Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Yeeee-HAW! Election Time! Crank Up Your Mis-Information Machines!

The morning the BOS met to vote on sending out the Prop 218 Sewer Ballot, the Tribune was off to a great start. In the early morning quiet, I could hear all the bodies of my fellow Los Ososians dropping around town after giving a shriek and blowing coffee out of their noses because right there on the front page, second paragraph, it noted that homeowners “could pay up to $25,000 in property taxes for a sewer . . .” then added the kicker, “That’s on top of monthly bills between $100 and $275 that were estimated in a separate report last week.”

Apparently not separate enough since that $100 and $275 wasn’t “on top of,” but a guestimate of the total cost. The gaffe prompted Supervisor Patterson to suggest to Paavo Ogren that he might want to make sure that important information be sent to the media in the form of a carefully prepared press release with all the critical information spelled out so gaffes like that wouldn’t happen. (I looked to see in this morning’s edition if there was a nice bold correction but couldn’t find anything anywhere. No wonder it’s so easy to fool people out here. Front page whoppers followed by dead silence.)

Well, no matter. It’s now Official Election Time so Sewer Jihadis of all stripes can crank up their misinformation machines and have at it.

Some notes on the meeting:

Paavo was asked if he’d go to the Sept 7th Regional Water Quality Board meeting to present a sewer update and ask that the Board rescind The Los Osos 45’s CDOs and CAO’s and promise to refrain from electioneering threats and any coercive tactics until after the vote. Paavo noted that as staff, that request was outside the scope of his duties, but Supervisor Gibson would be the one to answer that request. So Supervisor Gibson said that he would indeed continue the dialogue on all issues at that meeting, a vague way of saying he may vaguely bring up the “concern” the community has with the RWQCB’s tactics, but I for one am willing to bet the exchange will go like this:

Gibson. “ We’d like to make sure the election is a clean one, with no one group of people unfairly singled out under the gun or under threats, an assurance that you’ll “level the playing field” for the 45 by rescinding the CDOs & CAOs and or officially put them in abeyance, and then issue a public statement that you’ll “stand down” from all threats until after the election since we don’t want anyone to do anything that can be construed as illegal electioneering that could result in a delay and lawsuits and so forth which could result in the ultimate irony of it being the water board who has again sabotaged and delayed this project ”

And RWQCB chairman Young will look wide-eyed and surprised and say, “Why, Mr. Gibson, this BOARD has no power over anything. It’s the staff that has the delegated power as to prosecutions or issuances of CDOs and such like. We’re absolutely helpless to do anything.”

Which will cause everyone in the room who was also in Judge Barry LaBarbera’s courtroom during the PZLDF hearing to snort loudly, remembering that Judge LaBarbera, unequivocally stated that according to statute, it is the Board NOT the Staff that’s the responsible and controlling entity. Bwa-hahahah, so poor Mr. Gibson will be subjected to the old Waltz Me Around Again Willy ploy of, Hee-Hee, don’t look now, but there’s nobody here but us mice.

In addition, the County’s planning on several information mailers on the assessment process, plus a Workshop scheduled for Saturday, Sept 29 at the Sunnyside School that will give people an opportunity to talk with staff and ask questions on the whole process. The Protest Hearing on the vote will be Oct 23 then depending on the outcome, the Board will or will not proceed forward.

Some other notes:

The assessment costs will vary from a guestimate of $25,000 for a single family home, $13,000 for Bay Ridge Estates (since they already have the laterals and collections pipes in the ground, $6,000 for mobile homes & etc.

The water benefits portion of the sewer assessments will be considered a general benefit and will have to be paid by the entire community.

If the project ends up costing less than the guestimated assessments, the assessments will be lowered.

