Pages

Friday, April 07, 2006

Toot, Toot, Chuga-Chuga. Elvis has left the building.

At the April 6th Los Osos CSD meeting, the Board voted to give a contract to Ripley Pacific Company to prepare the Wastewater Project Update report. The contract amount is a not-to-exceed $513,400 and will take approximately 17 weeks to complete. According to the Agenda, “The fee is allocated by task, which allows the Board to assess the relative cost of key activities and prioritizes funding accordingly. . . . site selection activities will be completed within 5 weeks of the Notice to proceed . . . environmental review [will begin] early in the process. . . . [review of on-site technologies] will be performed by Ensitu Engineering as part of a District-wide Septic System management Program.”

In addition, the report will focus on “an integrated approach to effluent disposal and treatment with the goal of maximizing the sustainability of the community’s water supply. The goal of achieving 100 percent reuse of the effluent will be pursued to the maximum extent practicable and economically feasible." . . .”an analysis and comparison of the configuration, feasibility, and cost of various types, systems and methods of wastewater collection including . . . Gravity collection and pumping . . . utilizing the 100% design drawings and cost estimates prepared by MWH [the Tri W project] . . . Septic Tank Effluent Pump (STEP) and Septic Tank Effluent Gravity (STEG) collections systems . . . “

Further, “The life cycle cost analysis will include capital, operation, maintenance and replacement costs through the life expectancy of the system . . . Project costs shall address items that were previously deferred [in the Tri W plan] including sludge management processes. “

In addition, “The Ripley team will work closely with the district’s claims experts and financial consultants to prepare a comprehensive project cost analysis that includes the budget for the selected project, sunk project costs, budgets for claim resolution, land purchases or sales, and a budget for potential litigation.” And, interestingly, “The cost estimates prepared in Task 9 will be subjected to independent review by a construction firm with the relevant background and experience, under a contract direct with the CSD or alternatively by subcontract to Ripley Pacific.”

And, in Task 11, an interesting addition: the Phased approach, to see if there would be a benefit in constructing any wastewater project in stages, i.e. identifying the most seriously impacted areas and getting them on line first, followed by less critical areas.

Furthermore, there were some Board comments that I found most interesting: If the Tri W project were brought before the State Water Board and the Regional Water Quality control Board today, it wouldn’t meet the new requirements regarding sustainability and water reuse. Irony? Indeed. Since the new rules are now in place, whatever results from the project update and new project will meet those new standards. More irony.

The whole agenda item will hopefully be posted on the CSD’s website so anyone can read it in full. There was discussion about funding, and it sounded like the CSD will be rattling the various CSD’s coin jars (various applicable accounts) to get some from this fund, some from that and look into borrowing the rest, part of which would be put into an escrow account, so should something ”untoward happen,” Ripley Pacific would be paid for work done to that point.

So, there it is. Toot, toot, chugga-chugga, the Project Update train has left the station. What the “boxcars” will look like when it pulls into view again remains to be seen. Glimpses of the shape of things will be presented to the public as the various “tasks” are completed. Whatever is finalized will meet all the new state requirements and standards, including, if a SRF loan is in the mix, the requirement for a Prop 218-type assessment vote. Plus, happily, the project’s price tag won’t play hide-the-salami with “deferred” costs, as the Tri W project did, so the $64,000 Question I’m sure the whole community is just waiting to get a gander at will be the long-term, no-deferred costs, all-inclusive, O,M & R, final, bottom-line, out of pocket price tag.

So, stay tuned.

24 comments:

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Suppose that the CSD funds from the TriW SRF are frozen. How much money does the CSD have in these other accounts ... and how could they justify transfering it into the wastewater account? If the CSD claimed during the ACL hearing that fire money could not be used to pay fines, how could fire money be used to pay for Ripley?

I suspect the answer is that it can't be legally done. I further suspect that the CSD has no money in the Wastewater account that isn't directly attributable to the TriW SRF loan. The other funds in that account were pretty much gone by September 2005.

So, how can the CSD borrow money to pay Ripley should the rattling of coin jars not get more than $57.23? They would need to put some collateral on the line. Real property worth half a million? It is either that or a 218 vote?

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Borrowing was mentioned to fund the Ripley project also. Who would lend the CSD any money and at what interest rate and if they are dissolved, who gets to pick up the pieces? I can guess on all of the above and don't like my answers.

