Pages

Thursday, April 13, 2006

Calhoun’s Can(n)ons The Bay New, Morro Bay, CA for April 12, 06 (25)


Tribune Out-Onions The Onion!


Oh, God Love em! The Tribune has finally and spectacularly out-Onioned The Onion (http://www.theonion.com/), that deviously delicious satirical “newspaper” that regularly makes up hilarious headlines and phony news stories.


Most folks learned years ago to read the Tribune’s Los Osos stories with a cup of coffee in one hand and a pound of salt in the other. In their defense, all newspapers have a tough time reporting on wars. The chaos of battle, the fog of conflict, the fast changing skirmishes over disputed ground, the rotation of reporters so that institutional memory gets lost and whoever gets tossed into the Los Osos Sewer Wars’ free-fire zone ends up with one overriding wish: Scribble something, anything, then get the hell out of the place alive.


The result is that the reader can end up with that amazing Onionish March 28th headline: “Plan calls for new tanks in Los Osos; An engineering firm says bout 5,000 septic tanks labeled as faulty need to be replaced – at their owners’ expense – with pressurized models.”


The lead paragraph continued, “About 5,000 Los Osos homes and business may have to buy new septic tanks under a plan advanced by a small engineering firm the services district will hire next week.” Puzzlement surely would have turned to consternation or anger: “A plan has been picked and is being advanced? Hey, I thought the voters were supposed to select the wastewater plan!”


Well, not to worry, there was indeed a problem with the story.


The CSD had voted to enter negotiations with Ripley Pacific Co. to determine the scope of work to be done in order to update the wastewater project report – the “scope of work” being a “compare, contrast and price out” various alternative systems which can then be presented to the Board and then the voters. In short, when the story ran, the negotiations to determine the scope of work hadn’t even been finished.




But there it was, the gape-mouth question: Plan? What plan? Was the Tribune calling the race even before the horse could get out of the stall? Not quite. Turns out the “Plan” presented on the front pages as news, was a three-year-old Ripley Pacific alternative step/steg proposal for Los Osos, a plan similar to what Ripley Pacific is now building in the northern California city of Stevinson. But the Tribune failed to identify it as such, even in their buried-on-B-2 “Corrections” section.


In addition to specious headlines, a more serious problem appeared in the text that repeatedly appears in so many stories about the Sewer Wars: “He said - She said” claims that are printed without making even the slightest effort to determine whether the claims are true or arrant nonsense.


For example, the March 28th story reports that “. . . 5,000 septic tanks labeled as faulty by [Regional Water Quality Control Board] regulators . . .” Five thousand “faulty” tanks? Really? There are about 5,000 homes in the prohibition zone. As anyone with a septic tank can tell you, if you have a “faulty” septic tank, you call a septic pumping company really, really quick.


Since the Tribune printed that claim without attempting to verify its truthfulness, I asked CSD Board Member, Julie Tacker: Has a septic tank inspection of the prohibition zone ever been done to determine how many tanks are “faulty”? No, Never. I called Al’s Septics: Have you gotten calls from 5,000 people complaining about “faulty” tanks? Laughter.


Three-year-old “plans,” Five thousand” faulty tanks?” That’s how unchecked, arrant nonsense can turn into “fact,” how perception becomes “reality.” And when the arrant nonsense is coming from a regulatory Regional Board that then uses this false information to damage a whole community, it’s easy to see the role our county’s newspaper of record plays in this game, not as a watchdog or factual corrective, but as a megaphone and nonsense magnifier.


Perception IS reality. The Sewer Wars, like all wars, are no joke and require serious, accurate reporting. When that goes missing, the community is badly served, indeed. And you wonder why the outside world has a totally false picture of Los Osos?


With The Onion, you know in advance it’s a joke. If the Tribune is now trying to out-Onion The Onion, then in addition to Caveat lector, when reading the Tribune Los Ososians need to add two more words: Bwa-hahahah.

16 comments:

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Maybe you didn't read very carefully. Ripley has indicated that if we're going with STEP we'll need septic tanks that are capable of pressurization. Typically older tanks are not. Ripley estimates the vast majority of tanks would need to be replaced. Does it matter if it is 70% of us that have to pay thousands of dollars to replace a tank or 95% of us? It is still a cost that should be include in our cost estimates.

