Pages

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Yes, We Have No Water, So Go Right Ahead And Build That Mega-Mansion With Four or Five Bathrooms And Lots Of Non-Xerescaping, No, No, It’s Fine, Take All The Water You Want, Pay No Attention To Those Annoying People Whining That You’re Sucking Up THEIR Water While They’re Stuck In A Moratorium, Bwa-hahahah, Tough Luck Suckers!

Well, ya gotta laugh at the mixed message the BOS sent yesterday. Just prior to voting in all kinds of recommendations to put in place a Severity III Water Shortage Plan (the highest level short of a complete lock-down), the Supes refused to put the kibosh on a controversial mega-mansion a-building outside the PZ here in beleaguered Sewerville. They also refused to listen to LOCAC’s recommendation for a temporary building moratorium until the various water measures can be verified as actually working.

Nope, it’s build first, THEN when the wells run dry, everybody can stand around and say, Well, Dang!

Some other interesting tid-bits at the BOS meeting, and later that night the TAC meeting, concerning both Sewer & Water:

-- A snippet of tape from the recent RWQCB hearing in Watsonville was played. Seems the Board didn’t know what the status was of The Los Osos 45, you know, the 45 homeowners who were singled out for a year of hell and were finally issued CDOs and CAOs. Board thought in some way that these orders were merely “in abeyance,” but weren’t sure, that the Notices of Violation recently sent out to everyone in the PZ were simply notices, that there were no consequences associated with the NOV, (Really? No consequences? So why bother to send them out?), then they chatted about how they couldn’t rescind those 45 CDO/CAO orders without a hearing – a hearing? Oh GAWD, don’t let’s go there, you mean, actually open that can of worms again? – obviously it was an idea that fell with a resounding silent thud – but, oh, well, not to worry, what-ever, it didn’t really matter since that was, like, so yesterday . . . Move along, move along, more tea! More tea! Unless, of course, you happen to be one of the 45 with a legal CDO/CAO on your home, but then you don’t count in this sick game, anyway. You never did.

--The Tri W Permit from the Coastal Commission is now looking slightly weird. First, it’s still not clear to me just who “owns” it – the county? The CSD? One of the things constantly touted about the Tri W project is that it’s “permitted,” but clearly, with closer study by the TAC and the new regs on water reuse, the new rules that may pertain to the Bay now being designated as a State Marine Reserve, the ongoing questions raised by Ron Crawford about “bait & switchy,” the rescinded Statement of Overriding Considerations (no documentation for the “community held values” of having a sewer plant in the middle of town so a park could be attached to it), it’s becoming clear that that permit may now be turning radioactive: Is the Old Project still the Old Project, or has time and regulations morphed the Old Project into something resembling a New Project, which would have to be reviewed by the CC-- Oh GAWD, don’t let’s go there, you mean actually open that can of worms again? – and so forth.

-- Some speakers asked if there could be a split 218 assessment vote – a $2 -3 million assessment to allow for CEQA studies to be done, then a follow up “real” 218 vote for a final project, with known site, size, price tag, etc.

Paavo made it clear that that won’t fly for a couple of reasons: Funding for “studies” would be a “special tax” that would require 2/3 vote. Two-thirds is really hard to get for any project, whereas the regular 218 assessment would only require 50% plus 1. Much easier. So, a mini CEQA ain’t gonna happen.

-- During the due diligence phase (after the 218 is passed) everything that’s on the TAC table and/or on the County table (i.e. companies like Orenco and Pio Lombardo’s Purple Pipe Plan using decentralized plants) are supposed to be due diligenced along with the generalized work done by the TAC, i.e. general STEP, GRAVITY, PONDS, BIOLAC & etc. If everyone keeps their thumbs off the table at that point, and keeps working with solid numbers – beware of GIGO -- there’s a good chance the right project will rise to the top.

When the BOS meeting switched to the Level Three Water Severity portion of the program, a few things popped out:

--First, and most important, it appears that the water purveyors are making good progress in their adjudication process. Golden State Water Co, for example, will be going before the PUC to get rate increases to cover their costs of new wells – moved so as to reduce pumping to the west so as to decrease salt water intrusion, and other plans to utilize the upper aquifer better, again so as reduce over pumping) S & T Mutual (Sunset Terrace) water company was again urged to consider installing water meters on the homes they service (I know, surprising that in this day and age of water scarcity, there’s meterless homes???), and all the water purveyors are moving to structured rates so as to make more water use really, really expensive, so as to encourage conservation.

But the most interesting item, for me, that came out of the BOS meeting, came later that night at the TAC. It became clear that the cost for a Level I water benefit from any sewer project was nearly identical with the costs for a project that delivered a Level II water benefit, so the TAC consensus was, let’s not even waste time with any project that only delivers a Level I.

Furthermore, with full participation of the water purveyors, the county’s various water saving/ retrofit Severity III plans, and by separating out the sewer assessment benefit to be paid to those within the PZ and the water benefit, to be a general benefit assessment to be paid for by all those outside the PZ, (who are getting the benefit of clean water) it may be possible to bring in a project that delivers a Level III water benefit of balancing the basin, but do it at a Level II cost.

So, that’s something to keep an eye on as the process moves along.

-- Also of interest to me, were the folks who are part of “FAIR,” which is composed of vacant lot owners who came to the BOS to urge passage of this water plan. The “FAIR” folks are also going to be an interesting bunch to watch because it’s not known at this point whether or not they’ll get a vote on the sewer assessment – i.e. why be assessed for something you may NEVER get the benefit of, i.e. be able to build a home on your lot even after the sewer is installed because there’s no water. Which also raises other questions: The county allowed homes to be built outside the PZ, homes that have been sucking water out of the aquifer shared by all. Don’t know what’s “fair” about that, except it’s certainly a perfect example of how damaging and short-sighted the PZ was in the first place – a water basin is a water basin. It pays no attention to lines on a map.

Also unknown, if the PZ moratorium is lifted, how will new building permits be allocated? First come, first served? And what happens if people outside the PZ have reduced the resources available to those within the PZ thereby putting some PZ residents permanently out of business? Again, there’s that inherent unfairness with what the RWQCB did with those PZ lines.

--One nice thing about water saving in general, is it’s nearly impossible to get ahold of fixtures that aren’t water saving, unless you go to Canada or somewhere and smuggle in an old gazillion-gallon-a-flush toilet. So whenever anyone builds, remodels or upgrades, they’ll end up improving the situation.

--Another question that really should be looked at: According to the County’s figures, 70% of all water use is indoors, with 30% for outdoor use. Can the county and the RWQCB agree on some kind of safe, effective greywater system that would be allowed for Los Osos that could be installed NOW by homeowners who want to start saving that 30% immediately? Pio’s Purple Pipe Plan promises to do just that, but his proposal won’t be looked at by the TAC, to my knowledge. Let’s hope the County takes a serious look at it before moving ahead, and answers the question, how quickly would an immediate 30% outdoor water use reduction effect salt water intrusion . . . and at what cost . . . compared with the other plans now being looked at.

-- And, of course, the most obvious question that remained hanging in the air: How is it possible that Los Osos went through water severity Level I, then Level II and nobody did anything about it and here we are, ka-boom, Level III and only now is anyone lifting a finger. How is that possible? .

Answer: Silence

And, finally, at the TAC meeting, the Finance Committee held up a bar graph that indicated that when comparing capital costs for any combination of STEP/GRAVITY/and/or/Ponds/Biolac/ OxidationDitch, all those combinations were within a reasonable hailing distance of each other (with STEP being slightly cheaper)

But if you compared those cost combinations with TRI W, TRI W flew off the chart. Waaaaaaaaaay more expensive.

Which once again prompts me to say, “Oh Lucy, Jooooo Gotta Lotta ‘Splainin Toooo Doooo……”

Oh, and almost forgot: The July-August edition of The Rock (www.rockofthecoast.com) is out, with interviews with several Sewer Experts & Citizens.

74 comments:

4crapkiller said...

IN the beginning from Ann Calhoun comes a typical "no growth", the "rich are victimizing us", and "I got mine you can't have yours" rant.

