Pages

Tuesday, June 20, 2006

Stop or I’ll Pull The Pin!

Fatal embrace or the start of a beautiful friendship?

I’m sure that’s the question the Board of Supervisors and the Sewerville Denizens of Dogpatch were asking themselves yesterday when the BoS voted 5-0 to: 1) Support legislation that allows the County, at its discretion and upon confirmation of conditions [outlined in the supplemental report] to assume responsibility for the design, construction and temporary operation of a community wastewater treatment system in Los Osos and 2) Approve the key elements of a legislative solution [the Blakesleee Breakthough Proposal or BBP] outlined in [that report] as required conditions for the County’s agreement to assume responsibility for this project; and 3) Approve the Los Osos Wastewater Treatment Project strategy and objectives included in [that report] in order to minimize County taxpayer’s risk and provide the highest probability for success on this project.”

The problem with the vote was to be found in some of the details of the attached report which outlined a series of steps the county would take IF the legislative Blakeslee Breakthrough Proposal actually happens and all the other parties come to the dance. Since some of the report seemed to have been written for the upcoming LAFCO dissolution hearings consideration and since County staff hadn’t gotten the various latest tech memos concerning the Project Update Report, some of the troubling details were most likely out of date. One solution to resolve any of those troubling details was for the CSD’s engineers and/or technical advisors and/or consultants to immediately get county staff up to speed and into the loop.

While there was some angry foot stomping after the meeting adjourned as well as understandable mutterings of distrust and cries of betrayal, one critical question was raised that requires serious thought on behalf of everyone on either side of the Sewer Wars and here it is:

IF the County has set up the same process as the CSD is already using to evaluate alternative systems and sites, a process which includes input from the community, utilizes a technical advisory committee, conducts a community advisory election on the top site alternatives [again with best guestimates as to costs], co-equal analysis under CEQA for top site alternatives, includes a supplemental Environmental Impact Report, considers input from the CSD on water management objectives, [THE critical issue], then includes a Prop 218 assessment vote by homeowners on whatever system emerges as the top candidate (again, with a best guestimate as to full cost), in short all of the things the CSD’s process is set up to do, then does it matter who’s in charge since the process will be the same and the citizens will be ultimately voting on what they want to buy and where they want to put it, which is what the Recall and Measure B vote was all about in the first place?

THAT is the question that needs to be answered. Since elected boards consist of human beings, one human answer on the part of the CSD must involve the human ego: After so much painful labor, nobody wants to see their “baby” taken away by a Wicked Stepmother. But, suppose Mommy is facing death by deliberate murder? Is there also not another strong human wish to make sure that Mommy’s last will and testament concerning her “baby” is written by her before the kid is taken away and she is pushed off a cliff?

And on the part of an all too human Board of Supervisors, with their own long, dismal record on all things sewerish, they are faced with a Hobson’s choice of their own: Get the baby and leave the bathwater OR do nothing AND STILL get the baby AND the bathwater AND the dirty diapers AND all the furious relatives AND their lawsuit-waving lawyers including RWQCB’s Roger Briggs screaming FINES!FINES!FINES!

So it comes down to the possibility now of a truce between two antagonists – one is armed with a machine gun, the other has strapped bombs on his chest and is holding the pin. The county is demanding power and authority over this project (who buys the ticket, picks the show) while knowing full well that the bearish folk of Los Osos have proven themselves fully capable (twice now) of getting to the box office, taking a gander at the choice of movie, then pulling the pin.

Talk about a dangerous date.

On the plus side, the county has a real incentive to – this time – get it right. The Regional Water Quality Control Board has a real incentive to – this time – get it right. The CSD has a real incentive to – this time – keep it right. And the Denizens of Dogpatch have a real incentive to – this time – get it right.

So, again, the question: If the process set up by the County is the same as that set up by the CSD, and that same process includes an advisory and assessment vote by the citizens who are going to be buying whatever is presented, then what’s the problem?

Distrust? That’s a two way street. So, maybe it’s time to take a page from Ronald Reagan’s SALT playbook: Trust . . . but verify. The county may have the gun, but the Los Osos Bears have the suicide bombs. Not a pretty picture, but one that may have a pretty ending.