Of all the systems now being looked at, Tri W is still the highest. Under various scenarios, a STEP/Biolac or STEP/PMF-Ponds are the lowest, at this point in the process, which might result in their finally being selected. Which possibility didn’t make Mr. Beardon happy since he went to the microphone to begin campaigning early by asking the community to vote Yes on the 218, then went on to spend his other two minutes 45 seconds detailing how much he hates STEP and “doesn’t want alarm bells going off at any time day or night,” like he thinks the STEP system apparently comes with a couple of HUGE bright red firehouse fire bells attached to the house that will constantly and randomly be clanging at all hours of the early morning, startling the neighbors and scaring the horses.

If the 218 passes, under the due diligence phase and CEQA, other systems and technologies will be vetted. For example, Pio Lombardo’s Purple Pipe Cluster System, Orenco, and any other alternatives will be vetted. Indeed, a Mr. Murphy and a Mr. Mark Low stepped to the podium to note that they had onsite technologies and an onsite system that would result in clean water, qualifies for federal onsite grants and loans that could result in installation costs of $3,500 and a monthly cost of $45. They will be free to submit their systems to Paavo to be looked at, though I did suggest to Mr. Murphy that he could save himself a whole lot of time and simply talk to RWQCB staff member, Harvey Packard, who was in the audience. Mr. Murphy claimed that Packard had no say in what he’s proposing since his system doesn’t pollute or “discharge” and so doesn’t come under Harvey’s control in any way, shape or form. Uh, huh, sure, sure, so I just smiled and walked away.

Supervisor Katcho repeatedly expressed concern for the number of people who will be forced out of their homes by a now-guestimated cost of $200 a month. This is a puzzle to me. When Tri-W was finalized, the guestimated base cost was $205 a month. To my knowledge, no Supervisor stood up and said, Woa! You can’t build a sewer system that will cost $205 to start with, a system that’ll simply escalate upwards from that point, a system that’ll force a whole bunch of people out of their homes. Nope, not a peep. But now the County is looking at a project with a guestimated average of $200 before value engineering and competitive bidding has a chance to lower that guess (not a base starting price) and now people are having cows? Are concerned? I don’t get it. Where the hell were all these concerned folks when Tri-W was on the table and literally being dug into the ground?

As regarding the concern of many in the community that the 218 ballot won’t be secret and so can be used by the RWQCB as a “revenge” tactic, the reply to that was: Yep, the RWQCB can use those documents in just that way, but it’s more important for us to ensure that names and parcel numbers remain on the ballot so we can ensure an accurate vote count and an accurate, unchallengeable process.

Unanswered is this: If a sufficient number of people fear retaliation from the RWQCB for how they vote and so don’t cast any ballots, in what way has that ensured an accurate, un-coerced process, an un-skewed, fair, clean election? If the RWQCB refuses to even issue an official statement that they won’t use that information for prosecution and fines, does that open the door for a lawsuit that may delay this project? As I noted before, you don’t have to win lawsuits to monkey wrench projects.

And an ongoing puzzle: Why do so many people waste their time to stand at the podium asking for science, logic, common sense, fairness, justice, more science when they should know by now that in this Alice In Wonderland Mad Hatter Tea Party DADA RWQCB Sewer World, science and common sense have absolutely NO place. None of that matters in this peculiarly Kafkaesque Madhouse. None of it. All you need to remember is the line from Chinatown: “You don’t understand, Jake, he OWNS the police.”

And finally, Paavo closed with a recap of what the County has done since the start of this Process. With the 218 vote, the County Process pauses and the ball goes into the court of the Los Osos homeowners. They will decide whether or not they want the County to continue on to the next phases.

Thwok! It’s up to Los Osos now. They have been betrayed in the past and led down a failed garden path by a whole series of elected officials, regulatory boards and governmental agencies. Do they now have confidence that they can enter a new Covenant with the County and that the County will enter a new Covenant with them, this time with promises being kept on both sides?



Mike said...

Only 2 simple questions:

1) Do you believe LO needs a sewer?

