Pages

Monday, January 14, 2008

Suicide Run? Or "Oh, Dang! Whatever Shall We Do About Los Osos? "

Well, I see in today's Tribune, that newly elected Board of Supervisors Chairman Jim Patterson's heading for a likely bear mauling. He's proposing that the weekly three-hour Tuesday Fest, the "Oh, Dang, Let's Talk About Los Osos" jam session be moved to a monthly "Oh Dang Let's Talk About Los Osos" jam session. The reason given: The Hideous Sewer Project is now heading into the part where things can be studied and decided by various "experts" and the BOS doesn't really need weekly updates and/or public comments and oversight since that can be a real bother and anyway the TAC is back in business and concerned citizens can go speak at the TAC meetings and their concerns will be duly noted and possibly put somewhere in the ginormous report that will eventually be produced and/or they can always email their technical concerns to the various folks in charge of technical concerns and their comments will be duly noted and possibly put somewhere in the ginormous report that will eventually be produced, commented on then ignored in whole or part as the whole Hideous Project steams along under it's own tsunami power, going which ever way it was determined to go anyway -- towards a successful conclusion or over a cliff -- chugga-chugga-chugga.

Well, good luck to Mr. Patterson, I say. The problem with Public Comment has always been The Public. It's like herding crazed cats -- you don't have any control where they're gonna go or what they're gonna say. And Los Osos cats are even more wily than their feral counterparts up in the chapparral eating endangered wild birds. No matter what rules are in place, someone'll figure out a way to sneak a sewer comment in there. And if the rules say Public Comment is for items NOT on the agenda, if you have a one hour morning Public Comment period and a one hour afternoonn Public Comment, you will have at least half of the speakers lined up to talk about The Hideous Los Osos Sewer, no matter what.

And if you pass a new resolution that people can speak on any topic NOT on the Agenda and also NOT about the Hideous Sewer, you'll be threatened with Brown Act Violations and somebody will loudly announce that you're a fascist! And so forth.

Ironically, some of the problems with the "Oh, Dang! Let's Talk About Los Osos" portion of the public comment period come directly from the Blakeslee Compromise and the lack of any working agreement with the Los Osos CSD to "partner" on the Hideous Sewer during this critical input stage. Since the County is 100% in charge, the citizens of Los Osos have no other venue to vent their concerns about the Sewer Project BUT the County, and the only proper public forum are the BOS meetings and the BOS public comment period. Previously, all those run-amok cats would have shown up at the CSD meetings for Public Comment, thereby giving the LOCSD Board vast hedaches as to how to herd them. Now, ironically, the method to proceed forward with a wastewater system (taken over by the county) is the very thing that's channeling all those cats into the BOS chambers to give the Supervisors headaches.

So, how's this for a compromise: Finish that "Partnership" agreement with the CSD, then announce that all public comment on the Hideous Sewer needs to be directed first through the CSD, since that's at the grass roots level, and they in turn will share those concerns directly to the County Sewer Team during their weekly (?) meetings -- partner to partner.

Perhaps then, the new Chairman Patterson won't have to spend time thinking about different ways to divert this stream of Los Osos cats into some proceedure that won't waste so much of the BOS's time, yet will preserve the appearance of "Yes, We Actually Really Do Value Public Comment & Input, Believe It Or Not, Heh-Heh."

So, if Patterson and the Board can come up with some way to herd these cats back to Los Osos for input at a meaningful forum, (you know, one where if some citizen actually shows up with facts and figures showing some calculations are wrong, the information will actually be seriously considered instead of being buried in a pile of paper with the smiling comment, "thank you for sharing, now it's time to move on,") while at the same time getting MORE people from different parts of the County to show up to comment on OTHER County issues, then I say, best of luck to everyone.


Sauce for Goose and Gander?

Wickedly droll L.A. Times columnist, Steve Lopez, wrote a recent column outlining his efforts to call up the three Movers & Shakers behind the recall of Gov. Gray Davis. He quoted extensively from the recall petition -- you remember, all about how the Gov. had driven the state into a financial hole, was bankrupting the place, threatening services, mis-governing, etc. etc. etc. and demanding that when a Gov. does that, he should be recalled-- then asked these three whether they were going to head up another petition to recall The Governator.