In the end we get a sales pitch for Lombardo Associates from the great lady who wanted to "Move the sewer out of town", but now wants to spread it "ALL OVER TOWN".
Then we get a pitch for "The rock".
(selected experts with their sales pitches, Pavvo explainations, and John Alexander biography.)


In the middle we get words, words, and more words.

Richard LeGros said...

Hi Ann,

YOUR WROTE : "And, finally, at the TAC meeting, the Finance Committee held up a bar graph that indicated that when comparing capital costs for any combination of STEP/GRAVITY/and/or/Ponds/Biolac/ OxidationDitch, all those combinations were within a reasonable hailing distance of each other (with STEP being slightly cheaper)

But if you compared those cost combinations with TRI W, TRI W flew off the chart. Waaaaaaaaaay more expensive."


RESPONSE: Let us add the information you forgot to mention regarding the infamous bar chart:

1. The bar chart presented to the TAC was a hand-drawn chart prepared by Ms. Vendetti (a TAC member with no experience in designing a WWTF or construction cost estimating)

2. The costs reflected in the chart were her own "estimates" of project costs; and were noticeably lower than the costs projected by the County's project engineer (Corrolo Engineering.)

3. The chart reflects her bias that the County's cost estimates associated with TRI-W were too low, while the costs associated with the alternatives were too high.

4. The chart included $35,000,000 for construction supervision of Tri-W ON TOP of the original project cost of $135,000,000; while in fact the COSTS FOR CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION ARE INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL PROJECT COST.

5. Lastly, remember that the County's costs for Tri-W are based upon a designed project that has received real-world costs bids from contractors; while the costs associated with the alternatives are ESTIMATES ONLY of projects that have not yet been designed.
We all know that estimates are not as reliable as actual construction bid costs based upon a completed design
......REMEMBER OUR OWN EXPERIENCE OF WHAT THE ESTIMATES WERE FOR TRI-W ($96 M) COMPARED TO THE ACTUAL BID PRICE ($134 M).

Regards, Richard LeGros

TCG said...

Re: "...it is not known at this point whether or not they'll (the vacant lot owners) get a vote on the sewer assessment.."

Yes, it is known. At the July 17 Board of Supervisors, the Board ruled on that issue. The staff asked for direction on whether to include them, or not, in the Prop 218 vote and recommended against doing so for the exact reason discussed above.

From what I saw on TV, the County intends to recommend a second Prop 218 in the future (if the first one passes and there is still a project) that proposes assessments for a full resource project--one that covers their proportionate share of sewer, water, HCP, everything. They are currently working with the water purveyors to determine what will be required for them to make the necessary improvements to provide for these currently vacant properties.

With this approach, which makes sense to me, if the vacant property owners pass their 218 vote they will know that their action will lead to the ability to develop their property.

Sewertoons said...

Another note on the Venditti report: She used Ripley numbers on her step assessments. We all know how full of holes that report was.

A glaring note mentioned more than once that bypassed Ann somehow - inflation. It is the second largest single item in a project.

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"... it’s becoming clear that that permit may now be turning radioactive: Is the Old Project still the Old Project, or has time and regulations morphed the Old Project into something resembling a New Project, which would have to be reviewed by the CC-- Oh GAWD, don’t let’s go there, you mean actually open that can of worms again? – and so forth."

If the Coastal Commission ever gets a sniff of re-visitng the Tri-W permit, two... no... THREE things will instantly happen:

1) The permit will immediately be revoked because of "bait and switchy," a concept that now, thanks to some smart-ass investigative reporter, the staff of the Coastal Commission is extremely clear on.

2) Indictments for conspiracy to commit fraud will be handed down.

3) My campaign for the Pulitzer Prize in investigative journalism will begin in earnest.

Sewertoons said...

Dream on, ron.

Fed Up said...

Yes, Ron truly has gone 'round the bend.

Sewertoons said...

I think it was last night that TAC Chair Bill Garfinkle said that a bunch of comments on the Fine Screening Report had come in from the LOCSD Wastewater Advisory Committee. Since Ripley's numbers were used last night in a somewhat bizarre report by Karen V. (that she alone had put together, not the TAC Finance Committee), and those Ripley numbers will be coming up again, I am sure - why doesn't the LOCSD Wastewater Advisory Committee go over the Ripley report the same way they did the Fine Screening? Wouldn't that be interesting? Could somebody out there put the bug in the CSD Board's ear?

Sewertoons said...

4ck, I'll bet we would both like an explanation out of Ann why Measure B was good for the community and how that jives with Lombardo's little plants all over town!

(Do i hear the words, "flip-flop" splashing quietly in the background??)

4crapkiller said...

How about delay, delay, delay, and more delay. Some figure that they will pass from this earth and never have to pay anything.

Those in good health and relatively young need time so the McPherson group can find a judge to give them a hearing. Who knows?

The obstruction and objections have never been about polution, water, community, or responsibility. It has always been "I don't want to pay!" or "I don't want my rent increased".

The real problem is that they do not have the honesty to say this. People are starting to realize this in a big way. It is part of the sick and tired feeling.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Thanks for the nice reporting on both the BOS and TAC meetings that I was unable to attend, see or hear.

I am disappointed that you missed the details that Richard mentioned. On the other hand, I know that most of the Trib reporters would also have missed those details. The sad thing about missing those details is that now some will charge you with bias.

I would want to add to Richard's comments only one thing ... if TriW is started up again (as originally planned), it will save one to two (or more) years worth of design, permitting and the associated inflation. (A $150M project ... with two years additional delay will cost us an extra $25M ... put in terms of monthly payments ... just the principal and interest will go up from $160 to $185 if we get a low interest loan over 20 years. If we have to go with a conventional 7% loan over 30 years, that same delay will cause our monthly principal and interest payments to go from $200 to $233.)

Again, quite often a "more expensive" project that can be done now is considerably less expensive than a cheaper project that will cause delay. Just remember how much cheaper things are now than before we bought into "better, faster, cheaper".


On the question of the TriW CDP ... if it is still valid, the County owns the permit. AB2701 gave the permit to the County. If the County intends to go through with all aspects of TriW ... including and especially the park component ... everything is just fine.

However, if the County doesn't want to go with a park, according to Steve Monowitz at the CCC what would need to happen is one of two things. (It is not only Ron who can pick up the phone.) The County would simply need to apply for a new CDP if they don't want to stick with the LOCSD permit. If they want to stick with the previously obtained permit, to drop the park bits they would need to apply to amend the earlier CDP. This would require presenting the CCC with a compelling case for why TriW is the best location.


So Ron, where do you get off saying that the CDP would be revoked? You've put forward this idea before, but your arguments were pretty weak and you didn't actually ever cite Monowitz or anyone else so for all we know, you're no more than a purveyor of FUD ... it would seem that all those years of studying shady marketing has paid off. Ron's using it himself.

Mike Green said...

Dose anybody know if Monarch Grove will be allowed to vote for the 218 ?

Thanks.

4crapkiller said...

I drove by the sewer site to visit a friend. Bulldozer there, dirt being pushed. Is the county paying to regrade the site? I heard that the LOCSD decided to pay non existant funds (or very scarce) to do something there, and that they could not afford to pay for fence rental anymore, but the money to be spent could surely take care of fence rental.

Does anyone know what is going on? Does not the county have jurisdiction over the property?

Mike said...

The CCC has more important issues to worry about, like some kayak or surf boarder's view of the hills along the length of Caifornia.

They may want the hideous Hearst Castle removed, maybe that whole Morro Bay Water Front. Doubt they will even worry about a little mud flat shanty towns permit extention. Hey, what about Jeff Edwards home, will he have to leave the eucalyptus so some day sailor won't have a view of his hill top home?

But maybe Ron has enough money to back a campaign to challenge the Coastal Commission with the class action suit to halt a Tri-W permit extension.

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike said...

Has the LOCSD ever PAID any fine they have been hit with? Why should they worry about another fine when they have no money?

They know they are going to be out of business soon and apparently there is no consequence to their fiscal arrogance. We are going to be picking up the bills left in the wake of this contemptable Board of Directors! Some of them will simply take a CalTrans transfer and leave town.

neptune said...

4crap,

Regarding your very first comment...9:22am,7/25

I really don't see Ann's post as a pro-growth/no growth, have/have not, argument.