2) Do you believe this CSD could design, fund and build a waste water treatment system for LO if the 218 ballot were to fail?

4crapkiller said...


It seems to me by the tone of your opinion that you would recommend that people do NOT vote in the 218 election. YES would prevail! A NON vote would have no standing in any court to challange process. The LOCSD is insolvent, and perhaps will be dissolved if they cannot come to agreement with the creditors. As I read the AB2701, the district may have to be dissolved or boundries extended to put a sewer on the sites "out of town". It is easier to dissolve it, than extend the boundries.

I am not really concerned with this. I really would like information on the device or devices proposed by Mr. Murphy and Mr. Mark Low. Patent numbers would be fine. Patents are public knowledge. A web site with information is needed along with INDEPENDENT testing information to support the claims.

The CCRWQB can be chained by legislation the same way that the LOCSD was chained. The water board MUST consider new technology that is proven to work. It is not in the interest of the state or Feds to spend scarce resources in the form of low interest loans when such is not needed or can be vastly reduced. It IS in the interest of the entire state to stop pollution, and insure and adaquate supply of clean water.

This is a public works project for a purpose, and it is not a project to feather contractor and union beds as a "make work" project.

Steve said...

Crap, you give the waterboard too much credit. Like most government employees and agencies, they want the least amount of work for themselves.

The waterboard will NEVER approve individual systems, and contrary to what that guy told Ann, will fight individual systems that circumvent them.


Because they can.

Because they do not want to permit 5,000 systems.

Because they dont want to fight the people that don't want to install an individual system once the people that are scared of them have one installed and are therefore removed from the enforcement equation.

They want to issue ONE permit for the whole town because that is the easiest solution for THEM... they dont care about you.

Remember, they dont really want to fine anyone, or take their homes... they just want to scare and intimidate you into doing what they want you to do. And they dont have to scare and intimidate everyone... just 50% +1 of us.

If they can do that, they will get a ONE PERMIT centralized sewer and wont have to process 5,000 individual permits and then fight the nutjobs that won't install an individual system.

Ron said...

Rough week for the Trib, huh?

First, last Thursday, Bill Morem writes:

"As it turned out, a "wave wall" hiding the plant would be its defining amenity."

Really, Bill? Then what's all this? (Hey, Bill, after watching you stumble all over this story for the past 10 years, I want to give ya a little help, you know, as a professional courtesy... see that "Open Turf Playing Field" in that link I just supplied... yea, that $970,000 "Open Turf Playing Field?" Now THAT's a "defining amenity," Bill.)

Then, on Tuesday, their Los Osos "reporter," Sona Patel, wrote:

"That’s on top of monthly bills between $100 and $275 that were estimated in a separate report last week."

[Insert buzzer sound here.]

It's almost like they're out to deliberately confuse Los Osos. And, of course, as Ann points out, no corrections, ever.

Memo to the Tribune: Please, if I asked nicely, would you and your "news"paper just never write another word on this story? All Californians sure would appreciate it.

The Tribune -- worse than nothing!

- - -

Two great quotes from yesterday:

"Tri-W would be a more expensive project..."
-- Paavo Ogren


"We pledge our utmost interest into reducing the cost."
-- Bruce Gibson

OhhhhhKaaaaayyyy... sooooo.... why is Tri-W still on the table?

Maria M. Kelly said...

Dear Ron,
You are either choosing to not understand or the issues are still confusing you.

Neither Paavo Ogren or Bruce Gibson can unilaterally remove the TriW project. Their comments are in regards to cost and expense. Since it was a project, it still has to be considered a project when the CEQA process moves forward.

It isn't difficult to comprehend unless the focus of your mantra has morphed into obsession.

What rattles around in my brain is why is everyone so concerned? If TriW is as bad as everyone says it is then it won't percolate to the top as what's going to work for Los Osos. I think we are clear that it lacks in town community acceptance and out of town lacks the out of town community acceptance.