Mike Green said...

Anne, The train analogy tends to make me a little worried, have you ridden Amtrack lately?
Also Sharkey, Your Half a million comment about real property flashed the image in my mind of Mike Myers as the Dr. Evil "We Demand A MILLION dollars"
snicker guffaw.
Uh, you are aware of what property is worth around here, dont you?
Now that's a scary thought.
Sewertoons, going rates aprx 6.12%
(I'm doing a refinance now)

Anonymous said...

good point sewertoons. at this point, dissolution would be a really BAD IDEA. thanks for making this excellent point. way to go.

Anonymous said...

mike, i have ridden Amtrack lately. the fair was surprisingly reasonible, cheaper than gas for a single person. And now, they have an early morning train "The Surfliner" that goes from SLO to SD w/o having to change in LA. i took the trian to OC last month and i may never drive again. sure, it takes longer, but have you tried driving thru LA traffic lately? i just got really tired of trying to sleep and drink beer while i was weaving in and out of LA triffic. these activities are much more relaxing on the train. if your budget is not too tight, i would recommend the $16 upgrade to business coach. bigger seats more room. on the train, you also get to see parts of the coast that you never see from 101. like one spot where you ride right along the coast between the beach and the launch pads at vandenberg. it was a great and refreshingly new experience. I know I'll do it again......
i also like ripley's refreshing approach and "Big Picture" Vision of a project that minimizes the use of energy and natural resourses.
i like what he said about making sustainability a priority and developing a project with a minimum 100 year lifespan that will not only benefit us but our children and the generations to come.
This is who our CSD is workiong for, our children and the generations to come.
They are NOT looking to RAMROD a project into the middle of our town as fast as they can, so I CAN BUILD MY HOUSE ON MY LOT TOMORROW.
i liked what ripley said about how Google is going to wi-fi SF for FREE and seeing if we could get Google or a similar Co. to sponsor an experimental WI-FI project in LO for meter reading and data collection. i liked what Ripley and Bleskey said about financing such a project and how it might be better if we DON'T use SRF money because using SRF money makes you the State's bitch. i liked what Ripley said about building tomorrow's project today. It's this type of "outside of the box" thinking that we need. we don't need 19th century gravity systems and energy guzzling slugde factories....
after what this community has been thru, we should have and deserve better......
one of my friends says that one of the most healthy things you can do is to try something new everyday.
the dissolution movement is now engaged in a campaign of fear that is based on lies and misinformation. their hope is that if enough people hear their sick and twisted message of lies, they will believe these lies to be the truth without actually taking the time to see what's REALLY GOING ON.
Don't just believe something because someone says it's so. get out of your car. take the train. you might enjoy the ride.......

Churadogs said...

Inlet said," Suppose that the CSD funds from the TriW SRF are frozen. How much money does the CSD have in these other accounts ... and how could they justify transfering it into the wastewater account? If the CSD claimed during the ACL hearing that fire money could not be used to pay fines, how could fire money be used to pay for Ripley?"

I suggest you either watch he tape of Thuursday's CSD meeting, or, just a suggestion here, instead of spending time reading and typing on this blogsite about something that took place in a public meeting, you actually take some time to actually attend the public meeting so you can hear from various horses' mouths what was actually said or done or voted on or hear the questions raised or, and this is just another suggestion here, actually ask some questions yourself and get the answers, again from the horses' mouths. Just a suggestion.

Anonymous said:"And now, they have an early morning train "The Surfliner" that goes from SLO to SD w/o having to change in LA. i took the trian to OC last month and i may never drive again. sure, it takes longer, but have you tried driving thru LA traffic lately? "

Holey Moley! Amtrack goes from SLOTown to S.D. without having to transfer in L.A.? Woa! too cool.

Anonymous said...

I support Ann's suggestion for those with questions to go to the meetings and ask or at least watch them on tape/cable. The last meeting was wonderful...very few political attacks and lots of straightforward technical informative Q & A, including how the district could pay Ripley. Check it out instead of making everyone else, that includes Ann, repeat everything. It's a waste of time...we have a project to build!

Anonymous said...

I support Ann's suggestion for those with questions to go to the meetings and ask or at least watch them on tape/cable. The last meeting was wonderful...very few political attacks and lots of straightforward technical informative Q & A, including how the district could pay Ripley. Check it out instead of making everyone else, that includes Ann, repeat everything. It's a waste of time...we have a project to build!

