Pages

Friday, June 01, 2007

TAC & PZLDF Schedules for June

And check the county website: www.slocounty.ca.gov/pw/lowwp.htm to see when the Draft of the Fine Screening Report will be available, so everyone can start shouting and shooting, heh-heh.



Upcoming Meetings
Citizens for Clean Water Meets
EVERY MONDAY
Washington Mutual Bank L.O.

Monday June 4th 7:00 PM
What the enforcement relief lawsuit may mean to you


County Technical Advisory Committee will be meeting
Monday June 11 and 18th at 7:30at the SB Community Center


To avoid schedule conflicts with the TAC sessions

PZLDF will meet at 6:00PM
June 11th & 18th

Learn how you can comply with the water board requirements. Options, compliance costs , and 218 assessment

(Invited guests in June) Harvey Packard, RWQCB - Permitting Onsite Systems

Rob Miller, TAC engineer - 218 Assessment Process

For more information Call 534-1913
PO Box 6095 Los Osoos Ca 93412

34 comments:

Anonymous said...

Draft F/S available. 11:00 AM Fri., 6/1/07

Anonymous said...

Before everyone starts talking about delays and inflation, read the fine print... all costs include "escalation" which includes inflation estimated by when they think they can begin construction.

Ron said...

For once, I'm speechless. What in the hell is going on here?

I just sent the following e-mail to Paavo Ogren and John Waddell of the Public Works Departement:

Hello Paavo and John,

I just scanned through the Fine Screening Report, and I'm confused. I clearly heard Supervisor Gibson, at a recent meeting, ask Mr. Waddell if the Tri-W project was going to be part of the fine screening process, and Mr. Waddell said, "Yes."

But now, just a few weeks later, the Fine Screening Report says, "the Tri-W site will continue to be carried through the fine screening process..."

What happened? Why wasn't it scrutinized? Why aren't things like Special Condition of Approval #17 in the CDP discussed in the Fine Screening Report? Or things like how there's zero evidence that supports the "strongly held community value," according to the 2001 LOCSD, that any sewer plant in Los Osos must also double as a "centrally located recreational asset."

Also, you guys keep saying that Tri-W is permitted, but you're not addressing the questionable circumstances that led to its permitting, like why Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, called the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004? You do realize, that if the LOCSD had not played "bait and switchy" with the Coastal Commission, that Tri-W could never have been permitted, right? You guys have your minds wrapped around all that, right? It's extremely important in this entire discussion.

So, why wasn't the Tri-W project included in the fine screening process like Mr. Waddell told Supervisor Gibson in a public meeting?

Thanks,
Ron
sewerwatch.blogspot.com

IF they reply, I'll post it.

Anonymous said...

there are about 14,000 people that have priority for them to reply to first, and likely with more relative questions than yours so be patient hopefully by the time you get your reply there will be a project constructed somewhere

Anonymous said...

Why should they reply to Ron. He doesn't live here or own property in the PZ. Nit picking sewer obstructionist who doesn't give a damn how much we pay, as long as it is done HIS way, and everyone listens to HIM.

Anonymous said...

2:30
I live in the PZ and I would like a response to Ron's questions, so please do not speak for the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

I agree with anon above. I too would like to hear a response, from the county, to Ron's questions. It makes no diffeence to me if Ron lives here or not. Neither does Paavo Ogren. I do live here, in the PZ, and own two properties.

Anonymous said...

They did reply correctly, and IF RON BOTHERED TO ACTUALLY READ IT and actually had some expert background to understand it, he might get a clue. It states the evaluation for criteria is not the same as the original Tri-W project. It states more comprehensive costs for Tri-W. Ron has a comprehension problem. You'd think a journalist could read. It's a fine screening report dude, not a re-hash of a 7 year old column. Get a life, look at the comparisons. Quotes from Coastal Commissioners have no place in the report. It's not a Tri-W centric report, not a Ripley centric report, not pie-n-the sky report, not an appease Ron report. If you don't like it, propose a real plan with real numbers, not another election BS plan.

Anonymous said...

Thank You!

Ron not even a journalist, just a hack living on the past glory of article that happened to get published. Wasn't even a good article, just filler.