My challenge to you, and I say this with all the love in my heart, is to try to come up with what type of amenities will need to be tagged onto the out of town project to make it more palatable to the out of towners and will be paid for by the in towners. Oh wait, then maybe they should pay for it because it really is only going to bug them....or maybe we should pay for it so that....or what if.....

Another hamster wheel at your service free of charge no amenities required.
Maria M. Kelly

Area51 said...

"What rattles around in my brain is why is everyone so concerned? If TriW is as bad as everyone says it is then it won't percolate to the top as what's going to work for Los Osos."

This has been one of the most intriguing questions for me for some time now. It has been extremely beneficial for me to continue to see a side by side analysis (thank you Maria and TAC members!!) with Tri-W in the mix. If anything, it has moved my opinion against Tri-W. But if the vocal anti-sewer/move the sewer dregs had their way, it would have been off the table a long time ago. And to what avail? What are they afraid of? Why the incredible obsession? It's simple to figure out Santa Margerita Ron's thing. He's a freudian psychologist's dream come true. But what are the other's afraid of?

For me, it's simple. Tri-W is just a symptom for these folks. The true disease is a sewer in general. 'Cause mark my words, most of the vocal anti-Tri-W folks will also be the most vocal anti 218 folks. Anyone want to give me odds?

Ron said...

Maria wrote:

"My challenge to you, and I say this with all the love in my heart, is to try to come up with what type of amenities will need to be tagged onto the out of town project to make it more palatable to the out of towners..."

That's rich, and one of my favorite takes that led directly to this mess: "What amenities do you want in your sewer plant?"

As I once wrote in one of my favorite posts (June, 2005), what kind of question is that? What amenities do I want in my sewer plant? If I was paying for a sewer plant, I wouldn't want any amenities in my sewer plant. I would want a chain link fence and a sewer plant in my out-of-town sewer plant. And if you need to mix in some shrubbery to hide the sewer plant, fine, just make sure it's cheap and doesn't require a lot of irrigation.

"Neither Paavo Ogren or Bruce Gibson can unilaterally remove the TriW project."

Here's a sequence of questions I've been trying to get answered by Ogren over the last two weeks:

- - -
I was looking through the pro/con report, and I just had a couple of quick questions:

- Despite the site work, Tri-W is still ESHA, I take it? "Sensitive Dune Habitat?" (That's what it says in the pro-con report)

- Do any other potential sites contain ESHA?

- Are you familiar with the following out of the Tri-W CDP: "CZLUO Section 23.08.288d allows public facilities within ESHA only where there is no other feasible location."?

- If Tri-W is still ESHA, and there are other feasible non-ESHA sites, how is that not a "fatal flaw" for that Tri-W project, just like the PG&E easement restrictions were a fatal flaw for the Andre1 site? And, if it is a fatal flaw, shouldn't the Tri-W site go the way of the Andre1 site?
- - -

That's quality, tight stuff. I mean, linking all-up-like Andre1's PG&E easements with Tri-W's apparent violation of CZLUO Section 23.08.288d... that's beautiful work, and excellent questions that voters in Los Osos would find very interesting.

In fact, now that I look at it, Tri-W's flaws are even worse than Andre1's flaws. Andre1's flaws could have been mitigated just by throwing a lot of money at moving the utility lines, but Tri-W's flaw is that it's illegal. That's much worse than Andre1's flaw, yet Andre1 was removed from consideration by county officials months ago, as it should have been. That makes sense.

So, obviously, why can't Tri-W simply go the same way as Andre1? No one said a peep when Andre1 was removed from consideration. What's the difference? Tri-W's not permitted, it's not funded, it's apparently environmentally illegal, and it's "more expensive."

"... it still has to be considered a project when the CEQA process moves forward."

Hey, they considered it (where do you think I'm getting all of this information?), as per CEQA, and it was shown to be infeasible, as per SewerWatch.