Nope. They weren't.

So, a Democratic governor was to be held accountable and tossed out of office by three outraged Republicans, but a Republican governor gets a free pass by those same three guys for the same fiscal disasters.

Ah, just as I thought.


51 comments:

Area51 said...

This is excellent!!!! And reminds me that my voice as well is heard above the roar of those who are lucky to have the time to attend every BOS meeting. (A very, very one-sided lot they are indeed!!!)

I've been e mailing the Supes to consider minimizing the Los Osos Travelling Lunatic Road Show for some time now. I'm sure many have, and maybe we made a difference.

Power to ALL the people!!!!! And ALL opinions on this issue!!!!! Right on BOS!! And enjoy your time away from the loud, rude, insulting mob of crazies. Get 'er done!!!!!

Mike Green said...

Can anyone tell me of an instance where a governing body associated with the Los Osos sewer wars has modified or changed a position based on public testimony presented at an open meeting?
(leave the public spanking of Al Barrow out of this)

Sewertoons said...

Ann said:
" …yet will preserve the appearance of 'Yes, We Actually Really Do Value Public Comment & Input, Believe It Or Not, Heh-Heh.' "

Maybe Patterson is trying to save some time for other important jobs that the Supervisors do, The same group speaks time after time and says exactly the same thing every time. So much of it is premature and uninformed, to boot. It must be difficult to not take it out on Los Osos after enduring this mind-bending repetition. Talk about waterboarding! The public does itself no favors.

(I just watch this on TV, and I am sick of the repetition. At least as a TV watcher, I can get up and pop some popcorn or go to the bathroom. The poor Supes and staff just have to sit there.)

I think Patterson is showing intelligence and prudence with this move. I applaud him!

Prefix528 said...

The public comment policy followed by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors could provide some guidance to the local board. There, the rule is that any person can comment on one agenda item and can address a non-agenda item once every three months. The San Luis Board has been generous in devoting so much time to Los Osos issues. But anyone watching the sessions realizes that little is gained by providing a regular showcase for the same collection of people repeating the things they said the last time they went to the podium.

A once-a-month policy fits Brown Act requirements and might even provide extra time for the meeting regulars to discover new things to say.

Mark said...

Area51 said...

This is excellent!!!! And reminds me that my voice as well is heard above the roar of those who are lucky to have the time to attend every BOS meeting. (A very, very one-sided lot they are indeed!!!)

I've been e mailing the Supes to consider minimizing the Los Osos Travelling Lunatic Road Show for some time now. I'm sure many have, and maybe we made a difference.

Power to ALL the people!!!!! And ALL opinions on this issue!!!!! Right on BOS!! And enjoy your time away from the loud, rude, insulting mob of crazies. Get 'er done!!!!


--As long as it is done right. Including following the law.

Mike Green said...

Can anyone tell me of an instance where a governing body associated with the Los Osos sewer wars has modified or changed a position based on public testimony presented at an open meeting?
(leave the public spanking of Al Barrow out of this)


The public comment protects the record and provides ready reviewable comments- Remember in August 2007 when Paavo said "then that becomes the new standard?"

Sewertoons said...

Ann said:
" …yet will preserve the appearance of 'Yes, We Actually Really Do Value Public Comment & Input, Believe It Or Not, Heh-Heh.' "

Maybe Patterson is trying to save some time for other important jobs that the Supervisors do, The same group speaks time after time and says exactly the same thing every time. So much of it is premature and uninformed, to boot. It must be difficult to not take it out on Los Osos after enduring this mind-bending repetition. Talk about waterboarding! The public does itself no favors.

(I just watch this on TV, and I am sick of the repetition. At least as a TV watcher, I can get up and pop some popcorn or go to the bathroom. The poor Supes and staff just have to sit there.)

I think Patterson is showing intelligence and prudence with this move. I applaud him!