There is also a cost associated with a gravity system ... the cost of decommissioning a tank. This cost is considerably lower than the cost of buying and installing a new tank.

While the Trib suggested as fact things that are not evidently so, their suggestions are probably pretty close. To wit ... if we're going STEP, our paid engineer says we've got to replace the bulk of our tanks.

Anonymous said...

Well Ann, that's becasue the Tribune is obviously "against" the Los Osos CSD. As is the county of San Luis Obispo. And of course the Regional Water Quality Board has it in for Los Osos as well. As does the entire state of California, and most likely the EPA and the entire Federal government. And now that a judge said something that hurt Lisa's feelings, quite obviously the entire judicial system is out to get 'em. Man. It must be tough to be right while everyone is plotting against you...the media, the courts, all the legislative bodies, the ENTIRE world!!!!!!!!! Just don't know how they do it.....

Anonymous said...

Anon said, "It must be tough to be right while everyone is plotting against you...the media, the courts, all the legislative bodies, the ENTIRE world!!!!!!!!! Just don't know how they do it....."

Indeed - just ask Galileo!

Churadogs said...

Inlet said,"While the Trib suggested as fact things that are not evidently so, their suggestions are probably pretty close."

The POINT of the column was to remind people that we had huge HEADLINES which [should be ] reserved for NEWs (you know, announcing NEW stuff, things happening NOW or soon to be happening?) presented to a community just waiting with bated breath for "The Plan(s) upon which they think they'll be voting, and that Headline NEWs turned out to be information from a three-=year-old report that was NOT IDENTIFIED AS SUCH, not even in the "correction" section. This is typical of the sort of misinformation that gets such purchase here in the Sewer Wars. It's like the old parlor game of "telephone," didja hear? didja hear? we'll have to replace all our tanks, ooooo noooooo!

WHEN Ripley finishes his update and the various committees vet it all and the Board vets it all and it goes to the public for comment and IF (please note here I said IF) the "recommended system" turns out to be Step/Steg THEN folks will have to read the fine print regarding "replacing" anything since at the CSD meeting wherein some of the work was discussed, Ripley mentioned IN PASSING, using public rights of way for tanks as a possibility for difficult to replace ones and for ease of servicing & etc. It was only in passing but was intriguing and far different from the Replace Every Tank notion. So IF, IF, IF, Step/steg is still on the table, it still remains possible that there will be variants possible. And so when the report is finsihed and presented, then the Trib can have headlines saying, "PLAN(S) PRESENTED TO PUBLIC, with some subheads quickly identifying whatever options are there & etc. Those headlines will be NEWs. and we can only hope that they'll also be accurate.

Anonymous said...

More theater! Ann, should write a sequel to the Wizard of Oz. Really, you are wasting your time being a "news" columnist when you can write fantasy so well! That way, you never have to defend with facts!

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Considering the board has told us they want STEP and considering Ripley has offered a similar project to another comparable community and considering it was part of his discussions with Al just three years ago ... it is a very reasonable conclusion to have reached.

If you have evidence that it was just speculation ... if you have documents that show the CSD wants gravity or that Ripley has just lying to Al you have a good argment. Otherwise you are just quibbling with the Trib over their wording choice.

If you want to pick a fight with the Trib over their LOCSD coverage you should perhaps discuss their headline back last fall which said they SRF money would be flowing back once the contracters started up work again and that Dan had an agreement with them to do so within a week or so. This was all based on a Dan B. press release and none of it happened. In fact, folks on the SWRCB staff denied ever telling Dan this and no reporter from the Trib even called them to verify Dan's press release before they ran the story.

If you're going to complain about the Trib coverage, at least complain every time they do something wrong, not just when it damages your side.

Anonymous said...

Lisa Schicker......Julie Tacker....Dan Bleskey and..................Galileo!!!!! Wow

Churadogs said...

Inlet Said: "If you have evidence that it was just speculation ... if you have documents that show the CSD wants gravity or that Ripley has just lying to Al you have a good argment. Otherwise you are just quibbling with the Trib over their wording choice."