As I see it, her post is not about growth or development. It's about water supply.

We are losing our water basin to sea water intrusion as we speak.
We are in a water severity level III water conservation crisis.

I guess my question to you is this 4Crap.....

How many 5 bathroom, 29 water fixture homes should we allow to be built under these conditions????
Should we just keep building them until there isn't any water left? I'm trying to figure out if you're ignorant or stupid.
This has nothing to do with how much money anybody has or what they can develop. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
This is about protecting our water supply.....for the rich, middle-class, and poor.

Permitting 5 bathroom, 29 fixture mega mansions, under these conditions, is quite gluttonous, gross and abusive.

Regarding your next statement; "Then we get a pitch for "The rock"......"

I just have this question for you Mister Crap.....Do you have short term memory loss or do you suffer from alzheimers?

Let me remind you of a comment you posted on Ann's July 20th blog.....

4crapkiller said...
Since Ann is talking about water, To All:

Yesterday I happened to pick up a copy of "The Rock". While looking at it quickly, I only saw two advertizers: Ben DiFatta and Tank Nelson. The Ochs are to be commended for spending their money to produce and distribute this paper at their expense in their effort to promote freedom of speech and their wishes......


So, as far as, "a pitch for The Rock" goes you beat Ann to the punch on this one 4Crap and I actually found your endorsement to be far superior.

Thanks for supporing the free press 4Crap.

Have a nice day!!!!!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Ann,

I've got some news for you because you obviously don't get it.

Sam Blakeslee did not bring us AB2701 for the best project to float to the top!

He brought us his legislation to give the Dreamers what they lost after the recall (that's the horrendous gravity project -- in town or out.)

The county says things like, "Oh, we have to go by the Blakeslee law.." yet they've admitted a couple of times that they helped write the law (from the very beginning.) What a crock!

It's all fraud Ann. Why won't you see that?!

The RWQCB sent out notices of violation to insure that people would be scared enough to vote the way THEY want, AND to get the project THEY want. It was a small investment for a big impact.

Lies and fraud. The PZ is fraud. This 218 is fraud. How the legislation came about and what it was based on is fraud. They way they sold it was fraud (septic management plan..) The TAC is fraud....remember we had the NWRI --the real experts and the county throws that away, and gives us a team of people who think they're experts (but are only biased and making that more clear every single day.)

Shark Inlet said...

One more issue comes to mind ...

It doesn't seem exactly right to me that some expect those outside the PZ will pay a portion because "they will benefit too" from cleaner water.

If it was those inside the PZ who caused the nitrate problem with the upper aquifer, why should others be asked to pay? If it was the nitrate levels in the upper aquifer that forced us to use the lower aquifer exclusively, couldn't one say that essentially the PZ is the fault of the saltwater intrusion also?

It really doesn't seem appropriate to ask folks who didn't cause the problem to pay to fix the problem.


One more thing ... Conspiracy boy ... you've not yet provided any explanation of why the TAC is in any way biased. You've not yet told us of those who applied would be less biased. If there weren't folks with your point of view who applied and had better qualifications than those actually selected ... it would seem that your complaints should be aimed at people on your side who didn't even apply. Until you offer up that list of names, please realize that I and many others will view you as someone who is more interested in division and smokescreens than in actually working with your community to get a solution to our very real wastewater problems.


From inside the PZ ...

4crapkiller said...

To Neptune:

How much water should the farmers be able to use for spray rather than drip irrigation in the east part of our basin? Who regulates the amount of water a home can use if it is on a well?

As long as water is available through credits, retrofitting, etc., and a building permit issued, The right of a property owner to develop his land should not be stopped.

I am sure you would be all for any project that had some sort of socialist value (LOCSD board retirement home) regardless of water use.

You use water as a smokescreen for class envy and nihilism. Peddle your ideas in "the rock" where they belong next to Linde Owen.

Churadogs said...

TCG sez:"Re: "...it is not known at this point whether or not they'll (the vacant lot owners) get a vote on the sewer assessment.."

Yes, it is known. At the July 17 Board of Supervisors, the Board ruled on that issue. The staff asked for direction on whether to include them, or not, in the Prop 218 vote and recommended against doing so for the exact reason discussed above.

From what I saw on TV, the County intends to recommend a second Prop 218 in the future (if the first one passes and there is still a project) that proposes assessments for a full resource project--one that covers their proportionate share of sewer, water, HCP, everything. They are currently working with the water purveyors to determine what will be required for them to make the necessary improvements to provide for these currently vacant properties.

With this approach, which makes sense to me, if the vacant property owners pass their 218 vote they will know that their action will lead to the ability to develop their property.

10:05 AM, July 25, 2007"

Thanks for the update. Clearly, FAIR folk will be watching this very closely, since both water plans and the 218 vote will have a direct impact on them.

4ck sez:"
4ck, I'll bet we would both like an explanation out of Ann why Measure B was good for the community and how that jives with Lombardo's little plants all over town!

(Do i hear the words, "flip-flop" splashing quietly in the background??)"

Nope, no flip flopping. It was clear to me that this community voted to recall the previous CSD for at least four reasons: (plus a lot of subtext reasons as well)
1. They didn't want a GINORMOUS sewer plant in the middle of town. They wanted a GINORMOUS sewer plant located OUT OF TOWN 2. Didn't want an UNAFFORDABLE ginormous sewer plant in the middle of town. They wanted a CHEAPER ginormous sewer plant out of town. 3. They wanted an opportunity via 218 to VOTE on the full assessment amount, and (4) choose for themselves (Measure B) what they wanted to buy.

Well, right now, the community will likely get three out of the four things. If one of the choices turns out to be Pio's Purple Pipe Plan, at it pencils out as giving more water benefit at the same cost (this is all unknown at this point) and the community selects that option, then what's the problem? The choice of what gets built is NOT MINE to make. Like most homeowners in this community, I get one vote.

One of the interesting things that comes out of reading so many of these comments, is that so many commentors don't really believe in the democratic process or the public's right to have a say in the process. That such an approach is somehow wrong, that it should be a case of Daddy Knows Best, that the community should just all shut up and sit down and do what Daddy said. Fascinating.

Even more fascinating is the notion and I or anyone else has any more say in what the community wants than any other community member. Some of you really need to go back and read my columns about the Hideous Sewer Wars, all of them headed "Oh Lucy Joooo Gotta Lotta 'Splainin' to Dooooo." If the recalled CSD -- and the Coastal Commission, and the Planning Commission, and the BOS, and the RWQCB had actually listened to me and actaully "splained" a whole lot of this stuff, we wuldn't be in this mess. (I refer you to a whole lot of what Ron has documented at his blogsite. It's clear that the powers that be weren't paying attention, just like a whole lot of people in the community weren't paying attention and so "splainin'" never happened. I'm still waiting to know just what in hell CC commissioner Potter meant by "bait and switchy" and WHY, when he uttered those words, the rest of the Commissioners didn't stop dead and ask as well. Ron's been wondering forever, WHY there apparently was confusion regarding park amenities/ SRF loans, amenities in? amenities out? in short, what the hell happened? Ron speculates on this being a case of fraud. Is it? Or is it mere incompetent bungling? Or both? (The perfect bureaucratic storm: mendacity AND incompetence) Without 'splaining, preferably in a court of law, under oath, we'll never know for sure.

Inlet sez:"The sad thing about missing those details is that now some will charge you with bias."

Sad? Naw. No matter what I wrote, some posters will charge me with "bias," no matter what. Total knee jerk stuff. Comes with the territory.

Crap sez:"4crapkiller said...
To Neptune:

How much water should the farmers be able to use for spray rather than drip irrigation in the east part of our basin? Who regulates the amount of water a home can use if it is on a well?"

There's where it always gets "interesting," water law. Very interesting.

Crap sez to Neptune cont:"
I am sure you would be all for any project that had some sort of socialist value (LOCSD board retirement home) regardless of water use."

Oh, pllluuuueeeze. Water is water. It knows no "class" except the old Them's that got, get more. But like all finite resources, everybody needs to figure out equitable ways of distributing it. If they don't, Crap needs to be reminded of Voltaire's observation, that "history is filled with the sound of golden slippers descening the stair case and wooden sabots going up." Proceed with caution.