I hope it does not haunt him. When a man assumes a public trust he should consider himself a public property.
Thomas Jefferson


Prefix528 said...

The public comment policy followed by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors could provide some guidance to the local board. There, the rule is that any person can comment on one agenda item and can address a non-agenda item once every three months. The San Luis Board has been generous in devoting so much time to Los Osos issues. But anyone watching the sessions realizes that little is gained by providing a regular showcase for the same collection of people repeating the things they said the last time they went to the podium.

A once-a-month policy fits Brown Act requirements and might even provide extra time for the meeting regulars to discover new things to say.


Politicians also have no leisure, because they are always aiming at something beyond political life itself, power and glory, or happiness.
Aristotle

Jane said...

Ann,
Having the comments first shared at in a CSD forum, and then having CSD sit down and discuss issues with the BOS is a great idea. This would allow the BOS to actually process the information in a logical sequence with a grouping of topics. The discussion format would allow them to ask questions and really understand the issues. They would no longer have to rely on Gibson’s and Paavo’s slanted view of Los Osos.

I have to agree with Patterson in that the current comment format is not working. Some people are showing up at every board meeting and talking as fast as they can for three minutes. No one can possibly listen to this hour after hour, and week after week, and month after month. Outside of Gibson (and Ovitt?), the supervisors don’t really know if speakers are giving them the truth, or feeding then a pack of lies. They depend on the district supervisor to help them stay on top individual district issues; there is just too much material to digest and respond to each week. But as we know, Gibson has his own agenda that is more closely aligned with Roger Briggs and Pandora Nash, so the sups rarely know the peoples truth. Ann’s idea would be a much less stressful way to educate the supervisors. And since the CSD Board was elected by the people, their voice is more representative of the people than the backroom selected TAC.

Mark said...

WATER is the reason for the whole "excercise".
Without water there is no life...

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Low
To: Mark Low
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 6:18 PM
Subject: O.C. sewage will soon be drinking water - Los Angeles Times



The RECLAMATOR turns wastewater into drinkable water on-site using less energy and for less money than this "process".
The LOSTDEP RECLAMATOR Solution..."from obstructionists to world visionaries"- who would stand against it?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-reclaim2jan02,1,732425.story?ctrack=1&cset=true


As a hedge against water shortages and population growth, Orange County has begun operating the world's largest, most modern reclamation plant -- a facility that can turn 70 million gallons of treated sewage into drinking water every day.


Science & Technology: The 'end of the pipe' for O.C. water agencies | water, county, california, orange, district - OCRegister.com

http://www.ocregister.com/science-technology/water-county-california-1958363-orange-district

Thinking ahead
Water agencies aren't just jostling for more state water-bond money. They say increased conservation along with new ways to generate supply are also high on their list of priorities.

Area51 said...

Jane, your slant on things is so skewed it's laughable. You and your ilk feel anyone who doesn't agree with YOUR agenda to be biased, slanted, and under some hypnotic spell of Pandora. It's a pity you and yours don't give the Los Osos homeowner more credit. Oh well. I imagine you think the 80% mandate we saw recently, as your pal Mark Low opines, was just because we're weasels, scaredy cats, and just plain dumb. (I think "idiot" was his word). I like to think better of my neighbors. And I know that is the REAL people's truth.

And it's even more a pity you think the CSD is any way, shape or form relevent to the county takeover of the project. That ship left the port a long, long time ago (in sewer time at least.) And it ain't ever coming back. As Gail McPherson once said, you better get over that.

Mike said...

A GIANT 'Thank You' Mr Patterson and the rest of the San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors and that includes the staff!!!!!

Los Osos is NOT SLO County or some sovereign nation and does NOT deserve the inordinate amount of wasted "Public (ya right, all 12 of the same wantabe sewerlawyer/experts) Input"

Los Osos has a water/sewer issue, but that is not the only problem within the whole County. Time to move on and let the Public Works experts do the job and quit listening to the Los Osos obstructionists!

TCG said...