Since he does not live in Los Osos, he isn't going to have any vote, he'll undoubtedly have plenty to say, but the property tax payers will have the final say!

Anonymous said...

Bev. De Witt-Moylan here:

Just a parentheses:

(A co-worker who lives in the PZ came up to me today with a big smile saying, "It looks as though they're going to let you guys off the hook!!" as just another retirement perk. I told her that we are in the middle of compiling and composing the appeal of our CDO, issued May 10, to the SWRCB - on top of all the endoftheschoolyear fol de rol I'm engaged in.

Yet another PZ resident who believed the headlines and didn't think she needed to read the whole story.

She said that if the RWQCB simply issued CDOs to everyone, then everyone would vote "Yes" on the 218, and we could simply get on with it! When I told her that the RWQCB wasn't supposed to do anything that would influence an election, she said, "Yes, but we need to vote for that 218. I want to sell my house!" She did not see the electioneering connection in her own words.

Last weekend at Art in the Park in Morro Bay I met yet another Los Osos resident who knew NOTHING about RWQCB enforcement. From her expression it appeared that she didn't appreciate the heads up and that my mentioning enforcement had spoiled her relaxing weekend.)

Anonymous said...

You really are a twit! Quit doing the over-acting and trying to undermine any sewer system!

Anonymous said...

I sympathize with the Dewitt-Moylans and everyone in the PZ but I think it would be more productive to work with, rather than against, the powers that be. The county will bring us project if we vote yes on the 218 (the law), the RWQCB will back off, and we can all get on with our lives. If the first 45 have a case and can gain some compensation that's great. Maybe we should stop intermingling the two issues?

BTW, Ann. I like some of your stuff but your heh-heh snickering sarcasm does nothing to help. Nothing.

Anonymous said...

Love it...

Love the county's big lie in the fine screening. Tri-W is permitted and funded? Wow. Bait & Switch permit with an illegal loan. Good goin'. The fix is in big time for all to finally see.

I will vote no on the 218. Some company like Orenco can do it for $100 million less and by the Regional Board's deadline of Jan. 2011 (and with no liens on our homes!).

It's clear now and always has been that Sam Blakeslee gave the project to the county to finish what the old board started.

Anonymous said...

Orenco's STEP costs are cheaper than the STEP costs in the report? Still waiting for that quote from Orenco.

too bad. you won't get to vote because you aren't a homeowner.

Anonymous said...

FICTION: "The county will bring us project if we vote yes on the 218 (the law), the RWQCB will back off, and we can all get on with our lives."

FACT: The county will only bring us the most expensive project your money can buy. The RWQCB can only stop us from living our lives if we give them that power. I won't. Put $100 million back into the community's pocket. Vote "Hell No, Never" on 218.

Anonymous said...

Right on!

I vote for $100 million less!

NO ON 218! There's no Capps grant money to boot! (Page 3 Bay News, story not in Tribune)

Anonymous said...

FACT: The county will complete the project.

FACT: there is nothing you can do to stop it but lie

Anonymous said...

Beware the anti-sewer, anit-county, anti 218 misinformation campaign. It's in full swing and comes in all shapes and sizes; all ages and professions. It comes cloaked as mean-spirited paranoids, and sweet innocent old ladies. It comes straight into your face, and more quietly, insideously disgused as caring and martyrdom. It's incessant, and designed to further screw every homeowner in the PZ. It's called "move the sewer" but we know better. Stand up Los Osos and be done with the obstructionists. Let's take back our community. For once and for all. Support the county process. And beware still more pie in the sky. No more pie in the sky!!!!

Anonymous said...

Bev De-Witt Moylen said:
"She said that if the RWQCB simply issued CDOs to everyone, then everyone would vote "Yes" on the 218, and we could simply get on with it! When I told her that the RWQCB wasn't supposed to do anything that would influence an election, she said, "Yes, but we need to vote for that 218. I want to sell my house!" She did not see the electioneering connection in her own words."

Do I care if it is electioneering? NO. Is that really such a HUGE issue? NO. If you still have the will, you can nail them on that later, once the 218 passes. Making electioneering an issue is just a gambit to freak you out and make you vulnerable to being led by someone who appears to have a "clear head" and who appears to be "in control" of things. This is an irrelevant bit of trivia in the huge issues that surround the sewer for Los Osos – Or life in general! Don't make a mountain out of it. Your fear will bury you. You need to save your brains for selecting a project you like after the 218 passes.