"If TriW is as bad as everyone says it is then it won't percolate to the top..."

It did before. That'$ the problem.

4crapkiller said...

To Steve:

The way I understood the nature of claimed system is that it would attach to the home, no septic tank needed, and the clean potable water
would be piped through a water meter back to someplace to be used, clorinated etc. So this would be a public system not strictly an individual closed system. I have no valid information on what they propose.
I have no idea how it would work, or if it works. All I know is that they came before a BOS meeting and made claims. I fully understand the other proposed systems, including Orenco and Pio Lombardo's cluster system.

To Maria:

There is a LOCSD bankruptcy to consider. The greater hunk of it is profits lost by the contractors. One of the BOS a year ago, stated that if TRI-W was started up again, perhaps the contractors would rebid and drop their claims. In any case, the contractors suits WILL have to be considered. The cost of any out of town system would have to be increased by the amount of potential payment to the contractors if they did not settle and get the job. The money comes out of the same property owners pocket. We will see how this evolves. I doubt that the LOCSD can keep pushing off the bankruptcy court. We are talking about the 23 million already spent for tri-w and included in the cost figure. And the figure of ? for profit, damages, and legal expense to the contractors and the cost of legal defense by the LOCSD added to any system other than TRI-W where the contractors are not involved. We shall see.

Perhaps this is why "flush it and worry about it" is on the run from "flush it and forget it".

Maria M. Kelly said...

Dear 4Crap,
You are absolutely correct and I would suspect that this is more of the reason why the push to "get it off the table". I would like our community leaders to be direct and clear as to what their concerns are, how their decisions are impacting the community and are they able to take an objective look at the complete picture.

My question then becomes, why is the CSD spending so much time discussing, debating, and working on a waste water project they have no authority over instead of focusing on the bankruptcy. This bankruptcy has nothing to do with the county process and does not appear to be factoring in in their current deliberations but should be the focus of the CSD's.

Instead, I hear and see discussions regarding RFP's for when the 218 fails, constant comments on who did what to whom and when and how all our problems are everybody else's fault and so on.

We will see how this evolves and if at any point in the discussions, they have the ability to recognize the profound seriousness of this situation. A passed assessment is an investment, a bankruptcy is a liability. Both impact the value of my home and without resolution all impacts are negative with serious ramifications.

At this point in our lives, our home is our only investment, as I'm sure is the case for many families in this community.

This will be an interesting saga with interwoven complications that AB2701 tried to untie. Time will tell if it worked.

Shark Inlet said...

Aside from the fact that Ron ignored or completely misunderstood Maria M. Kelly's excellent comment about why TriW cannot be removed from the evaluation process at this point in time ...

In another comment section, Crapkiller points out something that is worth considering for those who are interested in what is best for our community (not Ron or the County who face a far different cost/benefit analysis) ... if various contractors will drop their lawsuits against the LOCSD if they are again working on the TriW project, this effectively reduces the TriW cost considerably relative to the other projects.

Ron doesn't want us to consider this at all ... he doesn't care about what is best for our pocketbooks but only in making sure that he gets some validation for his article four year old article. Some journalist! Based on one initial "take" on the situation, try to make sure that all the other facts are presented in a way that tries to back up the initial observation. Sure glad you're open to new facts because otherwise reading your blog entries would give us little more than additional references to four year old articles and four year old government documents! Boy that would be a drag.

TCG said...

After watching the Board of Supervisors yesterday, and in prior meetings, express their concern over the cost of the project to the community, it seems clear that, unless there is a great majority of people who express a preference in the Survey for Tri-W, that option will be the first one eliminated by them from the remaining group.

Then it will boil down to the two remaining--flush and worry or flush and forget about it. It will be interesting to see what the survey says about those options.

By the way, I thought that Ann's above summary of key points made in yesterday's meeting was a good one. She is so right--it will be a lot about mis-information from this point on.

Mike Green said...