Per AB 2701, once the Prop 218 vote passed the CSD is not authorized to provide sewer service. Given this, plus the fact that the CSD meeting attendence is not very high nor reflective of the recent 80-20 vote, I do not agree that running public comment concepts through that forum prior to the Board of Supervisors makes much sense.

Additionally, I believe that the CSD meetings should be focusing on the other important business that it is responsible for.

Mark said...

51 incorrectly wrote:-as your pal Mark Low opines, was just because we're weasels, scaredy cats, and just plain dumb. (I think "idiot" was his word).

51:
In an effort to keep the record straight I am "repeating a previous post for your benefit.
As you will note I did not ude the word "idiot"- I simply defined it.

----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Murphy
To: 'Mark Low'
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 11:45 AM
Subject: RE: 51


Tom Murphy said:

“By golly, I think he’s got it”……. He’s out of a “Stakeholders” interest AND, the County and CSD will tell him that “he’s going to be served by the RECLAMATOR anyway”. Not only is he a “self proclaimed” BAD GUY, but an IDIOT to boot.

And YES, we don’t want “idiots” as partners in out business either.

It is a GREAT DAY for Los Osos!!!

PS. Are you aware of any “corn fields” near Los Osos?

...more cut and paste from another Murphy/Low inter office exchange today- re:51:

Mark, the County won’t want to provide a “partial” AND “optional” non-compliant conventional sewer system service for Los Osos, so, by default, ALL citizens in Los Osos will HAVE to accept the Discharge Elimination Services (just like a sewer) or be fined $5,000 per day by the RWQCB for refusing to cease and desist their discharge.

Ain’t it just amazing how right always seems to win in the end???

Area51 said...

There's nothing left to say to you Mark.

I always fashioned you and your buddy fools, but reading your argument on the previous thread that Los Osos should not build a "big pipe" sewer because it will bring in construction companies who hire illegal aliens who in turn will rape the women and children of this community, I fashion you both far worse and much more sinister things than a fool.

But of course, I'm sure that's not what you meant, right?

Yuck.

Copied and pasted, the way you like it:

“This guy was a heavy equipment operator who used to work in California.
The kind of equipment that will be in Los Osos for years should the county continue towards its big pipe solution...
I am researching what company he was currently employed.

January 1, 2008 the toughest illegal immigration employer sanction law in the nation went into effect.
However, that is no consolation to the young girl this punk attacked.

Vigilance at every post, including but not limited to the LOSTDEP.


DNA links illegal immigrant to attacks
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/106468

Santana Batiz-Aceves, 39, a twice-deported illegal immigrant with a history of drug charges, was arrested about 11:49 a.m. Friday at his Chandler home near Arizona Avenue and Ray Road. He was booked into Maricopa County’s Fourth Avenue Jail on suspicion of 25 felonies, including kidnapping, child molestation, sexual abuse, sexual conduct with a minor, aggravated assault, burglary and trespassing.

Kiyler said Batiz-Aceves was deported twice for drug charges in California in 1999 and 2003.
Andersen Junior High principal Jim Anderson said the arrest was a “tremendous relief.”

“Everybody is going to feel a whole lot safer — if this is the guy — knowing that he’s not going to be around anymore,” Anderson said.

At least three of the attacks involved Andersen students, and the principal said the whole campus has been concerned.

The series of attacks started June 4, 2006, with the sexual assault of a 12-year-old girl. That attack was not reported to police until six months later.

The latest sexual assault victim was a 14-year-old girl attacked at her mobile home on June 8 while her grandparents sat outside on the front porch.

All of the victims were girls between the ages of 12 and 15.

The serial predator typically struck early in the morning and targeted young girls living in single-parent homes. Police also believe the man watched his victims and cased their homes before the attacks."

I think I'll go shower now.

Sewertoons said...

jane said:
"And since the CSD Board was elected by the people, their voice is more representative of the people than the backroom selected TAC."

jane, surely you must be aware that the CSD board (except for Joe) is filled with people elected on lies. $100/mo. - We have a plan - illegal use of Blakeslee's photo - illegal use of the County seal - $154/mo. All lies. Had those statements been disallowed do you really think these people would have been elected? Do you think that these NOW represent the people? Put on your glasses and hearing aid - you are seriously out of touch!

