Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects Water Conservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident calls $5.5 million rainwater-toilet project "waste" after consultant lowers water-savings estimate
Summary
At the Aug. 7 meeting, public commenter Ben Hobert criticized a recently approved $5.5 million rainwater recapture system for toilets, citing a consultant estimate that annual recapture falls from an earlier 2,000,000 gallons to 232,000 gallons, and argued the project's payback period is far longer than previously stated.
A resident criticized a county-approved rainwater recapture system for county toilets during public comment on Aug. 7, saying new consultant figures reduce the project's projected water savings to a fraction of earlier claims.
Why it matters: The comment raised questions about projected savings, the cost-effectiveness of a $5.5 million capital project, and whether the board should revisit the decision ahead of budget season.
Ben Hobert of Westwood Hills told commissioners the county previously asserted the system "had the potential to recapture 2,000,000 gallons of water a year," and that a consultantevaluation he obtained in a records request now projects only "232,000 gallons a year." Hobert said the county's earlier payback calculation, based on 2,000,000 gallons, produced a 35-year payback; using the consultant's 232,000-gallon estimate, Hobert calculated a payback of about 315 years. "If this board embraces this waste in the light of day, think how much waste is buried in this year's budget proposal," he said.
Hobert also asked the board to reconsider the prior approval as the county enters the 2026 budget cycle. The transcript records Hobert's statements as public comment; no county staff responded during the comment period in the provided transcript excerpt.
No motion, vote, or formal board direction concerning the rainwater recapture project appears in the Aug. 7 meeting transcript segment provided. Hobert said he received the consultant's evaluation via a records request and characterized the project as a "toilet travesty," language attributed to his public comment.
Notes: All numerical figures and calculations in this item are reported as assertions by the public commenter and attributed to Ben Hobert.