Then Crap closes with,: "You use water as a smokescreen for class envy and nihilism. Peddle your ideas in "the rock" where they belong next to Linde Owen."

To which I can only add that Neptune observed a previous CRAP posting about the Rock: " Let me remind you of a comment you posted on Ann's July 20th blog.....

4crapkiller said...
Since Ann is talking about water, To All:

Yesterday I happened to pick up a copy of "The Rock". While looking at it quickly, I only saw two advertizers: Ben DiFatta and Tank Nelson. The Ochs are to be commended for spending their money to produce and distribute this paper at their expense in their effort to promote freedom of speech and their wishes......

So, as far as, "a pitch for The Rock" goes you beat Ann to the punch on this one 4Crap and I actually found your endorsement to be far superior.'"

Hmmmm, flip-flopping? Or a case of different ox being gored? Or . . .

And as for "Conspiracy Boy's" question:

" It's all fraud Ann. Why won't you see that?!

The RWQCB sent out notices of violation to insure that people would be scared enough to vote the way THEY want, AND to get the project THEY want. It was a small investment for a big impact.

Lies and fraud. The PZ is fraud. This 218 is fraud. How the legislation came about and what it was based on is fraud. They way they sold it was fraud (septic management plan..) The TAC is fraud....remember we had the NWRI --the real experts and the county throws that away, and gives us a team of people who think they're experts (but are only biased and making that more clear every single day.)

10:43 PM, July 25, 2007"

Ah, yes, well. All of the various things you mention, plus a whole lot more, really do require 'splainin,' don't they? But it all requires 'splainin' in court, under oath, so, who ya gonna call to see that that happens?

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"I'm still waiting to know just what in hell CC commissioner Potter meant by "bait and switchy" and WHY, when he uttered those words, the rest of the Commissioners didn't stop dead and ask as well. Ron's been wondering forever"

Actually, I don't wonder why commissioner Potter called the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004. I know exactly why he uttered those words, and he was 100-percent right. "Bait and switchy" is exactly what they did. I wrote about it here.

"Ron speculates on this being a case of fraud"

The reason I call what the 1999 - 2004 LOCSD Boards did "fraud" is because I've read up on what constitutes fraud in California, and all the descriptions match exactly what those LOCSD Boards did.

- Did they (translated: Pandora Nash-Karner and former LOCSD General Manager, Bruce Buel) lie to the Coastal Commission beginning in 2000 by telling them that the community of Los Osos "strongly" demands that any sewer plant must also double as a centrally located public park? Yes.

- Did they know that was a lie? Yes -- at least Nash-Karner did, and that's key -- because she spearheaded Measures E-97 and D-97, and both of those measures failed. (By the way, D-97 was going to add $40 a year to LO property taxes to fund a community pool, it failed, but despite its failure, right now, Nash-Karner's pool project is still making its way through the system. What a joke. Nash-Karner is a commissioner on the county Parks and Recreation Commission and has been since 1991, and, GET A LOAD OF THIS, despite the fact that Measure D-97 failed, supervisor Bruce Gibson, on his web site, says, "A swimming pool should be built in Los Osos." Also, on that same web site, Pandora Nash-Karner says, "Gary and I are supporting Bruce Gibson for Supervisor. We believe Bruce Gibson has the background, knowledge and scientific expertise to help us build the sewer – quickly." Notice how she says, "the sewer," and not "a sewer." She adds, "I have spoken with Bruce Gibson on many occasions... ." Bruce, my brutha, I hate to say it, but you f-d up and trusted her, like a whole lot of other people. BIG mistake.)

- Did that lie benefit them? Oh, hell yes it did, because it allowed them to keep their second project -- a project that required exactly ten times less land than their first project -- at the Tri-W site, and that allowed them to give the appearance that there was actually a reason to form the Los Osos Community Services District in the first place, and that saved them massive embarrassment because they (translated: Pandora Nash-Karner) told the community through an over-the-top marketing effort throughout 1998 that if they voted to form the LOCSD, Nash-Karner's "drop dead gorgeous" ponding system that would also provide "future recreational opportunities" (translated: did not include a multi-million dollar park) at Tri-W would be "better, cheaper, faster" than the county's project.

When her "drop dead gorgeous" project failed, as predicted by a bunch of experts before the election that formed the LOCSD in 1998, they (translated: Pandora Nash-Karner) panicked and concocted their "strongly held community value" "bait and switchy" scheme to keep the second project at Tri-W, when there was absolutely no reason whatsoever to build a not-so-drop-dead-gorgeous industrial sewer plant at the mid-town location.

The evidence for all of that is overwhelming. I mean c'mon, the fact that it all happened exactly like that is pretty solid evidence.

Now, I'm no attorney, but, folks, that's fraud... clear cut case. Elected officials can't run around lying to the Coastal Commission in an effort to save their ass, and then have those lies cost California taxpayers somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million, obviously.

Of course, if you ask me, the real toll of Nash-Karner's bait-and-switchy-scheme-so-it-actually-looks-like-there-was-a-reason-to-form-the-LOCSD-in-the-first-plac isn't the $100 million, it's the fact that it ripped Los Osos apart.

Awhile back, someone left a comment on my blog wondering why there isn't a mob of angry Los Ososans with pitchforks and torches at the front door of the Karner's residence. I wonder the same thing. She just goes about her business like nothing ever happened. Which, by the way, is a symptom of a "compensated psychopath," as I learned from another astute commentor on my blog.

Why State prosecutors don't look into this matter, I have no idea. After all, it did cost California taxpayers some $100 million. They, the prosecutors, go about their business like nothing ever happened. What a slap to the face of California taxpayers. It's disgraceful.

Can you believe that the Trib never wrote a word on any of this? Now THAT'S disgraceful, and allowed this mess to drag out as long as it has.

Shark Inlet said...

Ron,

By that definition of fraud, it would appear that the entire LOCSD board during Lisa's presidency would be guilty of fraud.

Oh yeah ... it continues to be sad that rather than answering direct questions you change the topic to what you consider your ace in the hole. The problem is that you've made a whole lot of questionable statements and when asked to justify then you never do. Someone who cares about our community would at least address direct, on-topic questions.

Mike Green said...

I have some on topic questions,
Does Monarch Grove get to vote on the 218?
Did they get the NOVs?
Will the county stand behind the cost estimates provided by the TAC if the choice is not TriW?
Richard dose have a point here, why is it that government engineering always misses the mark by such a large amount?
Has anyone done a cost benefit analysis of the stage three WWTF against the cost or even the possibility of no state water needed for the stage one or two?
And can we all take turns driving that bulldozer down on the TriW site?

Conspiracy Boy said...

Ann,

You wrote: "Ah, yes, well. All of the various things you mention, plus a whole lot more, really do require 'splainin,' don't they? But it all requires 'splainin' in court, under oath, so, who ya gonna call to see that that happens?"

My point really was (it was directed to you,) that Sam Blakeslee did not go to all this trouble (working with the county in Sacramento) to do the legislation to give us the best project.

And if you really think that the best project will rise to the top, you're off your rocker.

The legislation was for Pandora, Shirley, Richard, Gordon and Noel and all the other (mentally ill) Tri-W big pipe promoters. It certainly was not for a good project like Step or clusters or anything else. (I'm sure kick backs went down and will continue to do so -- many people stand to make a lot of money from Tri-W/gravity, and they won't make any off of a good, affordable system that works! -- Forget about it...)

People better wake up because the county's big pipes are gonna cost us big bucks.

When the digs happen, and construction has to come to a hault - who pays? US! HOW MUCH? -- A FORTUNE! Who profits? CAL POLY.

How many 218's will there be WHEN THE PROJECT RUNS OVER? What kind of fees and charges? Oh my God!

Wake up Ann, please. And please don't electioneer youself by saying, "when the 218 passes." It's "IF" the 218 passes.

No matter how many projects are thrown into the mix, it only muddies the water and the big pipe system "floats to the top". You're playing right into that and I don't understand why.

Mike said...

How "big" is a BIG PIPE?

Conspiracy Boy said...