The old recalled CSD Board, for human reasons, acted in such a way so as to ensure that the citizens of this fair burg would be financially punished for daring to disagree with them. That board majority failed, for human reasons, to put the good of the community ahead of their own desires. The result was a financial Gotterdamerung.

I hope that this time, the newly elected CSD Board, for human reasons, will make different choices . . . for the sake of the community.

So, step one of the Blakeslee Breakthrough Proposal is underway. It’s a fragile thing, one that can be destroyed by any of the stakeholders. As with all things Sewerish, stay tuned.

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm just a tad confused by the proceedings yesterday. It seems the train is leaving the station on Blakeslee's framework, but it's quite clear to me the CSD just won't agree to losing "authority" of the project. Kinda like they're waving their arms on the tracks to stop the train. Quite a quandry for them. So what do they do? Do they stop the train? Can they at this point? I just will never believe they will agree to let the county have sole authority over the project. And it seems clear to me, thankfully, the BoS will not simply bail them out financially, which is what David Dugan admitted was the only goal of their "resolution." (at least in his opinion). So what does the CSD do now? Ego vs. "the good of the community." Very interesting.

Anonymous said...

I would like to give you a name other than Annon, like so many others, but it is not prudent to do so at this time.
I have been reading your blog and all the others pretaining to the LoSo thing.
I am really sick and tired of people referring to the CSD as having a big ego problem...among many others choice words. I feel they are mistaking "ego" for "wanting to do the right thing", with no resources to do it with (thanks to the previous CSD)

I think you provide a great source of information and insight to your community....making people think a little about what really has gone on and what is going on. It is discussed with more adult-like commentary, unlike the other "discussion" groups...."name calling groups" would be more accurate.

Anonymous said...

"Thanks to the previous CSD"
Which is why the county must retain sole authority over the project. Never in my memory have a group of people been so incapable of accpeting responsibility for their reckless actions as this CSD and their supporters. Accepting "community input" from Los Osos as nothing more than window dressing is absolutely absurd, and I have confidence the BoS knows this. Or at least I better have confidence in this or no affirmative 218 vote from me. Wow. Sam sure has his hands full with this, you think?

*PG-13 said...

I swore I was gonna give this a rest. I figured to become a lurker again. I used to be a good lurker. But then Ann posts something so delicious I can't help myself. I just gotta say thank you, Ann, I love how you write. Your blog is informative, fair and relatively civil but beyond this it is also entertaining. It is almost always a delightful read and I think this is one of your best. From tossing out babies & bathwater to dangerous dates with their finger on a bomb to SALT talks. All wonderfully visceral analogies. I almost hate to wonder what you are going to do when Los Osos finally has a sewer. Yeah, I suppose you can go back to writing about ... what? Bright sunny days, walks on the beach, laughing children and cute puppies just won't be the same. The upside that the sewer wars are still far from over is that we won't have to worry about that for a long while yet. The music may be awful but you help to make the dance fun. Thanks.

> So, again, the question: If the process set up by the County is the same as that set up by the CSD, and that same process includes an advisory and assessment vote by the citizens who are going to be buying whatever is presented, then what’s the problem?... Distrust? That’s a two way street. So, maybe it’s time to take a page from Ronald Reagan’s SALT playbook: Trust . . . but verify.

Remember, before we had SALT there were decades of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). MAD made SALT look pretty good. Through the long series of sewer events leading up to the CDO's and today's ugly checkmate we have moved into MAD territory. Perhaps this is what is needed to make compromise the preferred path. One big difference though. SALT was never put to a public vote. At least not directly. Left to vote on it the populace would have probably continued with the familiar insanity of the cold
war. Presumably this is why we have leaders. Leaders are supposed to lead - not necessarily always in the same direction - but when appropriate (or necessary) in new directions. Los Osos has been dickering for sooooo long that dickering has become the status quo. Sometimes ya just gotta take a flying leap into new, uncharted and uncertain realms in order to move forward. Uh, realistically, are there any other options?

Sewertoons said...