Churadogs said...

Anonymous sez:"BTW, Ann. I like some of your stuff but your heh-heh snickering sarcasm does nothing to help. Nothing."

I have been watching and commenting on The Hideous Sewer Wars for years and years. A "heh-heh" when noting that the latest report is out so people can read it and start shouting and shooting is totally apt. I would advise you to read the comments posted above for some perfect examples of shouting and shooting that are already taking place. As for "scarcasm," what is the proper response to some of the Los Osos people Bev (above) is describing? If I called these folks "clueless," you'd probably claim I was being sarcastic. To me, "clueless" would simply be apt, with or without the heh-heh.

Ron sez:"Also, you guys keep saying that Tri-W is permitted, but you're not addressing the questionable circumstances that led to its permitting, like why Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, called the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004? You do realize, that if the LOCSD had not played "bait and switchy" with the Coastal Commission, that Tri-W could never have been permitted, right? "

while Anonymous sez:" Why should they reply to Ron. He doesn't live here or own property in the PZ. Nit picking sewer obstructionist who doesn't give a damn how much we pay, as long as it is done HIS way, and everyone listens to HIM."

I hope the TAC and Paavo do answer Ron at some point. If Tri-W appears back on the table and gets picked as the project, unless those issues Ron has raised concerning the permit may well be grounds for either a CC appeal and new hearing or a lawsuit (delay) so I hope the county and the TAC will seriously look at those issues as a possible con in the pro and con analysis.

anonymous sez:"Beware the anti-sewer, anit-county, anti 218 misinformation campaign. It's in full swing and comes in all shapes and sizes; "

Anonymous forgot to add, " . . . INCLUDING my own anonymous posting. . ." Caveat, indeed.

Anonymous said...

I think people are scared to death of Tri-W because the story of cost is finally going to be splayed out in regards to the cost of designing a step system for this community. This delay through the obsession of technology is truly Los Osos' "Sacred Cow".
There will obvious cost increases shown to: delay, design difficulties, odor controls, cost to the homeowner that is due every month and not over 20-30 years and so on.
We are "starving" for a solution and we let this "cow" wander our streets.
Truly fascinating and unbelievably bizarre.
Get a new cow and vote yes on the 218.

Anonymous said...

To Beverly,

You said stupidly, "You need to save your brains for selecting a project you like after the 218 passes."

YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG HERE. WHO THE HECK ARE YOU LISTENING TO?

WE WILL NOT HAVE A CHOICE, THE COUNTY HAS MADE THEIR CHOICE. THE BOS WILL DECIDE. THE 218 VOTE IS ONLY FOR FUNDING A PROJECT. IF YOU LIKE GRAVITY AND CAN PAY UP TO $400 A MONTH, FINE.

PLEASE DON'T SAY OR THINK THE PZ HOMEOWNERS WHO HAVE TO PAY WILL GET ANY KIND OF A CHOICE.

Think for yourself Beverly, you've been brainwashed by Gail.

Anonymous said...

Now that the County has acheived the next step in their documanted process, producing the draft fine screening report written by Corollo Engineers, and have laid out the possible options with current cost ectimates, we are one significant step closer to finally getting this unparalled community problem resolved.

With this significant step comes the increased panic of those who oppose any sewer project. I expect an increasing amount of lies, distractions and obstructions over the next six months leading up the to Prop 218 vote. Hopefully, for the sake of the community, the majority of the property owners and the County will keep focused on being diligent and doing the right thing, even though it will be tough.

Ron said...

Although the exclusion of the Tri-W project from the fine screening process, after county officials told everyone it would be included in the process, renders the long-awaited and expensive Fine Screening Report all but useless, there are still a few crumbs of interesting information that can be salvaged from it. For example...

"The Tri-W project included leachfields at the Broderson site and additional sites on the east side of town as the only reuse/disposal alternative. The sum of the capacity for disposal by the sites in the Tri-W project did not meet the required capacity for buildout flow. The shortfall in capacity was deferred to a future project to solve." (bolding mine)

Tri-W -- a project so bad that it takes TWO projects to meet the planning needs of Los Osos.