Ron:

You wrote: "Also, on that same web site, Pandora Nash-Karner says, "Gary and I are supporting Bruce Gibson for Supervisor. We believe Bruce Gibson has the background, knowledge and scientific expertise to help us build the sewer – quickly." Notice how she says, "the sewer," and not "a sewer." She adds, "I have spoken with Bruce Gibson on many occasions... ." Bruce, my brutha, I hate to say it, but you f-d up and trusted her, like a whole lot of other people. BIG mistake.)

GOOD CATCH. WILL YOU POINT THIS OUT TO ANN SO SHE'S CAN SEE WHAT WE'RE IN FOR? SHE SEEMS TO THINK THAT WE HAVE A CHOICE.

AGAIN, THESE PEOPLE CAN'T MAKE MONEY OFF OF A SUSTAINABLE, AFFORDABLE SEWER!!!!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike,

Big pipe is gravity. Don't ya know?

Mike said...

Just another term for No Sewer obstructionism.

Mike said...

Conspiracy Boy, You really are a certifible nut case. Ann and Ron deserve you. Hope you enjoy the IC at French.

Sewertoons said...

Ann, you wrote:
"4ck sez:"
4ck, I'll bet we would both like an explanation out of Ann why Measure B was good for the community and how that jives with Lombardo's little plants all over town!

(Do i hear the words, "flip-flop" splashing quietly in the background??)""

I wrote that, not 4ck.

Gee Ann, how can you forget all the talk about how outrageous having a big, smelly sewer right next to the library, the South Bay Community Center - right across the street from homes and near churches!! All of THOSE REASONS and the price was the outrage, not just plain old "wanted it out of town" with no reason as to why attached to the explanation!

You have spun it to seem that these reasons really weren't there. Sorry. It's not working. You can't have it both ways. Pio's idea just can't jive with anyone who supported Measure B. There is no way you can have little, smelly sewers all over town and want NO SEWER in town.

Ann, did YOU support Measure B?

Mike Green said...

Sewertoons is gettin all dramatic about "flip floppin"

Hell, I sure wish the solutions group had flip flopped,
and imagine how much money would have been saved if the CCC had flip flopped.
I'll bet some past LOCSD directors wished they had flip flopped about delaying a recall vote and done it sooner.
I sure as heck wish I could retroactivly flip flop on my votes in at least two of those elections. (especialy the first)

Aint hardley anyone round here that couldn't benifit from a little flip flop.

Shark Inlet said...

Toons,

The problem you and Ann are having over Measure B and the decentralized system is this ... Measure B was written to be all things to all people.

Some would say that the measure was all about giving people a right to vote and others would say it was to stop TriW and still others would say it is to keep the WWTF away from schools, parks and churches and still others would say ...

Ann has portrayed Measure B as anti TriW at some times and as giving people a right to choose at others. I don't see her support of Measure B as conflicting with her support of the conceptual idea of a decentralized system which would return irrigation water at a cost.

I actually like the idea quite a bit myself, but I was also not one who was fussing about TriW being near homes.


On two other matters ...

Mike Green, don't yet know if Monarch has a vote or not, but I do know they didn't get NOVs.

Oh yeah ... Conspiracy Boy ... your 7:15 posting here makes me tend to agree with others who have suggested you are a nutbag. Please convince us that those folks are wrong. Please explain to someone who viewed AB2701 as a way of getting a project, any project, to move forward (because the LOCSD was and still is moribund, there was no hope of any progress until someone else took over) why you view AB2701 as being a stealth way of getting TriW. You should also explain your comment about Cal Poly profiting from cost overruns. Oh yeah ... one more thing.

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet,

Play stupid and twist what I said, why don't you?

Cal Poly benefits from the digs, and we pay for the extra time the construction workers have to stop and wait.

The county expects the "big" project to go over budget at least $30 million. It will probably be a whole lot more than that when the county is done with us. But the more people out the better, right Shark? Isn't that what you want? You're sick and classless.

By the way, Morro Bay's drinking water is a whole lot worse than ours and they have a sewer. Their sewer lines are in bad shape. How much for repair? ... at least $6 million?

Again, you want the most expensive sewer in the world to HOPEFULLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT NITRATES? A $70-$100,000. lien on our homes and no guarantee of anything? Wow.

No, it's fraud. You're a fraud. It's corruption, you're corrupt.

And, the CSD had Ripley and could have done a 218.

AB 2701 was to get the project away from the CSD and away from a Step system and you know it. The bill gave the project back to the Dreamers and "the" project. That's what the Regional & State Water boards have to have and publicly stated so. Noel King has stated so. It's what you have to have. It's what the county has to have. It's what MWH has to have. It's what the Blakeslee supporters have to have.

What an expensive dog n' pony show the county is putting on to get a 218. Oops, we'll paying for that expensive dog n' pony show too.

I don't need to waste my time to convince mentally ill people like you of anything and certainly won't.

You and Crapkiller have taken over Ann's site. Not many people post like they did before. It's a shame that you couldn't stick to your Tribune blogs, you two just had to chase anybody away that doesn't agree with you (that the most expensive sewer is the only way to go.) Just like the Trib boards.

Shark Inlet said...

I'm not playing dumb nor am I twisting anything you've said.

I am trying to make sense of what you wrote. You are suggesting that Poly benefits from something and it is unclear how they benefit. Please explain yourself.

As for twisting words ... you seem to be out for the crown that only the chief word-twister gets to wear. Over the last two years I've argued in the comments section of this website that the only way we can protect the special nature of our town is to make sure the total monthly cost is as low as possible. I've also relentlessly pointed out that delay costs and typically a whole lot more than people think.

What is sick and classless? To willingly misrepresent what others say and believe would get close.

Again, I would ask you ... before you bash TriW and those who view it as the likely cheapest solution ... to do a bit of research and to explain to us why your solution is better and cheaper. It is simply not enough to wish or hope that there is a better solution ... it is not enough to simply point out drawbacks with TriW (like it's cost) ... you've got to actually have something better that will meet the requirements of various permitting agencies.


About Ripley ... the Ripley numbers were a fiction designed to sell their services (to design a new collection system and treatment plant). Had the CSD actually wanted to get going on a project, they would have had a 218 vote considerably earlier rather than going into bankruptcy. I believe that the bankruptcy was yet another way of stalling and delaying any project.


Your argument that AB2701 was designed to stop a STEP system boils down to "because I said so" and "you know it." That's really weak. Perhaps you should ask Mike Green to give you a logic lesson.


As for your suggestion that you shouldn't bother trying to convince folks of your point of view ... I would suggest that if you do want to try to convince people, you would want to try evidence or reason.

On your last point, that I've taken over Ann's blog and not many people post here like they did before and that I should go back to the Tribune discussion ... hahahahaha. I would like to suggest that I've been posting here longer than anyone but Ann and Ron and that the discussion recently (while a bit depressing due to the rude comments) has had at least as many participants as months ago ... probably more.


My gosh you are off the wall tonite. Perhaps a good night's sleep will help you sort things out.

Sewertoons said...

"I don't need to waste my time to convince mentally ill people like you of anything and certainly won't," sputters conspiracy boy emphatically!!

GOOD. That means you will stop spouting your mouth off on this blog. Thank you.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"Ann has portrayed Measure B as anti TriW at some times and as giving people a right to choose at others. I don't see her support of Measure B as conflicting with her support of the conceptual idea of a decentralized system which would return irrigation water at a cost."

Actually, I see it as being both, but primarily it came into existence because the original CSD didn't have the resources (per Paavo, who should know since he was present at the creation)(or, if Ron's correct) the intention to (honestly and seriously) do what the county is doing now with their Process of looking at options and systems and letting those dictate placement, type & etc. If the original CSD had done that and held a Chinese Menu "vote," Measure B wouldn't have been necessary. Neither would the recall. No train wreck either. sigh. For want of a nail . . .

Conspiracy Boy sez:"No, it's fraud. You're a fraud. It's corruption, you're corrupt."

O.K. let's say you're correct, it's ALL fraud. So what? WHO YA GONNA CALL? Attorney General Lockyear? The SLO DA? The Feds? Who? Foxes and wolves and chicken coops and sound asleep watchdogs and Farmer McGuil snoring in his bed, oblivious to it all is what I see. Not a promising picture.