Ann, why would we trust this CSD? They are already in property negotiations with somone over ONE piece of property:

"The Board will meet in closed session to give direction to its negotiator, Dan Bleskey, with regard to potential acquisition of an interest in real property (APN 067-011-022), for negotiations with the owner of such property. Under discussion are price and terms of such acquisition."

Shouldn't there be OTHERS to give to Mr. Bleskey for negotiations?

How would that information support any feeling that the citizens are to be included in the decision process? Not to mention that Tri-W is up for sale, so no fair cost comparison as to siting will be done. Winning by 51 point something percent does not mean the WHOLE community is behind you!

Never mind that there are 15 or so lawsuits going and Measure B is being defended ONCE AGAIN and the funds for core services have been impinged on to pay for the lawyers and the CSD is near bankruptcy -

How can you even ask that question? This CSD does not make good choices for the sake of the community and has ruined any chances or choices for any CSD that would try to follow. The difference is that with the county in charge, this CSD will not be allowed run the show down the drain!

Mike Green said...

Lets just think for a min. about the County In Charge.
Take a walk around our dear ol town with your eyes wide open, in fact, imagine you are from somewhere else.
You might notice a few things strange, like the lack of sidewalks, streetlights, parks, paved streets, gutters, manhole covers.
The houses for the most part are all built higgely piggely any which way, big yuppie mansions next to rundown shacks.
The downtown has no theaters, walking and even bike riding are clearly not encouraged.
This is what County Control got us, remember, almost nothing has been developed because of the sewer problem.
Those who petition for complete dissolution of our local control have not, to my mind, made the argument that it would be a good thing.
Yes, you may ask the question, "Well, what has having a CSD done that is positve?"
I would reply that BECAUSE of the sewer mess left by the county the CSD past and present has had no opportunity to rectify the problems that they should rightly be working on.
Remember, this is the world's biggest per capita, costwise, wastewater problem.
It will have only one road to solution, and it aint science or spreadsheets that will get it done.
Politics and political will alone will solve this.
No one went to the moon because it was cheaper better faster
No one built a pyramid because it was cheaper better faster
No one fought a revolution,
No one fought a civil war (or any war for that matter)
You get my point?
We in Los Osos have been given a gift in the form of Sam Blakeslee.
You wanted a leader? Look!
Cry a river about the costs of a solution, but do it after we are on the road to that solution (whatever that may turn out to be)
Its getting very close to "Showtime" folks.
And I'm getting real tired of the word "sewer"
How about you?

Mike Green said...

Oh! sorry Sewertoon.
Did not mean to offend!
(Crimeny, where do you people think theses names up?)

Sewertoons said...

No offense taken Mike!! I can't say I'll be sorry when the word "sewer" is just used occasionally like once a week or so - I think we are all tired of it....

(I started out with "Looneytunes" but thought adding the "sewer-" characterized it better for the main topic of this blog!)

Mike Green said...

S.Toons.
Thanks, yes, I also messed around with monikers, "Jester" was one horrible mistake.
I yam what I yam.
You write well!

Sewertoons said...

Thank you Mike! I appreciate your posts a lot, as I much admire the thought that goes into them. You have a BRAIN!

Jester is cute! But then, maybe that just isn't the real you! I like the Popeye reference tho!

Watch out - now that I have said something nice, there is an "anon" that is going to rag about it. But maybe that poster is on vacation, it has been a little quiet around here!

Steve Paige said...

Does Sam Blakeslee and Arnold Schwarzenegger have plan to use Los Osos California as scapegoat to create State legislation to override Prop 13 and Prop 218? Are they setting up a backdoor tax on real estate that could be used State wide? In essence could the Blakeslee-Los Osos Sewer legislation confiscate property equity as a tax base to remedy State Shortfalls for any kind infrastructure improvements using Los Osos as their scapegoat?

Here are the facts:

While Sam Blakeslee and the Govenor attended a 10,000 Dollar a plate dinner in San Luis Obispo County, his staff was working on a plan to force 40 million dollars in State loan debt on a community of 5900 households for a Sewer project that the State backed out of because of Prop 218 irregularities.

