Home › News › Fillmore
Fillmore's water softeners OK'd for buyback program
STORY TOOLS 
More from FillmoreThe city of Fillmore has approved funds to jump-start a public outreach campaign and buyback program for water softeners in order to stave off state fines for the pollutants they produce.
Public Works Director Bert Rapp said every liter of Fillmore's wastewater contains 50 milligrams more chlorine than the state allows. The chlorine is caused by a large amount of salt discharge from roughly 500 water softeners in Fillmore homes.
To limit pollution and escape fines, Rapp urged the council Tuesday to adopt an $80,000 water softener buyback program, which will employ local plumbers to remove brine-discharging softeners from homes. The program will compensate homeowners about $400 to cover the loss of the softeners.
Mary Farkas, spokeswoman for Fillmore's Chloride Control Committee, said the state could fine Fillmore $3,000 a day for its swollen chlorine output.
Rapp said the fine, mandated by legislation set forth by former Gov. Gray Davis, is a conundrum for the city.
"We cannot remove the salt from the water, and yet the homeowners are granted by the state the right to own softeners and discharge salt in the sewer," he said. "We have to pay the state every time our salt is higher than the limit, so we are in a sort of Catch-22 caused by the political process."
The state has not fined the city yet, Farkas said, but has warned Fillmore it must declare a solution by September. "The state can at that point accept the plan and give us five years to put the plan into action," said Farkas. "Or, they could say, Nope, we're not going to accept the plan and start fining you now.'"
Farkas wants Fillmore High School students to initiate a letter-writing campaign to raise public awareness to the dangers of water softeners.
"We've got to do something, but the community just doesn't seem to be engaged, so I'm trying to do something to get them engaged," she said.
Farkas said she has asked Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, R-Moorpark, to sponsor a bill banning the sale of water softeners in California.
Councilman Scott Lee said some sort of public awareness campaign is warranted.
"We definitely need some sort of an outreach program, because I don't think most people know how serious of a problem this is," Lee said.
Water softeners soften hard' water, which usually has high levels of calcium and magnesium. The devices soften water by exchanging sodium ions with calcium and magnesium ions.
Softened water has high levels of chloride, which can damage local crops. Some of it goes through Fillmore's sewer system to its water recycling facility and eventually into groundwater or the Santa Clara River.
It is illegal in Fillmore to install brine-discharging water softeners, which are subject to a $1,000 fine. The ban affects softeners installed after June 11, 2004. Other types of softeners, which use reverse osmosis and do not discharge brine, are not affected.
But the city cannot trace which homes have installed brine-discharging softeners, frustrating efforts to enforce the ban.
The council voted 3-2 to approve the program, with Councilwomen Laurie Hernandez and Patti Walker voting no.
Rapp said the funding approved by the council Tuesday will be allocated in next year's budget.
Posted by del on April 12, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, it is a start. If only my homies in Santa Paula would follow suit.
It is bad enough how we have paved over the Oxnard Plain, but why add additional salinity to the ground water.
Posted by d0cdave on April 15, 2008 at 4:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Offering $400 for my $2k LEGAL (permitted) water softener is a joke. A real solution would be to offer an exchange of a like system that is compatible with the city.
$400 wont cover the cost of a new RO system to protect the pipes, valves and appliances in my home. Partner with Rayne and Culligan. They will consider it a major PR campaign being the "approved" solution and passing savings onto the residents.
Posted by Christopher on April 15, 2008 at 4:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Please advise the authorities of the city of Fillmore to learn from the Santa Clarita strategy: they pay up to $2000 rebate for removal of softeners, and they OFFER A SOLUTION to the public that is environmentally safe. For example, easy water treatment alternatives with great results are electronic descalers or hard water conditioners like Scalewatcher or similar approved by the Los Angeles Sanitation Department and easy to find at www.AquaGenesisUSA.com ~ Be Green!
Posted by heritagevalley on April 16, 2008 at 4:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Christopher,
There is no such thing as a electronic scale remover. Even if the minerals change polarity at the the magnetic coil they will change polarity again as they move through the pipes. If it was that easy the city would have a big magnet at the water well. It needs to be changed chemically to stop the scaling.
I hope nobody falls for this voodoo science. I wish it were true though, but it's not. I hope someday they come up with a real GREEN solution.
Posted by Hopper on April 16, 2008 at 5:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I thought that if you switched over to potassium instead of salt in your softener that it didn't hurt the environment? Maybe the $80k should go to educating the homeowners on what to use?
Posted by enigmaetc on April 17, 2008 at 8:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Here in the UK we successfully provide a non-chemical solution to hard water. Our company provides solutions to commercial & industrial customers (www.electronicdescaler.com) and our sister company provides units for householders. They sell 16,000 units per year into a market that is 20 times smaller than the USA, all with a performance guarentee. The reason we have never been successful in the USA is the staggering opposition to the product from the water softener lobby
Posted by d0cdave on April 17, 2008 at 4:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Potassium doesnt solve the problem. It's still Potassium Chloride instead of Sodium Chloride. It's the Chloride that has the city in a bind.
Posted by d0cdave on April 17, 2008 at 5:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Christopher, I wish Fillmore would do so. I would remove my softener for a comparable solution if the City brokered a deal for a replacement. I WILL NOT remove my softener for $400 cash and leave me with the bill for the plumber. It's obsurd for them to assume people will go for it. Will they replace my 4-year old copper pipes when they are clogged with scale? How 'bout my dishwasher, showerheads, RO system, and my water heater? How about pollution from the extra rinse agents and scale removers I will be using to remove hard water stains from the dishes and the tilework in the bathroom?
WAKE UP BURT and the rest of the council! You are not being creative with your solutions. Talk to the neighboring cities, counties, and states. They are all dealing with this problem and have more options to try.
Until I see a real solution, and a reduction in Total Dissolved Solids at my water meter (after the installation of the proposed water treatment facility that we voted on to soften the water), my water softener stays. PERIOD.
Posted by heritagevalley on April 18, 2008 at 1:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
enigmaetc,
I hope that you and everyone else looked at my last comment. Electronic descalers don't work, and I am sure these salespeople know it also. If it does anything it will be in the area of the coil but not throughout the house. Just a waste of money! Again, I wish it were true, because I hate the non-green alternative.
Posted by d0cdave on April 18, 2008 at 1:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Google "do electric descalers work?"
You will find a lot of people saying it most probably doesnt work at all. Fillmore has really hard water (in 2005 the average TDS was 723ppm and Hardness was 430ppm) and I can confirm that with my own TDS meters. Many folks on the net have purchased these electronic and magnetic descalers in softer water than ours and say they make no difference in scale buildup.
(Requires free registration.)
Comments on this site are to be used for the discussion and/or debate of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Comments should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We don't allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete comments and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.