COUNCIL OKS RIVER CLEANUP $736 MILLION COST ESTIMATED.

Byline: Rick Orlov Staff Writer

The Los Angeles City Council agreed on Tuesday to most of a massive $736 million, 10-year program to clean trash out of the Los Angeles River.

Under the far-reaching agreement with the state Regional Water Quality Control Board, the City Council said it would dispute only one portion of the agency's order - dealing with whether a zero-trash level should be a goal or a requirement - once it takes effect.

Council members ignored questions about paying the massive bill, and rejected the City Attorney Office's recommendation to appeal the entire order.

``We want to protect the city, but in protecting the city, we aren't just talking legally, but we're talking about the future of the city and the future of the river,'' Councilman Hal Bernson said.

``We were in a situation like this years ago with our sewer system and we chose to fight. It ended up costing us billions and embarrassed us as well.''

The regional water board approved the plan last month to clean up the river under requirements of the 1972 federal Clean Water Act.

The plan, still subject to approval by the state Water Quality Control Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, will force new efforts at trash prevention and reduction for the river, including tributaries such as the Tujunga Wash, over an area of more than 500 square miles and 52 governmental jurisdictions, including Los Angeles city and county.

The city estimates compliance will cost $409 million to install capture devices on storm drain outlets plus $327 million in operation and maintenance costs over the next 10 years.

Those costs would squeeze the city budget - for example, they far exceed the Bureau of Sanitation's estimates of $16 million in one-time costs and $8 million in annual costs to permanently close Sunshine Canyon Landfill when the city was considering such a possibility in 1999.

City officials said the costs of the river policy will have to be funded either through a bond measure or pay-as-you-go from the General Fund.

Currently, the city spends more than $12 million a year in operational costs to remove trash from the Los Angeles River watershed.

County officials have indicated they, too, plan to appeal the part of the order making zero trash a requirement. Officials with the City Attorney's Office had urged the council to appeal the entire order to give it legal leeway in the future.

Jonathan Bishop of the local board urged the city not to appeal any portion of the order, saying the agency would use common sense in applying it.

``Some people have said we would sue if there was a single cigarette butt on the beach, but we can assure you we won't be doing that,'' Bishop said. ``We're going to be realistic about this.''

Bishop also questioned the cost figures for the city and the overall estimate of $1.2 billion.

``That's looking at the highest-cost, low-tech solutions,'' Bishop said. ``We think there are other solutions out there that can lower the cost.''

Trash in the river has been a long-standing problem officials have been attempting to deal with for years, particularly when storms hit and the runoff goes into the ocean and fouls both the water and beaches.

Councilman Mike Feuer, who opposed any appeal of the order, said it was time for the city to face its responsibilities.

``Right now, the city is engaged in an effort to transform the river from a garbage dump into a real asset,'' Feuer said, citing a pilot program to start in Studio City in the near future. ``When we look at the costs, we are failing to look at what the costs are if we do nothing.''

However, city Bureau of Sanitation officials said the costs had to be considered if the order is to be obeyed.

A report from Bureau of Sanitation Director Judith Wilson said the city would need to look at installing and maintaining full trash-capture devices at some 1,573 storm drain outlets and might require a special bond measure to raise the necessary money.

Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas said the main questions were the city's policy on cleaning out the trash as well as if it had any choice.

``As a policy matter, none of us want to be embarrassed by the river.''