Los Osos is a Community that doesn't want a sewer in the middle of town next to the library. A runaway sewer board tried to force the sewer on the Community raising the price tag from 47 million to 160 million without a prop 218 vote by 'cooking the books' with respect to the revenue stream description. End result: A three hundred dollar a month sewer bill for a community where 35% of the elementary students are on the below poverty school lunch program and the school receives Title 1 funding. A town where U.S. Census data says 32% are Seniors on a mean income of 12000 Dollars a year.

The old sewer board was voted out of office but the New board was sued out of existance by Pro-development Mega Sewer at any cost spoilers who want to reshape the economic demographics of the most sought after costal real estate in California.

The County is now taking over the project from the defunct CSD with Sam Blakeslee "working on legalization" to protect County coffers by a possible end run on Howard Jarvis Prop. 13 and 218. To quote the SLO County Staff Report:

Blakeslee's "legislative option would establish greater certainty if it could be approved by the Assembly, the Senate and the Governor. It would entail the State of California taking control of the wastewater project through an appropriate state agency, enacting a regulatory fee authority for that agency, and authorizing a solution funded through those regulatory fees.
Since the regulatory fees would be authorized for a State agency to impose (presumably only
under special circumstances) those fees would not be subject to Article XIIID of the State
Constitution that restricts local agencies from, among other actions, imposing assessments or special taxes without a vote of either property owners or registered voters."

The plan also calls for the impoverished Community to pay for any serer the County wants and to be fully responsible for the first runaway boards left over debt of 40,000,000 Dollars even before it it goes to trial on prop 218 irregularities like:

The Project Loan was suspended by the State. The CSD had acted to continue to install the infrastructure under the existing loan while re-sighting the sewer plant. But the State backed out because of the 218 vote issue.

The existing Los Osos Taxpayers Association 218 law suit assumes the State of California Approved a flawed engineers report on the Revenue Stream for TRI-W. The TRI-W report confabulated “assessments” and “user fees” to avoid community vote on sewer cost increases and tax bifurcation.

An Exhibit in their suit is a letter from June 13,2005: Jon Seitz (Attorney for the district) wrote to the SWRCB that the TRI-W Sewer project “has no ability to extract or collect rates and charges for services that are not available.”

Also as an exhibit from that case is a legal description missing from the State contract: On July 2, 2005, the Sewer contract was signed with no description of the “Agency Reimbursement Resolution”- EXHIBIT –L required by State law. It was a blank page!

After the Measure B election kicking out the runaway board, during the First Blakeslee Negotiations, the State attempted to remedy the un-voted on sewer cost increase by demanding a Prop 218 vote. Actions speak louder than words.........

Sewertoons said...

Steve said:

"Los Osos is a Community that doesn't want a sewer in the middle of town next to the library."

Correction:
"Some people in Los Osos don't want a sewer in the middle of town next to the library."

PublicWorks said...

WOW,

What a theory. Any irregularities associated with the previous loan are just that - specific to that loan.

NO legislation, even on the LO sewer, can get around prop 218.
Prop. 13 is irrelevant to the LO project.

It's all about prop. 218, and the keys are wastewater, standby charges, fees, protest periods.

The poster is wrong. The Measure B election did not kick out the old board, the recall election kicked out the old board.

The state can already take over the project, if it so chooses. It doesn't need legislation to do that. The issue is how the state gets people to hook up. That has nothing to do with 218, and everything to do with water codes.

Poster sez,

"The CSD had acted to continue to install the infrastructure under the existing loan while re-siting the sewer plant."

Yes, the CSD did just that, they acted unilaterally - duh - contracts don't allow for unilateral acts.

The state did suspend the loan. Why? The CSD reneged on a contract. Anybody with half a brain about contracts knows that re-siting is so substantial an issue as to void an agreed upon contract UNLESS BOTH parties agree (in this case FIVE parties agree, actually dependant on EIGHT parties if you throw in contingent review by RWQCB, Coastal, & County).

Poster sez,

" his staff was working on a plan to force 40 million dollars in State loan debt on a community of 5900 households for a Sewer project that the State backed out of because of Prop 218 irregularities. "

40 million is State loan debt? Please itemize. (talk about throwing numbers around). There is 6.4 million loaned, plus contractor claims up to 28 million. The most (if the state were to be held 100% culpable and contractors could actually prove 'losses' and be 0% culpable) is $34.4 million.