Mike said...

Just waht is the legal status of Measure B these days?

Richard LeGros said...

Hi Mike,

Measure B has been ruled illegal and void by Judge Tagiman of the Superior Court.

The CSD has appealed the that the judge errored in the ruling (the appeal is not challening the ruling, but the reasons of the judge in making the ruling!". The CSD)claim that the appeal stays the implimentation of the ruling.

As the CSD included the Measure B appeal in the Bankruptcy, they have not moved forward with the appeal in the Courts. How convienient for them; as the CSD really, really wants Measure B to be legal.

Regards, Richard LeGros

4crapkiller said...

Ann states:

"O.K. let's say you're correct, it's ALL fraud. So what? WHO YA GONNA CALL? Attorney General Lockyear?"

4crapkiller chants as part of the cargo cult ritual:

"Moonbeam, moonbeam, you're our man! (drum beat)
You can do it moonbeam man!" (horn bleat)

Ann, you are lost in the past, last time I looked Jerry Brown (secular/progressive/liberal darling) was Attorney General. Write him, he will understand your thoughts and feelings.

To conspiracy boy:

It seems that the "nut cases", with the exception of you and Ron, HAVE left Ann's blog. Perhaps they are being treated for toxoplasmosis or cat scratch fever. OR MAYBE THEY HAVE COME TO THEIR SENSES. Looking economic disaster (insolvency)in the face has a way of waking people up.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Ann,

As long as Bush is in office, there is nobody to go to.

But the truth will come out. The truth always does, and the truth is so much more powerful then the big lie and all the lies since.

Since you were the one who pointed out about the "no cap" on the Tri-W project, you should know it's the same now or worse.

Many people will vote "NO" on a (very) blank check. Many people will vote "NO" to the big gravity pipe system.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mr. Shark:

Is your real name Bob? Do you sit on the TAC? You say some of the very things he does...hmmmmm.

Fed Up said...

CB says:

"Many people will vote "NO" on a (very) blank check. Many people will vote "NO" to the big gravity pipe system."

Fed Up says:

And many, many people will vote "yes".

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy ... many people will vote "no" on a 218 vote because they are afraid of the County because they've listened to unfounded alarmist propaganda. The question is this ... how can we tell which "no" votes are from folks voting on financial issues and which "no" votes are from the tin-foil-hat brigade?

I suspect the 218 vote will pass ... mostly because those opposing a 218 vote recently had their chance to be in charge and the rest of us saw how well the Lisa board did with the project.

By the way, my name is not Bob and I don't know Bob at all. If Bob agrees with me he must be pretty smart, however.

4crapkiller said...

Sharky,

Lots of smart people read this blog. They are the ones that agree with you! I agree with you, therefore I am smart. This old lady thanks you for the complement.

Sewertoons said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sewertoons said...

conspiracy boy, get a grip on your seat, take a deep breath - Many people will vote "NO" to a step system.

Horrible isn't it? That people can't see how truly fab it is to have a tank in their front yard? Or that they just cant accept Orenco's teaser numbers as fact?

Well, that's why the Count is smart enough to do the 218 first. Because if it was left up to choice up front, nothing would be chosen! Great news for the NO SEWER folks, but not so hot for the rest of us PZers.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Sewertoons:

The NWRI said that step is best. They said Tri-W wasn't best. Remember?

Paavo, the accountant, and Pandora's man know better, right?!

Remember it was Pandora's group who formed the CSD to get ponds at Tri-W knowing there wasn't enough land and the RWQCB said no. That's where one of the big lies started.

But the big lie? It's about our pollution:

Roger Briggs wrote in 1984 that the pollution was over-stated and a sewer would not correct the problem.

Mike said...

The BIG lies are all in your head!

You are so obsessed with your own agenda that you can not accept other solutions, you can,'t even accept the problem!

The community will vote a 218 ballot and when it wins, what will you do? Will you sue the County? the State? Pandora? the CSD? Gail? Joey? Ann? How many of those who you now disagree with? I'm betting you will have a stroke, hope it will have been worth it for you to blow out your brain over a sewer, it's just a sewer! It's not going to matter to any of the community when you die, you will just have been a misguided squeaky voice trying to obstruct a much need public works project. You won't be missed any longer than when the first pipe is laid in the ground. Go get a life somewhere where you'll be happy before you die!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Crapkiller/Mike:

Everything involved in the sewer mess is a lie (including the lie that homes would be worth so much more money after the big sewer.) Don't hold your breath!

Sorry to tell you this, but my only agenda is for the best, most affordable sewer (whether it be step or clusters.)

The mega sewer you have your heart set on is wrong and stupid. You don't live here (?) so you won't have to deal with the construction mess for five years.

Besides, it's not just a (gravity) sewer at all. It's a waste of money (with liens on our homes on top of fees and charges) that have no cap and no end in sight. The darn thing could go $75 million over budget, and you can't say it won't! If you do, you are certainly mentally ill.

No, it's about my investment in my home. It's about a sustainable, affordable project that won't force half the town to move (even though that's what you want.)

Obviously, you could care less about anything that I care about, so it makes no sense to me to waste my time with you.

The lies are not in my head, they're all out there for the public to see. You never address that Morro Bay has horrible drinking water compared to ours and they have a sewer AND it's in need of repair -- millions of dollars worth.

Is this want you want for us too? You like the mercury imported lake water too, you think that's a good thing. Thank you Martha Stewart!

Mike said...

I happen to live in LO and was born in SLO a little over 63 years ago. I also have family still living here. There are also 3 other brothers who have roots right here! So I do feel free to speak my mind when faced with paranoid obstructionists like yourself!

We find your writings and rantings disrespectful of all those who have owned homes in this area and who have worked for years to improve the quality of living in this community.

If you don't like what is going on and find you have no control of the outcome, then sell out and leave. You'll be happier and so will those of us who live here and will in all likelihood be buried in the Los Osos Cemetary near our parents and grandparents.

I don't care whether you like what I say, I certainly don't like either what and how you say the nasty things you do! You really are on a fast track for a stroke! You better not depend on me to pay for your hospital care! Go back to Orange County or where ever you came from, but do go somewhere that is as perfect as your dreams of a LO Nirvana seem to be. Los Osos is not perfect, but it will have a sewer and yes, the streets will be torn up and maybe rebuilt better than they are today!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike/CrapKiller:

I love the way you refuse to address any issues that I raise.

Construction of gravity, cost over-runs, five years of destruction, Morro Bay's water pollution is worse than ours (with a sewer,) 218 after 218, no price cap on anything ever! If you wanted the best for Los Osos you would favor a better sewer -- but no, you just want everyone out.

Roads paved, not only are they not paved, they have huge holes. Where else in this state do you see anything like this?! No county money here, that's for sure. All tax dollars go to SLO.

We'll pay for raods, we'll pay for everything. Our (PZ) money is no object to the county. The more people forced out the merrier.

Now you want us to believe that only the PZ is responsible for sea water intrusion?

And you think when I say the words fraud and corruption, that's nasty?!

Mike said...

I'm sorry? You have been asked repeatedly for any true cost for the County and the individual property owner. We'd all like to know just what it is you are ranting about. We just can not figure out what and how much your friends at Orenco are proposing.

It's kind of like applying for a personal loan. What, how much and how long? So far, all you have done is blast away at Pandora and Tri-W, but you haven't laid out any cost or facts.

So, gather up your facts, organize them and present them without all the hyperbole of blaming everyone for every social problem on the Central Coast! If you can't do that, then you only come across as someone with a tremendous grudge and anger management problem. Try being rational and logical. Present facts to support your case, but be prepared to accept that there are other competing plans. There are always reasons for chosing one project over another and there are always folks who will get their feelings hurt, but that's life in this world. If you can't handle that, then you should take a look at why others are turning away from you. So far, you haven't convinced anyone that you know what you are talking about. If you can't do that, then no matter how great your idea, it will be passed over.

Conspiracy theories are not doing your case any good at all. You need to consider the compromises that have already been made during this long road to get this far. It's now time to let the County design and build what their engineers can put together, with or without Orenco, Pio or gravity. There is just too much we don't know or want to hear for us as a community to resolve. We need the County, we are not capable of producing a major public works project in Los Osos without the County resources!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike/CrapKiller:

Orenco will give figures to the county, not me.