OK, so I'm sitting here in Arkansas and I can smell the stink from the Triv. I usually refrain from using foul language, but this time I will make an exception!
To the Tribune: You are the worst paper in the country as far as I can tell, you suck! Go to hell, even the free online version is overpriced! your advertisers should all bail on you and sign up with the Bay News!
There I feel better now!
Heading west tomorrow so I can join in the fun!
Cussing from afar, Mike Green.

4crapkiller said...

To Maria Kelly:

If I read AB2701, the LOCSD is expressly prohibited to do anything about a sewer system. Patterson did not understand that at the BOS meeting. Schicker understood, and said that she would have to consult with district lawyers. However, there are no punishments in the law for violating the law. The punishments must come from within another statute somewhere, or perhaps they do not exist. FYI: anyone who has bought a house here within the past four years should get it reappraised by the county assessor.

To Mike Green: A little north of you is Branson. Inexpensive motels, and real good trout fishing. You have said that you like to fish. I love Branson and have a timeshare there.

Somehow we have come to the same conclusion about the TT.

To tcg:

The way I understand it, the survey will be mailed to all residents of Los Osos, not just the property owners. In that any sewer will require increased water costs for all in the basin, it should be mailed to all in the district. Correct me if I am wrong. The survey does not call for mandatary action, but is to be used as a guide. I have no idea how the survey can be weighted, but the recall showed that many did not consider the consequences of stopping the sewer. 30% of the population are renters. In most cases property owners pay the water charges, in that they do not want their landscaping to die from neglect or lack of water. Rental contracts will have to be changed, but there are consequences. There are renters who have a great respect for property and then there are not. Chances are sewer fees will be based upon water consumption. It is hard to evict tenants. I have no idea how this will play out, or what can be done.
In Los Osos there is no group or the LOCSD that inspects the outside of homes and yards for cleanliness, lack of garbage, junk accumulation, and old cars in disrepair on stands in yards, or even painting. There are no regulations or fines, and as a result much of the community is sliding into slum like conditions with the property values of all deminished. And now, with Sam Boykin removed from the CSD, the community cleanup sucks. I have no idea what the result will be, but it is clear that Los Osos HAS been neglected by the county. Roads come to mind, and the failure to complete their latest road project
on Sta. Isabel? is a prime example.
Sort of like "Let the nut cases stew in their own juice".

They don't mind taking our property taxes however.

When Ann states that there will be a great deal of misinformation, she is correct. However, during the recall election 49% were not duped. Expect the same people to vote YES on the 218 vote as voted against the recall within the PZ. In addition they will be working with those property owners who did not vote and never believed that the LOCSD board would take the unreasonable action that they did. Big difference now when looking at a $900 a month discharge fee. Reality check!

To Steve, again:

"Crap, you give the waterboard too much credit. Like most government employees and agencies, they want the least amount of work for themselves."
You are absolutely correct! This has been my experience for many years. The BOS is an exception to this rule. If 218 fails, the state will come in, and it it will be TRI-W as designed with a much higher markup. In addition there is the problem with the CDOs and the discharge permit.

Mr. Dooley has stated on the TT blogs: "There are a lot more chains than dogs." He is correct.

Jon-Erik G. Storm said...

"For me, it's simple. Tri-W is just a symptom for these folks. The true disease is a sewer in general. 'Cause mark my words, most of the vocal anti-Tri-W folks will also be the most vocal anti 218 folks. Anyone want to give me odds?"

That's too simple.

The TAC report makes it clear that the anti Tri-W people at least had something of a point. They people totally against a sewer, of course, are going to use whatever leverage they have to get otherwise neutral people to go against it. That's how the game is played. Maybe if the idea of putting the thing in the middle of town hadn't given them so much leverage we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I'm all for a sewer, but unless there's a compelling monetary reason, putting it in the middle of town isn't my preference.