Poster sez,

"the State attempted to remedy the un-voted on sewer cost increase by demanding a Prop 218 vote."

duh, the state was going to loan $139 million with a minimum (and unrealistic) delay of two years of not collecting on the loan, without collateral? Go get some finance & contracts experience.

Poster sez,
"A runaway sewer board tried to force the sewer on the Community raising the price tag from 47 million to 160 million without a prop 218 vote by 'cooking the books' with respect to the revenue stream description."

Nope,wrong again, the 2001 assesment specifically had a project estimate of $85 million. The 2005 cost had was for approx. $118 million ( in addition to the $20 million assesment).

Speculative estimates of deferred costs are not relevant to a 218 issue. A 218 question is if the increased fees from a preliminary revenue plan violated 218. Another 218 question is if a preliminary revenue plan constituted an adequate/additional protest period by property owners.

Is it any wonder people in LO are so confused.

If you want to file a lawsuit against the state for an illegal 218 loan, then do it. Based on Seitz memo, there doesn't seem to be much of a case against the CSD. The CSD needed the loan to comply with a time-schedule order, although the state could always come back and say it's not responsible for funding, it's only 'helping'. Don't ya love California.

Dogpatch Refugee said...

Daffy Duck sez:
"Los Osos is a Community that doesn't want a sewer in the middle of town next to the library."

Correction:
"Some people in Los Osos don't want a sewer in the middle of town next to the library."

Correction: the citizens of Los Osos VOTED to move the sewer from the middle of town, next to a library
Thus a MAJORITY of Los Osos voters, legally counted, recalled one board's majority to replace it with another majority who PROMISED to move the sewer.
I , among many others, pray that they can & will still fullfill this promise , despite the political strong arm tactics otherwise.

Sewertoons said...

Dogpatch Refugee sez:
"Correction: the citizens of Los Osos VOTED to move the sewer from the middle of town, next to a library…"

Here is another correction: Had all the people who OWNED property here in Los Osos been ALLOWED to vote, the election would have gone the other way. Telling people to vote on the platform of "cheaper" - $100 a month - (is in a piece of campaign material that I have), swayed the vote to recall. As we "no" voters knew then, and certainly EVERYONE knows now, this was a LIE.

And Measure B - that delay tactic to the tune of how many million? - had nothing to do with moving the plant all along and has been found over and over to be illegal.

Start praying DP (or packing), looks like Tri-W is back on the table.

PublicWorks said...

I agree with Dogpatch.

The town voted to pay whatever it costs and however long it takes to find another place for a sewer or to not have a sewer.

Guess some people have endless amounts of time and unlimited amounts of money.

Sewertoons said...

Steve said:
"The old sewer board was voted out of office but the New board was sued out of existance by Pro-development Mega Sewer at any cost spoilers who want to reshape the economic demographics of the most sought after costal real estate in California"

The pro-development people appear to me to be the STEP/STEG crowd as you can just KEEP expanding when using that technology. Tri-W as it was designed would allow for only a finite maximum build-out; that's it and no more.

Mike Green said...

Doggie, Good to hear from you!
You are right about the vote,
As it turned out, not everything that they PROMISED came true.
I don't think I need to expound on that.
In Los Osos, political promises, we have learned, should be taken with a septic tank full of salt.
The new situation with Sam's plan is no different.
Hence Ann's "verify" statement.
I'm with you in the hope the solution will be out of town, the CSD has fought a hard fight.
Politics aint pretty and it aint fair.
But the only way I see any light at the end of the sewerpipe is to all start walking towards it.
Lawmakers all over California and in Washington have heard about us, ask Sam, ask Abel, ask Lois.
This is what I heard from Sam's assistant at the first meeting of the doomed.
"Everyone thinks you are a bunch of yahoos that just dont want to pay ANYTHING for a sewer".
Not hard to figure out where that perception came from.
Here is another observation I'd like to share;
You don't get finacial help from the government untill it's a disaster.
Screaming " oh no the sewer bill might kill me" aint got the pull of " OH CRAP! THE SEWER BILL IS KILLING ME! HELP HELP HELP!!
Trust in politics and short attention spans, works everytime!
Shouts and peace to you Doggie.