Personally, I do not trust the CSD except for Joe to take my ideas to the County. Why shouldn't I just do this my self by attending a TAC meeting and speaking or e-mailing my idea to the County? You really think aside from poor, lone Joe that the County wants to hear from the people through the Board rather than from the people themselves?

You just sound like you think it is too dangerous to let the people speak for them selves. You want to control what is said. Does your real name start with a G? All this sounds like something G would say.

Mike said...

Ann, PRIOR to any further discussions of any sewer, hideous or reclamous, the LOCSD should finally have some serious discussion of the very real bankruptcy!!! The CSD is out of the waste water business!!!

The County no longer needs to hear the same scrip from the same 12 actors, they made their point and it does not help to pound on the nail already driven.

Jane said...

area 51,
Why do you assume that I voted against the 218?

You are trying to group everyone as for or against your view. This is a very narrow perspective. The Recalamator promoters are a very small segment, and to place everyone who questions the process in this catigory is a typical Pandora technique. Gibson is a snake with a RWQCB/Pandora/Tri W agenda just as Mark has a reclamator agenda. They use different methods, but both are trying to quash the voices of the people.

The CSD represents the people with individual members representing different views. (From Sparks to Tacker is quite a range.) Let them speak occassionally with the BOS, organising the public concerns and presenting them in a comprehensable form.

Sewertoons said...

Gee jane - interesting how you managed to skip by my idea of individual participation without any acknowledgement.

Why?

There are four views all one way on the board and one view that is different. I don't see at all what you mean about "range."

Churadogs said...

Hmmm, it's always been interesting to me how glibly and easily and quickly people rush to throw away, with both hands, their rights as citizens to speak out and help shape their own destiny. I suppose the reason falls to the old Bell Curve: X% of people are Heirarchists -- they want Big Uncle Daddy to make all their decisions for them then tell them what to do vs Y% of the people who are Decentralizists, they want to make their own decisions and operate on the "small d" democratic methods. I suspect that's who/who we're hearing from above: Cut local governance out of the loop, Let Big Uncle County Daddy Decide everything vs. retain Local Citizen Input and consultation and collaboration.

Wierdly, our system is set up to encourage small-d-democratic participation. It's a slow, often frustrating process, fraught with silliness and boredome, but it is a process that's in place. The question is How to make it work better since it's unlikely it can be overturned to install a process that runs strictly on a Dictatorial form. But it's still interesting to see how many people really do believe: Free speech for ME, but NOT for Thee.

Sewertoons sez:"jane, surely you must be aware that the CSD board (except for Joe) is filled with people elected on lies. $100/mo. - We have a plan - illegal use of Blakeslee's photo - illegal use of the County seal - $154/mo. All lies. Had those statements been disallowed do you really think these people would have been elected? Do you think that these NOW represent the people? Put on your glasses and hearing aid - you are seriously out of touch!"

Uh-oh, Toons, you just know that comment is gonna get Ron Crawford in here to remind you once again about Faster Better Cheaper. . .

Mark said...

51 wrote:
But of course, I'm sure that's not what you meant, right?

51-When government does not enforce the law already on the books like the recent (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,225337,00.html) border fence legislation and hiring of illegal aliens as in the case of the serial rapist who was for a third time in the United States illegally, the citizens suffer. As in the case of the rape victims some suffer more than others.

When you shower (or flush) next time think USC 33/26 as that law is what created USEPA in 1972. USC 33/26 underpins everything WaterBoard and the LOSTDEP and how that water is to be treated by law.

The CDO's that have been in place against the LOCSD for the community septic systems that serve 224 residences in the communities of Vista de Oro and Bayview Ridge Estates since November 19, 1999 aren't as well known and did not receive the level of attention that the "BOS Patriots" of Los Osos/Baywood Park , have brought to the the LOSTDEP in general.