Great... so once Tri-W goes in, we get to do the "hideous sewer wars" all over again for the second, "future project." I wonder what the costs will be for that deferred project, and will it also include an "objective for centrally located community amenities?"

Anon wrote:

"Ron has a comprehension problem."

I MUST have a comprehension problem, because I could swear that this, "the Tri-W site will continue to be carried through the fine screening process," means this, "the Tri-W site will continue to be carried through the fine screening process... ."

Anonymous said...

FACT: The county will build a project YOU cannot afford. Guaranteed.

FACT: You can stop it simply by rejecting the Big Lie -- and Vote "Hell No, Never!" on 218.

Anonymous said...

Dumb-shit obstructionist please move away.

Anonymous said...

Dumb-shit obstructionist please move away.

Nope. Love it here.

Hey, has it ever dawned on you that your dementia created "obstructionists" like me? Without "destructionists" like you there would be no "obstructionists," just the community you shattered to bits to fill your emptiness.

Fascism has no place in Los Osos.

There is treatment for your depression. Get help.

Anonymous said...

Bev. De Witt-Moylan here:

Just another parentheses:

(To "anonymous 6/2 10:43 AM"

The quote you ascribe to me and respond to in caps by indicating that those thoughts came to me from "Gail" were actually the words of "anonymous 6/2 12:59 AM."

The confusion is understandable, given that one "anonymous" is difficult to differentiate from another. I do, however, sign my name precisely to avoid errors such as yours.)

Anonymous said...

To avoid future confusion, you might stand in front of the CSD and demand McPherson resign from any association with the CSD!

It's probably to much to ask that you demand the CSD produce the bankruptcy recovery plan, so how about demanding the State to perform the Audit of the CSD's finanaces over the past 24 months?

Anonymous said...

anon 10:43 said:
"WE WILL NOT HAVE A CHOICE, THE COUNTY HAS MADE THEIR CHOICE. THE BOS WILL DECIDE. THE 218 VOTE IS ONLY FOR FUNDING A PROJECT. IF YOU LIKE GRAVITY AND CAN PAY UP TO $400 A MONTH, FINE.

PLEASE DON'T SAY OR THINK THE PZ HOMEOWNERS WHO HAVE TO PAY WILL GET ANY KIND OF A CHOICE."

SO - what kind of choice do you think we will have if the 218 fails? Looks like no choice to me there. The CSD is bankrupt, has a LOUSY credit rating, and if the State comes in, it WILL be Tri-W at whatever price they want to charge us. Whatever price. Remember, time lost is big bucks. Get it?

Anonymous said...

The state can not come in and do Tri-
W...are you kidding?

Anonymous said...

You sound like a No Sewer, Anywhere, at any Cost kind of Orange County transplant.

Anonymous said...

An Orange County transplant that endured the first largest bankruptcy? The thot plickens.....

4crapkiller said...

I look at the fine screening document as a wonderful work. It shows the intelligence of the TAC and it's leaders. The fact is that the County is not set on any one plan, yet. They will decide, the BOS will decide, providing the asessment vote passes.

If I have to accept an option of $900 a month for each of my duplexes for discharge permits, I will attempt to raise the rents, but by law they cannot be raised more than 10% per year per unit. If this occurs, chances are the renters will move. People have cars and can move anywhere for rental property. The value of rental property for rent depends upon the market county wide.

At that time I will have to make a decision. I can shutter and board the duplexes and file to convert them to Condos. They have to be vacant for a year to do this. There will be NO discharge, they will be vacant, there will be no water use.
During this time, the units can be refurnished for sale.

I will have loss of income, and the loss can be taken off my gross income or any sale of the condo property thereafter.

1/3 of the population in the PZ are renters. The above option is available to every landlord. So where are most of the renters to go, and what effect will it have on the county wide rental market and wages? The county is very aware of this problem. They will do the best they can, and consider all options.

There is an opportunity for hybreds. We shall see first if the 218 passes, and it would be sheer stupidity for it not to pass.

If Orenco can do the job, let them. But make sure that their work is guaranteed, bonded, the figures analyzed by those in the industry, and they do not come back with cost overruns. The county will decide.



I will vote for the asessment. Thereafter, I still will have options.