HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/21/2026 Item 7b, Updegrove
Graham Updegrove <
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:4/221 City Council Meeting - Sewer Lateral Inspections
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I support Staff recommendation #2 dissolving the wastewater offset program, however oppose staff
recommendation #1 requiring replacement of poor or failed laterals at point of sale. While I support
maintenance and replacement of both City and private infrastructure, tying the requirement to a sale
presents the following issues:
- Replacements will almost never take place prior to a sale closing escrow given contractor timeframes
and the length of a typical escrow. Various contractors who provide this work were queried and most are
“scheduled out” at least 4 weeks.
- Focusing on specific areas of the City vs point of sale would seem to be a more efficient approach at
addressing this issue. Staff has strong data on the areas known to have problems based on age of
construction and lateral material. Is there any reason this approach is not being considered other than
being politically unpopular?
- To my knowledge, there are three main plumbing contractors who are licensed and bonded to do this
work in the City right of way. Of those three, two have noted they do not have interest or capacity to take
on much additional work. Only one contractor is looking to grow. There is an assumption more service
providers will come into the market, but to the contrary, during the last 5+ years a point of sale inspection
requirement has been in place, one other plumbing contractor no longer offers full lateral replacement. It
seems premature to require replacement when there are so few contractors who do this work. *You
might consider asking staff roughly what percentage of laterals are currently being replaced by these
three companies before voting.
- Requiring replacement effectively makes housing more expensive. The cost of replacement will have to
come out of pocket from buyers who are already struggling to afford a downpayment, closing costs and
mortgage payments. Yes, a seller can potentially credit a buyer toward replacement (up to a limit, not to
exceed that buyer’s actual closing costs) however that is driven by market factors. We are still in a
limited inventory, competetive market where sellers may not feel the need to credit a buyer the full cost
of replacement when deemed poor or failed. This just shifts the cost to a buyer. Furthermore the quoted
price for replacement may increase by the time work is performed.
Overall, I prefer continuing to incentivize voluntary lateral replacement vs the City requiring replacement
(carrot vs stick approach.) I encourage you to table the discussion until further notice or vote no. Thank
you for your time and consideration on this issue.
Regards,
Graham Updegrove
Broker / Owner, Lic #01873454
California Coastal Real Estate I www.ccreslo.com
c: 805.459.1865
1