Anonymous said...

An anoymous said,

“Don't just believe something because someone says it's so.”

Does this include what Mr. Ripley and Mr. Blesky say?

I noticed that the specific questions by several citizens that directly asked about needing to replace septic tanks (yes or no) and what their costs would be were never answered. Would we settle for this answer from the old board?

I never heard verifiable facts. I did hear a lot of “vision statements”. I felt like I was listening to a marketing presentation or a college pep rally!

For example. I read through Mr Ripley’s proposal and noticed that he claimed that Monarch Grove is a STEP/STEG collection system that could support the entire community.

In fact, it is a gravity collection system and can barely support something like 86 homes. How many other “pitches” are“enhanced”?

Call me a skeptic, but until I can review verifiable facts (specifically costs, both ongoing and long term and hidden, e.g. escalating energy costs to operate an “efficient” turbo grinder pump) I will have my doubts.

If it sounds too good to be true…you know the rest!

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Anonymous said...
good point sewertoons. at this point, dissolution would be a really BAD IDEA. thanks for making this excellent point. way to go.

Actually Anon, dissolve or not dissolve, (and this is up to LAFCO), WE get to pick the pieces. The point I made poorly was that it would just be one more mess that we would have to clean up from this board - paying money on a waste-of-time project that won't fly with the water boards.

Mike, you said:
"Sewertoons, going rates aprx 6.12%
(I'm doing a refinance now)"

I'll bet your credit rating is much higher than the CSD's.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann writes: "Plus, happily, the project’s price tag won’t play hide-the-salami with 'deferred' costs, as the Tri W project did, so the $64,000 Question I’m sure the whole community is just waiting to get a gander at will be the long-term, no-deferred costs, all-inclusive, O,M & R, final, bottom-line, out of pocket price tag."

I do not think that means what you think it means. Perhaps Ann has some similarities with Howard Dean.

Churadogs said...

Anonymous, whichever one that is, said, "Call me a skeptic, but until I can review verifiable facts (specifically costs, both ongoing and long term and hidden, e.g. escalating energy costs to operate an “efficient” turbo grinder pump) I will have my doubts."

According to the proposal, all the figures are to be checked by an independent source as well as being open for public scrutiny.(I hope you'll be at the wastewater committee meetings when sections of the report start coming in?) The deferred costs for Tri W weren't part of the $205 price, so having them up front, especially energy costs to run whatever system is chosen, and sludge disposal costs, will be nice. Most important from my point of view, is to find out what he's going to propose about WATER, since that's the critical issue. Well, we'll see. The Devil is always in the details.

I hope folks will start attending meetings when those update report "Tasks" are done and presented so you can all ask questions directly then and get answers. (At Thursday's meeting, Mr. Beardon (sp?) asked a whole bunch of really good questions after the agenda item on the update, then literally turned on his heels and walked out the door. It was embarassing silly "theatre," and did not serve him well. Too bad. Especially since, if I heard right, in addressing the question of replacing inaccessible tanks in back yards, Ripley spoke briefly of his interest in collection tanks in public rights of way with pipes from multiple homes, which sounds like something that would work for people with inaccessble tanks (in the back yard,) -- I presume you'd unhook your old tank and backfill it in place (as was planned for all tanks with Tri W plan) then hook up to a communal tank in a public right of way (easy access for service) that would serve several homes, the effluent would be then hooked into the main system & etc. He didn't go into further detail, but that was intriguing. Maybe if Mr. Beardon had stayed to hear that, it might have answered some of his concerns and been something he could have persued further. Also, Ripley did answer Mr. Beardon's question about tanks in high-ground-water (after Mr. Beardon had left the building, I believe.)

So, once again, we have a process in place that can result in questions and answers or we can just end up with the old "Royal Theatre of Rhetoric, Posturing, Huffing & Puffing." The choice is up to the citizens.

Anonymous said...

Anon asked about the Monarch Grove site being gravity versus pressurized but Ann's response was focused on redicule of Don Beardon instead. Is Riple to be believed?

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Also, is Ripley to be believed when he said in that same meeting that RECHARGE has the highest risk, too many negatives, that the preferred option was direct re-use.