Please go to the CSD office and ask for the Ripley Proposal for project update report. It's in a three-ring binder along with the other two firms proposal. look at the date at the bottom of the three-year old "report."

Anonymous said...

Ann,

are you kidding me? a headline of 'PLANS SUBMITTED TO PUBLIC'

the object of newspapers is to SELL newspapers, not put people to sleep.

boy, now I know when I see a headline of 'PLANS SUBMITTED TO PUBLIC' I do cartwheels, but to most people, a little more attention grabbing works. Sorry Ann, the Trib ain't the Wall Street Journal.

Newspapers zip up headlines, ya know, that's how muck-raking journalists helped causes, not that they were always factual. Ya know, like the Trib, Bay News, CSD President Editorials.

Here's a couple of headlines: "BAY NEWS REPORTER SETS RECORD FOR CONSECUTIVE (almost) COLUMNS ON THE SAME SUBJECT" in the social/human interest section

"WATERBOARD SENDS OUT VERDICTS, HEARING CANCELLED AS COST-REDUCTION MEASURE" in real estate news

"BLOGGERS COMMITTED TO ASH, INMATES REVOLT" in the sports section

Shark Inlet said...

So what you are saying is that no, the CSD hasn't stated they prefer gravity and no, Ripley did tell Al and did include a STEP plan as part of the proposal.

Hardly sloppy reporting by the reporter. However, the headline title seems to have given some quibble-fodder to the commentator.

Again, do you have any reason to believe that the substance of the article ... that Ripley and the LOCSD are likely going to aim for STEP which Ripley has already concluded would require replacing all septics ... is wrong?

If not, your quibbling is just a distraction from the real issue, that STEP may cost our community considerably more than gravity due to the new septic requirement.

Churadogs said...

Inlet said: "Again, do you have any reason to believe that the substance of the article ... that Ripley and the LOCSD are likely going to aim for STEP which Ripley has already concluded would require replacing all septics ... is wrong?"

The thrust of the article was wrong, the skew of the article was wrong, the point of the article was wrong, the spin of the article was wrong and the date on the report was ommitted so the context of all of it was wrong. Ripley's job at this point is a compare and contrast and to come up with several systems and sites that can be selected by the community. He's to look at capital costs, sunk costs (the $ the old board pounded into the ground)O,M & R costs and focus heavily on water and water recharge and reuse since long term water use is the real $$$$$$ problem here.

"If not, your quibbling is just a distraction from the real issue, that STEP may cost our community considerably more than gravity due to the new septic requirement."

According to Rob Miller, the CSD's engineer, the requirement for grinders, and tank replacements are requirements ONLY IF we use SRF loan money. They are not required by engineering or county regs or anything else. I mentioned in another comment that at a CSD meeting Ripley talked briefly about locating tanks and communal tanks in rights of way with hook-up pipes from the homes (sort of like Bayridge Estates) (you'd shut down and back fill your tank the same as you'd have to do with the Tri W system) & etc. While folks were being scared to death by the headlines of having to replace their tanks, what's still NOT known is a price comparison between some closed system and Tri W. For example, IF O,M & R costs for step steg were considerably lower, (pipe and laying pipe waaayyyy cheaper, treatment plant cheaper since a lot of treatment takes place in the tank, not at the plant, & etc) then the cost of replacing a tank, when added into your long-term sewer bill may still be cheaper than Tri W's overall costs would have been. Right now, I don't know what Ripley's report will show.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

With Measure B gone, why do you think the community will have any say in what plant gets put where? In the interest of "saving the community from fines" speed is of the essence, and I'll bet the CSD will just do what it wants, where it wants. (Maybe they will do a poll over the phone?)

Long term water use is not the real $$$$ problem in most homeowners' minds. Immediate out of pocket cost is.

Also, as this is an already built community, communal tanks in rights-of-way means "in the street." Imagine the sight, sound, smell, and inconvenience of septic pumping in the roadway.

Imagine the financing available if there can be no SRF loan. Think of those Visa card rates offered to the newly bankrupted. That might drive the cost of the project up a tad, no matter how cheap it looks on paper.

Anonymous said...

sewertoons said:

"Long term water use is not the real $$$$ problem in most homeowners' minds. Immediate out of pocket cost is."