Of course, I've only lived in Los Osos for 5 months, so I'm not all into this Hatfield & McCoy vendetta stuff, and am just trying to approach this like a normal person. But I'm probably failing.

Jon-Erik G. Storm said...

"... if various contractors will drop their lawsuits against the LOCSD if they are again working on the TriW project, this effectively reduces the TriW cost considerably relative to the other projects.

Ron doesn't want us to consider this at all ... "

Ummm....So because he won't consider a big "if" he's full of crap? Aren't LOCSD lawsuits claims in bankruptcy now? What's the guarantee that the county would/could use the same contractors?

I'm sure there are a lot of possibilities that remote people aren't considering. heh.

Of course, I love how this whole sewer thing has turned into an "I've got inside information you don't" cock contest.

It's not. It's politics. Get 50% +1 and you win and it happens. That takes persuasion, and persuasion doesn't always stem from the best idea. For some people it's as simple as how much, for others it's where. If some combination of those things prevails, it does.

But no one's blog (mine included) or miracle cure is it.

4crapkiller said...

To Rick (Jon_Eric):

Well, it is only money, and it truly is the root of our evil: hence the squabble. Glad you, so far, say you are out of it. However on your legalized blog, you sure hit the ground running. Made some good points. But this is the essence of litigation.

Welcome to the community. Glad the fees and increased taxes won't hurt you. It is nice when you have money and can afford such. You have the right to the fruits of your labors.

No doubt you bought your house in the PZ at a well discounted rate from two years ago, and ended up with your fees and tax increase taken from the previous owner. But you helped the previous owner to get out of a very bad situation and so it was good for the previous owner also. So now all you have to do is enjoy our clean air, coolness, and lack of high utility bills for electricity and heating. Enjoy! Thank you also for buying the home at market price (sales price) and increasing the tax rolls. See if you can get your friends to do the same. Last time I looked there were better than 100 homes for sale in the PZ, and just sitting there. Most without any offers! These people need help, many cannot reduce the price, or they will be upside down on their mortgages, with no net cash at sale. They have refinanced creatively, anticipating that their home values would go up and putting aside part of the money that they received from their equity to pay off the increased mortgage or new mortgage payment. I hope they did not spend the money the balance of the money on vacations, a new car, etc., they will need it.

By the way, LOCSD claims are not in bankruptcy. The bankruptcy has only been filed, and NOT been accepted by the court. No plan has been accepted by the creditors and as far as I know, and no acceptable plan has been offered by the LOCSD to the creditors. The suits are simply stayed. Of course, reasonable interest continues to accrue until a decision is made on the acceptance of the bankruptcy, assuming a plan is accepted. The creditors can wait: they fully understand that eventually the property owners are on line to pay the debts. There is 1 billion plus in property securing the potential awards, far far more than what is owed. 5 to 6 percent of property values considering fees, punitive damages etc.? There is also the problem LOCSD lawyer costs and they are not cheap. The bankruptcy lawyer representing the LOCSD received 100 grand up front.

In any case put you comments here, rather than your own blog, for all to see. You CAN make valid points, and your self described outsider's perspectives CAN bring sunshine and light to our discussions of facts, opinions, and ideas. This blog is monitored by many in high places as is the Tribune blogs. Of course anything written here is nowhere as effective as maximum campaign contributions. It has always been about money to insure good government, since the beginning of time.

4crapkiller said...

Buy the way Rick:

Fines against the LOCSD by the state continue to accrue at the rate of $10,000 a day for non compliance of directives of the water law. They started when the sewer was stopped by the LOCSD. As I understand it, the amount fined the LOCSD and in dispute in the court, stayed, were reduced. What the water board intends to do with the accrual is unknown, and their decision to impose them is unknown should water law obstruction continue. The water board holds a royal straight flush. Their fines are also subject to payment by property owners. 7.2 mil! Mercy?

Best to vote for the 218 assessment and hopefully there will be mercy for property owners and reason will prevail.......