Would anyone out there care to illuminate us on just what he meant by that? And how that addresses the saltwater intrusion issue?

Thanks.

Shark Inlet said...

I really dunno for sure, but if I were to have said that, I would have meant that keeping our aquifer healthy is of the highest priority and that if, rather than pump the disposal water directly into the ground at Broderson, we were to use it for irrigation it would both lower our need to pump from the aquifer (imagine if all landscaping were done with treated wastewater) and hopefully saltwater intrusion would be limited.

I like the idea other than it might take the running of even more pipe to homes in the community which creates an expense.

Anonymous said...

Ann complaining about theater??

Where was she when people were speaking 7 times on the same subject a year ago, stalling meetings??

The key response was Ripley, and multiple collection points. That means more land aquisition in town, maybe up to 50 or so properties for all these 'collection points'. The devil is always in the details.

It's one thing to have the luxury of designing these systems into a new development, where the easement issues and rights can be put into a homeowners restrictions up front and into the land-use planning.

It's another thing to retrofit it. Just like retrofitting a gravity collection into this town is exorborant, so will retrofitting STEP into the town be more costly than a pre-planned STEP system.

Ann complains about theater, ironic for someone that acts it out. Ann complains about the Tribune's context, ironic for someone that so often ignores context.

Anonymous said...

/anon 11:45 said........

“Don't just believe something because someone says it's so.”

Does this include what Mr. Ripley and Mr. Blesky say?
I noticed that the specific questions by several citizens that directly asked about needing to replace septic tanks (yes or no) and what their costs would be were never answered."

There was one item on the agenda at Thursday night's CSD meeting: Award Contract for the Preparation of a Wastewater Project Report.

Ripley has been on the job for, let me see, ONE DAY. I'm sure after he sits down and plugs in his calculator and sharpens his pencil and goes to work for a few weeks, he may have some more specific answers for you. I mean this is why we hired the guy, right?
The former recalled csd board promised us ALL cheaper, better, faster and after 8 years presented this community an energy guzzling sludge factory next to the library for $205/month. NOT better, NOT cheaper, NOT faster. You think we could give Ripley and his team 3-4 months to design a wastewater project report before we start ripping on him? I'm sure his report will include estimations on costs of replacing septics if required and land acquisition and how we can go about financing all this. Is it asking too much to let Ripley actually do something first? Is it asking too much to take an honest look at his final Wastewater Project Report before you start bashing on him? How can you criticize the guy when he hasn't even presented you with something to criticize?
I'm so glad that you're moving into this process with an open mind and unbiased opinion.
I'm so glad that when you look at Ripleys report, it will be without prejudice.

sewertoons said.....

"Also, is Ripley to be believed when he said in that same meeting that RECHARGE has the highest risk, too many negatives, that the preferred option was direct re-use.
Would anyone out there care to illuminate us on just what he meant by that? And how that addresses the saltwater intrusion issue?"

All you guys are asking good questions. But, to reiterate one of Ann's points, WHY ARE YOU ASKING THEM IN A BLOG?
Why aren't you asking them at a Wastewater Committee meeting or a CSD meeting? Maybe you sewer obstructionists like Don Bearden are just afraid that there ARE reasonable answers to your questions. I'm so glad that Don Bearden was SO concerned with the questions that he brought to the podium that INSTEAD OF GETTING THE ANSWER TO HIS QUESTION HE LEFT THE BUILDING! What in the fuck is that all about?...........

I'm writing a play about our sewer saga. Here's an embellished scene from last Thursday night's CSD meeting.......

Don Bearden asks a few questions in a futile attempt to embarrass the CSD hoping they will have no answer.
Terrified that he may get reasonable answers to his questions, he exits stage left as fast as he can to avoid his own embarrassment as his questions get reasonably answered.....

....a concerned citizen with rainbow socks who has been labeled "a red diaper, doper baby" by sewer obstructionists, follows him out the door and says....