Sewertoons, I hope to God you keep posting in here. I said it throughout the recall election.......
Do you know who worked harder than anybody for the recall movement? Do you know what the best thing was the recall movement had going for it? The best thing we had working for us was the previous RECALLED board and every idiotic decision that they made. Eliminating the public from the process by shutting down committees, going to the State to ask for 40 million additional $$$ BEFORE putting the project out to bid. Having one bidder come in at 40 million over the cost estimate(HHHHHHHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM), and starting the project 20 days before the election.........

PLEASE SEWERTOONS, continue to make idiotic statements like "Long term water use is not the real $$$$ problem in most homeowners' minds. Immediate out of pocket cost is."

What in the FUCK are you going to do when there is no water to pay for?

I guess in your mind that as long as we don't run out before you DIE, then who really gives a shit, right?

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Gee anon., I guess I really hit a nerve here.

But what I said was, had you read carefully, that it is the immediate out of pocket costs being the real money problem in mind to the homeowners. NOT that long term water use isn't important to them. But if they have to move out of Los Osos because they can't afford to replace their septic tank or pay the monthly costs for the sewer, why would they care about the long term water use? THEY WON'T BE HERE!

I'd say the best thing going for the Dissolutionists case is the present board (who unfortunately are lessening our chances of living here). Every day another $10,000 in fines is accrued, more money spent on Bleskey and legal fees, and more incompetance is brought forth in the media. How anon., do you possibly DEFEND the actions of this current bunch of money wasters? How, with no money and no credit, will they build ANYTHING here to save one drop of water for the future?

No board is the BEST board for poor, warring Los Osos.

Anonymous said...

well, let's see........
our current CSD is working towards developing a sewer treatment facility that the community supports. Not, the energy guzzling sludge factory in the middle of town next to a library that we voted against. And, the dissolutionist want to dissolve the CSD. HHHHHMMMMMM Who's anti-sewer? Sorry, those grapes are sour, aren't they. Sucks to be you:)

Shark Inlet said...

Ann writes:
According to Rob Miller, the CSD's engineer, the requirement for grinders, and tank replacements are requirements ONLY IF we use SRF loan money. They are not required by engineering or county regs or anything else. I mentioned in another comment that at a CSD meeting Ripley talked briefly about locating tanks and communal tanks in rights of way with hook-up pipes from the homes (sort of like Bayridge Estates) (you'd shut down and back fill your tank the same as you'd have to do with the Tri W system) & etc. While folks were being scared to death by the headlines of having to replace their tanks, what's still NOT known is a price comparison between some closed system and Tri W. For example, IF O,M & R costs for step steg were considerably lower, (pipe and laying pipe waaayyyy cheaper, treatment plant cheaper since a lot of treatment takes place in the tank, not at the plant, & etc) then the cost of replacing a tank, when added into your long-term sewer bill may still be cheaper than Tri W's overall costs would have been. Right now, I don't know what Ripley's report will show.


Well, let's talk about that a bit. If you borrow $100M for 20 years at 2.3% interest versus 6.5% interest, the difference in monthly payment goes from $104 to $149 ... an extra $45 per month (or, if you like relative terms, a 43% increase in P&I payments). Sounds cheaper to not have to include the replacement septics, but the change in interest rate is a killer.

I do like the idea of the community pressurized tanks because it would shift the cost most clearly onto the CSD where it belongs and not on me as an individual.

If such a STEP system were to pass muster and we qualify for a SRF and if we could get it done quickly enough and if it really were "waaayyyy cheaper" and if O&M were lower then it might be a good option compared to the TriW plan. But admittedly, that's a lot of "if"s and you've offered no numbers about changes in O&M costs (lisa told us that STEP wasn't necessarily less expensive than gravity ... what reason do you have for doubting her?) and the piping costs being less expensive and the rest. Perhaps we'll just have to wait until Ripley finishes their review and hope that the CSD board asks Ripley to compare directly to TriW so we can get a fair comparrison.

Just one technical note ... wouldn't we need a gravity-like system to convey sewage to the communal tanks? Wouldn't that requre a lot of the trenching that you say is the cost killer?