I don't favor one company over another. Sorry. I do favor a system that is better than Tri-W/gravity.

The NWRI and EIR both state that step is better, for that matter, clusters are better than gravity.

Maybe if the county hadn't got us into this mess and would take SOME responsibility and showed some good faith, that might be a different story.

But they haven't. The say, "we have to go by the Blakeslee law.." when they helped write the legislation in Sacramento! They never did a septic management plan (under 83-13 law) and built over 1,140 homes, permitted them, collected taxes on them, created the density and so-called pollution, never collected infrastructure monies from the developers, etc. etc.

You say I'm wrong about all that too? Give me a break.

What about cost over-runs on your gravity? Every single Chumash bone that's found will cost us major dollars when the construction comes to a hault. You say that I'm wrong about that too?

No, all you can address is Orenco's figures! The county probably has them or will soon. Contact them, not me.

As far as blasting Pandora, she deserves it, and will get blasted more as time goes by. She was a major player in the big lie and wanted to profit from it, from driving out people who deserve to live here just as much as she does. What kind of person wants their neighbors and community fined out of existence?

The county will deliver the MWH gravity system with the State Water Board's blessings. I mean, they have insisted on it, because they want their money back for the "gamble" loan they gave out!

Get with it fool!

4crapkiller said...

To conspiricy boy:

Nothing wrong with gravity, it keeps our feet on the ground!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Crapkiller:

That's all you can say about my previous post? Was that your final answer (to the fraud & corruption?) -- that's all you can come up with?

I rest my case!

4crapkiller said...

To conspiricy boy:

Yup! Heard ALL your crap before, all your unfounded speculation, and all your points which come to nothing but ignorance and irresponsibility.

The county will decide. A 218 vote will pass. The consequences of failure to pass a 218 vote are horrible.

Your case was rested a long time ago, as a matter of fact, it has always rested up your colon asissted and hidden by dingleberries.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Crapkiller:

The county didn't build 1.140 homes knowing the discharging was illegal? They didn't create density and about 25% of the homes in the PZ knowing and not following the water board's 83-13 -- that's unfounded speculation?

You're full of crap.

Oh, what happens again if the 218 fails -- it is the right to vote on taxes act. Are you saying we don't have that right? We must vote a blank check to the county to stick us with whatever they want for a project that will go over budget by at least $30 million?

What exactly are the horrible consequences? Please tell us exactly what's going to happen (since you think you know so much.)

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

I find it troubling that you now say that Orenco won't give you any information about costs but that they will give that info only to the County. I am not so troubled that they'll deal with the County ... the more options the better. I am troubled that earlier here you were touting them as our savior and as saving us $100M dollars. Frankly, unless you are a civil engineer who knows California wastewater regulations and the specific characteristics of Los Osos which makes our problem unique and also happen to have solid cost estimates from Orenco, you have no idea about whether we'll save money or not. Your comment of 8:24pm yesterday is essentially an admission from you that you're hopeful and that you don't have a solid foundation for your hope.

Now ... on to areas where we tend to agree. Not only did the County permit the building of additional homes after the PZ came into existence, they had also neglected to construct a sewer earlier, when the County Health folks started telling them that there were too many septics per acre.

The County is very very culpable for the current situation. However, based on the way the cookie crumbles or ball bounces or whatever ... they're not offering to pay. I fault them. I can also fault those in Los Osos who ... in the early 1980s ... chose to pass up building the sewer then. The Solutions Group? Blame them too. How about CCLO and the recall? Also to blame.

The best way of predicting what will happen in the Great Los Osos Sewer Wars is to use Murphy's Law.

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

It's not troubling that Orenco won't give ME numbers, I haven't asked. I only know what they've presented to Los Osos in the past and how much their FL project cost homeowners.

I want to get your thoughts on one more thing:

The sewer (Tri-W in or out of town) will not help nitrates for up to 40 years, if ever. The waterboards have said that "hopefully" the sewer would help pollution.

Morro Bay has terrible drinking water, they have a sewer. They're going to spend at least $6 million on repairing the bad pipes.

So, why is the county, Blakeslee, the state, the RWQCB, and many others insisting on a sewer that is so expensive to "hopefully" help the problem? Why not take the extra time needed to research the best and most affordable project for Los Osos? When I say the best, I mean energy efficent, sustainable, environmentally friendly, etc. and affordable.

Why the rush to a bad project that may never solve the problem? i.e. Morro Bay?

Your thoughts?

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

I would have hoped that you would have gotten more details from Orenco before promising us that it was a better solution and that they would save us money.

In either case, let's talk nitrates ...

The nitrates in our upper aquifer are higher where the septics are more dense and where they are closer to groundwater. The levels are lower outside the PZ.

There is no logical explanation for this pattern other than septics. Essentially the RWQCB is telling us that for years we've had a problem with our septic density. We've been asked to do what most communities of our size and density have done ... get a sewer system and WWTF. The County let us down by not doing that years ago.

Lowering nitrate levels in the aquifer is a tough thing. The first thing one has to do is to lower the nitrate loading on the aquifer. By getting a WWTF online we'll be doing exactly this. Yes, it will take time to see the results ... but if we don't take any action at all this year, the cumulative effect over many years will be even more difficult to fix than if we take action right away. It is sort of like CO2 and global warming. We all know that there is an imbalance of carbon on this planet and that we produce far more CO2 than plants can convert into O2. If we just wait another decade before we take any action on CO2 and global warming, the problem will be far more difficult to tackle than if we take action today, even if the action is only to limit our CO2 production a bit.

One nice thing, though, about getting a WWTF online ... if we want to then use upper aquifer water for drinking we need only denitrify if ... which is far less expensive than getting state water. Furthermore, using the upper aquifer, or blending the water from the two aquifers will dramatically reduce saltwater intrusion.


As for Morro Bay's problem with old pipes ... that happens with gravity and STEP systems.


Lastly, you use the buzzword of sustainable. As an environmentalist I am getting pretty miffed with "move the sewer" and "no sewer" folks co-opting the word sustainable when they haven't really thought through the issues. Even if a "sustainable" plant uses only half the electricity and diesel as TriW, the total savings over the life of the treatment plant and pipes is more than balanced out, cost-wise, by a two year delay in getting the plant online. Even if one is expecting the cost of electricity and diesel to have inflation at about three times the nominal inflation rate, the "sustainable" plant is still more expensive over the life of the plant.

So, to achieve "sustainability" we get to pay more and suffer from an additional few years of environmental damage. Doesn't actually sound that wise if you think about it.

The TriW plant could be made "sustainable" by simply putting up solar panels all over. There is nothing in the TriW plan that would prevent the use of solar.

Essentially I view the use of the word "sustainable" to refer to an alternative to TriW as evidence of sloppy thinking or of a deliberate use of manipulative language.

Lastly, I would ask you how your favorite plan (be it orenco or ripley or whatever) would lower the nitrate loadings any sooner or better than TriW.

Sewertoons said...

conspiracy boy,

Can you tell us if the wells Morro Bay uses for water is near any agriculture?

Oh, as for spending more, and spending more time to find that "perfect project" that you think the County is failing to do - by that time, nothing will be affordable.

if you mean Tri-W out of town to be MBR technology, the County has already stated MBR will only go in at Tri-W, not out of town.

You have a crystal ball as to which project will be picked?

Sewertoons said...

conspiracy boy, do you think that we need a sewer, any kind of sewer?

Conspiracy Boy said...

Sewertoons:

Do I think we need a sewer? Well, I think some areas with septics work fine. I think there should be a septic survey/management plan to look at everything. Clusters would work in some areas.

It's about WANTING a sewer. Most who want the big sewer believe it will increase home values and clear out the riff-raff. I've talked to many Tri-W supporters.

I believe it's all about the land.

This is 2007 and there are many ways to treat our wastewater, I don't believe much has been explored and that's too bad.

I do believe we've been tricked, "bait & switched", lied to, beaten up, bullied, threatened, and more.