"You want answers? You can't handle the answers. Don, we live in a world that needs sewers. And these sewers need to be designed and built NOT by people who want to exploit and take personal advantage of our situation, but by people who want projects that will serve not only us but our children and our children's children. Who's gonna do it? Taxpayers Watch? You, Stan, Richard, Gordon? This CSD has a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Pandora and you curse our CSD. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that TRI-W's death, while tragic, probably saved money. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves money...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want a sustainable wastewater project. You NEED sustainable wastewater project.
The CSD uses words like honor, code, loyalty...they use these words as the backbone of a life spent representing your community. You use 'em as a punch line. Your CSD has all the time and inclination to explain themself to anyone who rises and sleeps under the very blanket of freedom our local Government provides, then questions the manner in which they provide it! If you're going to stand at the podium and ask a question, I'd rather you wait and let them answer it before you just run away and stick your head in the sand and crawl into your spider-hole to hide and plot to overthrow your Community's local Government. The truth is MR. Bearden that you really don't care if our newly elected CSD and the Ripley team design a plan and a project that is better than TRI-W, do you? As a matter of fact, this is what you fear, isn't it? If your new CSD comes up with a better designed plan in less than a year it will make you and Stan, and Richard and Gordon and Pandora look like a bunch of idiots. The truth is Mr. Bearden, if you were so concerned with the questions you asked, you would of waited for the answers before running out the door. The truth is Mr Bearden, that your feelings on this issue are way too personal and don't reflect what's best for the community as a whole.
The truth Mr. Bearden?
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!

Anonymous said...

Oh my God, you mean someone asked a question and then left.!

You mean someone asked a question, knowing full well the potential answers.!

You mean someone asked a question for theatrical effect!!

Hey Anon, where you been for the last two years? Two years of rhetorical and political questions, simply to stage a CSD 'business meeting' into a political rally.

And someone that cares enough to show up at a meeting, and has probably more common sense than you, Ann, and half the CSD board combined, you need to rag on him?

Even IF Ripley can design a cheaper plan in 2001 dollars (God help him, because I'm sure Beardon and everyone elso hopes he can), doesn't mean the TOTAL cost in 2014 dollars will be any cheaper, because of decisions made to stop a project.

Anonymous said...

How about the decision to stop the County's project in 1998 when the Solutions Group/Taxpayers Watch lied to this Community and sold all of us cheaper, better, faster. And, after 8 years, they give us an energy guzzling sludge factory next to the library for $205/month. Not better, Not cheaper, Not faster. No wonder so many people have been pissed off the last two years. No wonder the solutions group CSD board was RECALLED. Now, because they lost an election, these poor-sport losers are trying to trash our whole local Government? I guess it's not enough that they fucked us over on a sewer project 8 years ago, now they want to fuck us over on all the other public services we enjoy. They want us all to pay 15% more for Fire Service, Water Service, and Garbage Service too. All because they lost an election. These people are sick and twisted motherfuckers and I will never support or believe anything they say or do again. Sorry.

Anonymous said...

Last Anon,

Why don't you tell us how you really feel?

Your expressed emotions are very vugarly stated in a public forum, but I feel the same way with the same strong feeling, but

TOWARD THE CURRENT BOARD AND THEIR MISPERCEPTIONS OF REALITY!

Anonymous said...

Oh my God, the "Few Good Men" parody is a riot.
Very Funny!!!!!

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Anon, sometimes I ask question in a blog because I will get a wider variety of answers than I would at a CSD meeting, where all I will get is spin. Also, you may have noticed Mr. Ripleys INABILITY to ANSWER questions, or even stay on track with the questions, as shown by Lisa's ever prodding of him at the last meeting. Bleskey can't answer anything directly even if he has an answer. If the CSD-5 are NOT reading the blogs, they should.

No matter what they come up with for a preferred site, they will have no money to finance it at any affordable rate, if indeed they can get ANY rate.

You make a huge and false assumption that only old board members and "Dreamers" are behind the recall. I and many others in the recall movement are neither. We just BECAME recallers upon seeing what the FAb-5 have done to our options of getting ANYTHING built before we are fined into having to MOVE OUT of our presently devalued homes.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

She is a good writer, I will give her that. It's just that her facts are not factual.

Churadogs said...

I'm "swweet?" Gosh, thanks. And here's a puzzle. Sometime ago, somebody calling themselves "spectator" said he was outta here, wouldn't comment further, was finished with all of us, buh-bye, etc. Now, he's baaaacccckkkk? Or is it just somebody pretending to be Spectator? We've got so many wannabest and who-the-heck-is that? it's hard to keep track.But, so far as I know, I'm the only one with funny socks. (Wait until you get a gander at my new shoes . . . .)