Churadogs said...

Sewertoons sez:"Here is another correction: Had all the people who OWNED property here in Los Osos been ALLOWED to vote, the election would have gone the other way."

In what way were property owners not allowed to vote? Are you refering to out of town property owners who aren't registered to vote in SLO county, because they don't live here? If so, any idea of the number that would fit that description? A few dozen? A few hundred? Enough to tip the election one way or the other?

Anonymous said...

churadogs,

There are 756 know owners of Los Osos property that live outside of (and not registered to vote in) Los Osos. Contact the Los Osos Propety Owners Association.

If these out-of-town property owners were able to vote in the special election, there is no doubt the reults would have been different.

Anonymous said...

Hmmm, well tis interesting indeed to read the comments in this blog. Ah me, well someday Anne someone will be elected to that new manse in Sacramento and to the Assembly that will realize:
1. The ENTIRE TOWN of Los Osos is surrounded by distressed/impaired open bodies of water: Los Osos creek, Warden creek and of a National Marine Estuary: The Morro Bay. [PATHOGENS, NITRATES]
2. Underneath the town the water board has deemed the aquifer as distressed/imparied by nitrates and pathogens.

Its in the basin plan.
3. According to THE LAW FEDERAL & STATE: under those conditions NO DISCHARGE is permitted, period. NADA. UNLESS you are granted a very special waiver to discharge from your water board OR you follow the specified remedial steps laid out in the draft AB885. The National Marine Estuary cum National Monument throws a monkey wrench in the works. NO DISCHARGE can be permitted while the water remains "distressed/impaired".

Yes, technically all of Los Osos is in a prohibition zone. ALL OF LOS OSOS ... but then so is Morro Bay, and probably San Luis Obispo.... hmmmmm does anyone smell a rat? In any case someday someone other than Roger "the dodger" will correctly enforce these laws. Evenly. Because a scarse natural resource depends on it: water. And when that happens in a few years those who failed to heed the warnings dating back to 1994 (yes that means YOU TOO Morro Bay and Cayucos) are doomed to pay hundreds of millions to fix their faults; their oh so egregious faults.

Anonymous said...

By the way if you believe that a centralized, conventional sewer system with a conventional gravity collection system in an ecologically sensitive area of sand dunes adjoining a future National Monument which may span the entire CA coast is a good solution. You will likely be proven to very, very wrong. But you developers will have already sold and left town. The poor uninformed noveau chic that buy from you will be left holding the proverbial bag. And it will be a very, very expensive bag in the future.

And I for one, have no problem with Tri-W as a site. The site of a Riparian forest where we store tertiary treated effluent for future use. It has already been treated by clusters and onsite systems all along the way as prescribed by none other than the EPA. The waste is treated as close to the source as possible. Tri-W with lots of nice redwoods, cottonwoods, etc, to get rid of all the rest. Nice paths, maybe a museum.

But, ah you developers won't like that now will you? Can't just "plug and play", get permits as you please? Might have to pay some extra money to ensure that your own waste is handled properly. NO FLUSH & FORGET.

Now, is that the way for a responsible adult to act? To just flush and forget? What did your mother teach you?

Sewertoons said...

Can you just imagine the infinite possibilities that stretch before the developers' eyes as they see unlimited clusters and onsite solutions ––to build, build, build!!

No infrastructure needed this time around either!! Permits will be issued if there is an easy way to treat the sewage.

Tri-W is FINITE in its limit of allowable hook-ups.

Mike Green said...

Interesting thought, Even though TriW is an old dinosaur it may be the most ecologicly preferable solution in that it will limit the amount of development. thereby limiting the adverse effects of humans.
Using that logic, it would be better to just eminant domain every other house or whatever to create lots that can conform to septic use or onsite zero discharge.
Heck, since its bound to become a national monument, let's just kick everybody out.
Nice pristene nature!
Except for all those pesky nonnative eucalyptus trees.
Cut em all down!
ouch, I just bit my tounge again!