Over the next ten years, when the construction starts and the bills start coming in, people will put their homes up for sale. The inventory will increase and home prices will drop further (some homes are almost $100,000. less than just three years ago.)

Now, tell me who benefits from that?

We, in the PZ, have lost equity already, now the county will put liens on our homes. It could be as much as $60,000. - $100,000. we just don't know. We don't know because of the additional monies for public works projects going over budget. Public works projects go over budget. The big gravity system that you support will have cost over-runs -- there is No question about that.

That's why this 218 is a blank check!

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

Whether you or I or anyone else ... but the RWQCB and their staffers ... feel that septics work just fine is irrelevant.

Once the RWQCB set the PZ in place, the need for the sewer is clear. Without one we're subject to being essentially bankrupted and/or asked to move out of our homes.

Which is worse ... to pay $60k for a sewer or to be forced out of your home until a sewer is put in place and the sewer ends up costing $80k?

That's sort of the way I look at it.

I would also want to add that cutting the County a blank check seems far wiser than refusing to do so and cutting the LOCSD an even larger blank check...

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

Here we go, round and round again.

A sewer can be built by 2011 -- or at least well on the way to completion. It would look really bad for the RWQCB to fine Los Osos when a sewer is almost complete. Don't you think?

I like Orenco because of their financing. I never believed going with the SRF was the way to go. We should be able to build what we want and can afford.

I hear Orenco will be here on Aug. 2nd. Let's hear them out.

The county has said in so many ways, so many times that we're going to have gravity or else, or like it or not. I can not vote for a blank check. The lien from their project could be $100,000.00.

I am wise enough to know that the fix is in. I'm not going for it.

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

While you may have some forms of wisdom, financial wisdom doesn't seem to be one of them.

To wit ... your suggestion that private financing is better than a SRF because of fewer restrictions.

For example, let's suppose that a project would cost $150M and would be financed over 20 years at 2.5% per year ... one would have to cut some $35M off the project cost before a 30 year loan at 7.5% would provide the same monthly cost (just to simplify things, let's ignore the extra 10 years on the loan for now).

So ... once Orenco trots out their numbers and a professional engineer with knowledge of RWQCB and CCC standards verifies that Orenco's cost estimates are both complete and accurate we can talk.

As for your suggestion that we can already tell that Orenco is better even without any of the key details being known ... it is like the guy who votes for the National Socialist party just because they couldn't be worse than the other group who has been in power ... and we all know how well that one turned out, don't we?

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

You say, "... it is like the guy who votes for the National Socialist party just because they couldn't be worse than the other group who has been in power ..."

That sounds more like the 218 vote the way it is set up now. Crapkiller says build any sewer. That's not a very good idea. In fact, it's a stupid idea.

I believe Orenco said $50 million -- but even if the price tag was double that, it's still half the cost of gravity. Gravity is going to cost a whole lot more than the county is letting on...way more. You just can't dig so deep and stop during digs, 40 some miles, and expect the price to not go through the roof.

We could also assess ourselves. That was always an option for the CSD -- and still build what we want and can afford.

You've never addressed the fact that the NWRI and EIR preferred STEP out-of-town.

SRF policy says a project HAS to be sustainable for SRF loans...and then there's AB 32 (which Arnold feels strongly about).

The PZ was enacted way before Prop 218, which says, "the entire district." I think the PZ is very questionable and could/should be challanged.

I'm against gravity because it won't work here. The construction will be horrible, and because so many homes are here in place, it's studid. If homes weren't here, then it might be a different story.

Discharge at Broderson is dangerous. Just like what the rain has done to the hills. It's just stupid.

The county is doing just what John Alexander once said: "Hook the suckers before they are told the truth!"

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

When you talk about costs you are not playing fair.

Orenco won't be only $50M. Let's cut you some slack and say it is only $100M today. (Note: this is less than what Ripley says his system would cost and Ripley's system didn't achieve one key RWQCB requirement, denitrification. Note also that even Ripley didn't claim that there would be a great savings by using STEP over gravity from the point of view of installation.)

Furthermore, TriW won't be as high as $200M. Even if the bids that came in some 35% over estimated weren't lower (adjusted for inflation) in a re-bid by the County, the remaining construction costs would be about $170M. If the re-bids resulted in lower costs (and that should happen if the bids really were inflated like many suspect).

So, we're comparing a $100M solution which won't necessarily meet RWQCB requirements to a $170M solution which would come far closer.

Now let's talk inflation. The Orenco system would require about two years to get designed and permitted. That brings the cost up to $117M. Add a 7% interest rate over 30 years (as opposed to a $2.5% interest rate over 20 years).

How does this boil out? For just the P&I, TriW would run us about $180 per month for 20 years for a net present value of about $30K per home. Orenco would run us $163 per month for 30 years for a present value of $34k.

So, using favorable assumptions for Orenco and unfavorable assumptions for TriW it seems a wash ... except that Orenco's plan won't necessarily accomplish the denitrification that our treatment plant needs to do so that our aquifer can be recharged with water that is cleaner than what is there already.


As for your other contentions, with the exception of NWRI, I won't address them because our conversations are sounding pretty similar over time. On the NWRI issue, they were never charged with determining what was the best option for the cost and what would meet RWQCB requirements, only for addressing the question of STEP versus gravity and in-town versus out-of-town. If you don't ask NWRI the right question they'll give you a useless answer. The LOCSD hired NWRI and asked them exactly the sort of questions that were designed to get the answer that put TriW in the worst possible light.


The unfortunate thing here is that many many individuals all seem to be making decisions for political reasons when they ought to be making decisions based on purely scientific, engineering and financial reasons.

4crapkiller said...

To sharky:

You are correct! After we have a tertiary plus sewer plant and the effluent is less than 7ml/L (water quality standard) we can leach this water into the upper aquifer to replace water drawn from the upper aquifer that has gone through nitrate reduction at the well head. The amount of upper aquifer water used
and purified will determine the time span for nitrate removal in the upper aquifer.

The problem we are looking at is TIME. If we end up with three more years with very low rainfall, we will be looking at VERY difficult times for Los Osos. Right now we are unprepared.

The sooner we build a tertiary plus sewer system the sooner we can take care of our water problem.

Sewertoons said...

Did anyone see in yesterday's Trib that the latest bid for a portion of the Nacimiento pipeline project came in 21% lower than the designer's estimate? The first three bids came in 10% what the designer had estimated.

Large thanks to shark inlet and 4crapkiller for their clear and reasoned thinking. Totally the opposite of conspiracy boy.

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet, Crapkiller, Sewertoons:

One major component you left out is that gravity will run $30 million plus over budget, mostly because of the archeological digs.

Dr. T also preferred step over gravity for Los Osos because of the hills and sand. He was part of the NWRI, but on his own, he told the county the same thing. He writes the books and knows better than you three put together...

P.S. Looks like the county wants to go regional because of Morro Bay Plant's problem. It's the worst example of government and private industry collusion in California history, if it were a different administration in office right now, it would be the target of a Federal investigation. Don't think that others outside of Los Osos aren't watching what is going on here.

Sewertoons said...

What - the County and Jo-o-o-o-e-e-e-e-y are on the same page for regional?

I think the State is watching very carefully as to what is going on here - will we or won't we vote yes on the 218!

Does nobody recall the Arroyo Grande Creek problem? The State threatened to level an assessment to clean it up. The Citizens got the County involved and passed their own 218 to take care of the problem, rather than have the state come in to do it. Gee I wonder WHY they didn't want the State involved?

Shark Inlet said...

I doubt that the County is planning on trying to tie together the Morro Bay situation with the Los Osos situation. Not only does the County not have any jurisdiction over Morro Bay, they don't want to delay the Los Osos sewer ... and trying to figure out how to get permits to pump sewage through a state park and national estuary will cause a bit of delay.


On the two other issues brought up ...

$30M over budget because of artifacts and $30M under budget because of bids on the CSD version of TriW being too high sort of cancel out.

About the AG creek ... it is pretty clear that DWR could do that ... it is not exactly clear who would be best suited in Sacramento to swoop in to build us a sewer. I suspect that it would take special legislation to give some agency the right to do that. One the other hand, special legislation to take the Los Osos sewer project from one group and give it to another is getting be be old hat.