisions tend to be unanimous. As of late there has been serious division among the Council, at times even degenerating into name calling. Eric Friedman values consensus. But if that cannot be achieved, he can still move the agenda forward while being respectful of Council members who disagree. Eric Friedman thinks the funds have to be in place for the initiatives approved by the Council. At the New Vic debate, Ms. Sneddon said that if the City moves forward with a new initiative somehow the funding will follow. This type of spending is a good way to continue budget deficits and related problems. Eric knows the City needs to spend money on its aging infrastructure and take that into account when putting together the City’s budget. At this challenging time, he is the right leader for the City.

Jeff Dinkin