PublicWorks said...

hey, good idea mike,

or we can all just pick up and leave, let the bankers deal with the mortgage, that'll show 'em.

how about limiting households to one child? like in china.

we could all go over to the RWQCB during business hours and ask to use the restroom - that'll cut Nitrates by 33%. And the RWQCB will have the proof in their water bill!

Anonymous said...

"Start praying DP (or packing), looks like Tri-W is back on the table."
I'll pray when I choose & I'll leave if I choose, ya newbie carpet bagger sounding opportunist.
Whether this board can keep its promise to move the sewer wasn't the point, thickies. The point is the INTENTION of the majority of the voters in the recall was this vital policy change.
Tri W back on the table?
This ain't over til the fat cats sing.
MC MG:
"Politics aint pretty and it aint fair.
But the only way I see any light at the end of the sewerpipe is to all start walking towards it."
Hope that light ain't an on coming train or the fires of purgatory.
props back atcha,

Dogpatch Refugee said...

previous post mistagged. Mistakenly mis monikered

Churadogs said...

An Anonymoose sez:"3. According to THE LAW FEDERAL & STATE: under those conditions NO DISCHARGE is permitted, period. NADA. UNLESS you are granted a very special waiver to discharge from your water board OR you follow the specified remedial steps laid out in the draft AB885. The National Marine Estuary cum National Monument throws a monkey wrench in the works. NO DISCHARGE can be permitted while the water remains "distressed/impaired".

In the latest issue of The Rock (little Freebie Paper) there's an interview with Dr. Wickham in which he says," I read the EIR pretty carefully when we prepared our proposal for the Project Update . Montgomery Watson notes in their proposal for the Borderson leachfield that since nitrte levels in the lechate beneath the site might exceed 20 mg/l there would be a need for a multi-million dollar extraction well and water treatment system just downslope fromthe site. What gives? The waste-discharge requirement was 7 mg/l of total nitrogen and the site is virgin. Who's kidding whom? You do not get 20 mg/l of nitrogen when you start with 7. Well, maybe they came up with a special new way to create nitrogen fertilizer. I am ready to invest when they proive it."

Clearly, TriW wasn't a "no discharge" unit. And where did that 20 mg/l come from?? High enough to they'd have to re-cycle the treated wastwater back through Tri W again? Uh, . . . .

Anonymous said...

And just as CLEARLY Tri-W is far and away friendlier to developers dahlings. Just ask "Boris" Crizer or
"Rocky" Edwards.

It works like this. With clusters you need permits. With a centrzlized sewer you need none. With a local waste-water management district, clusters, onsites you have to go through the local management agency. in our case an offshoot of the CSD. Then you might still have to go to the county. Plans for your cluster system would have to be studied, examined and you would be assessed. It would be YOUR (as the developer and operator) responsibility to ensure that the system is operating properly. If someone flushes the wrong thing you could get fined. If you "spill" you get fined by the management agency. (AND YES AB 885 is on its way Jan 2007.)

Tri-W, centralized sewer: its "plug and play" baybeeee! You just hook up your transverse pipe and then merrily flush and forget. Hmmmm now if you were a developer which would you pick.

Sheesh I kind of wonder about you guys?

Anonymous said...

Tri-W was built to handle a city at least 3 times the size of Los Osos with room for ready expansion for all you fans of "flush and forget" out there. Anyone got flushable kitty litter?

Sewertoons said...

Um, so how did we get to this density on nothing but septics? - Oh, no wait! Was that just a compliment I heard for the county? The county would have to approve the cluster system! The county would make sure we didn't over-build here in Los Osos!

But what about the Water Board? Step/steg has already been shot down twice....

FYI: TRI-W was built to accommodate what LOCAC AND the County deemed to be full build-out for Los Osos, about 5,000 PZ homes.

Sewertoons said...

Anon said:
"Whether this board can keep its promise to move the sewer wasn't the point, thickies. The point is the INTENTION of the majority of the voters in the recall was this vital policy change. "

The majority of the voters did NOT include the people who own property here in LO, but do not live here. Hardly an accurate assessment of intention, Anon.

Since their propery value is in question at the moment, and hundreds of people who recently signed for dissolution were once for the recall but have seen the result and have decidedly changed their minds, if ALL property owners were allowed to vote now, what do you think the INTENTION would be today?