It is interesting that the WaterBoard allowed the development of those community septic tank systems in the first place...
But that's another "thread" in the LOSTDEP quilt.

I am a big fan of the cut and paste! My point in using it on this thread was to make the point the you incorrectly credited me for writing something that I did not. No excuse for misrepresenting my words when they are right in front of you on your screen...

There is no excuse for not following the law when the technology that is called for in it cost less and can be implemented faster than the "conventional county public works sewer project".

Area51 said...

Jane:

Huh?

In one moment you write:
"You are trying to group everyone as for or against your view. This is a very narrow perspective."

Then you write this: "Gibson is a snake with a RWQCB/Pandora/Tri W agenda..."

It always amazes me that people like you, and Santa Margerita Ron, and Ann et. al. are offended when called "obstructionists," but have no problem referring to all of us who support the county process as tools of Pandora. (By the way, I wouldn't know who Pandora is if she walked into my office with a sign saying "I am Pandora.")

It's just too lazy to do that, and besides, Los Osos' property owners are smarter than that.

Just amazing.

Mark said...

toons asked:
Why shouldn't I just do this my self by attending a TAC meeting and speaking or e-mailing my idea to the County?

If asking questions that will never be answered makes you feel involved, great!
I do not rely on that excercise to have my point addressed.

Mark said...

tcg wrote:

Additionally, I believe that the CSD meetings should be focusing on the other important business that it is responsible for.

Like the cutting edge profit sharing PPP agreement as outlined in the summary on the previous thread, which would insure income not only from the LOSTDEP but from everywhere within the CCRWQCB territory.

Mark said...

Mike said...

Ann, PRIOR to any further discussions of any sewer, hideous or reclamous, the LOCSD should finally have some serious discussion of the very real bankruptcy!!!


The Re-Org summary on the previous thread is an optimum way out of BK


The CSD is out of the waste water business!!! We disagree.

Mark said...

Jane wrote:
Gibson is a snake with a RWQCB/Pandora/Tri W agenda just as Mark has a reclamator agenda.

At least I am honset enough to admit my "agenda"- Promulgate federally mandated and compliant technology that follows the law, conserves water and money while I make a living.

What's not to like?

Mark said...

Churadogs said...

Hmmm, it's always been interesting to me how glibly and easily and quickly people rush to throw away, with both hands, their rights as citizens to speak out and help shape their own destiny.

BRAVO!!! Ann, SPOT ON TARGET!!! RIGHT ON THE MONEY!!! There really isn't anything new under the sun as far as human behaviour goes. However, technology is a different story. Imagine if the founding fathers of these United States had Blogging? We need toons, 51, green and MIKE to help illuminate and promulgate, at least I do...

If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send one hundred and fifty lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, and talk by the hour?
Thomas Jefferson


Congress correctly came up with the solution to ater pollution in 1972 with an amendment to "The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948". That amendment USC 33/26 created the USEPA, it is commonly refered to the "Clean Water Act". The engineers in the late 1960's knew of developing technologies that would treat wastewater at the source and used that knowledge to write law. Today that technology and law are represented by AES DES LLC in an appliance called "RECLAMATOR". The LOCSD has a groundbreaking oppourtuinty to follow the law and become the most profitable CSD in history, while it saves its citizens water and money, big money and lots of water.

What is not to like???

Ron said...

A-51 wrote:

"(By the way, I wouldn't know who Pandora is if she walked into my office with a sign saying "I am Pandora.")"

Apparently, A-51, you weren't around from 1998 - 2005.

If you're a PZ property owner, A-51, you really, REALLY need to know who she is.

So, allow me to introduce you...

Area 51, meet Pandora Nash-Karner.

Mark wrote:

"Jane wrote:
Gibson is a snake with a RWQCB/Pandora/Tri W agenda just as Mark has a reclamator agenda.

At least I am honset enough to admit my "agenda"... "


Beautifully put.

I know what Mark's agenda is -- trying to sell his product that he believes will work better for Los Osos. Fair enough. How is that a problem?

However, if there's one, $200 million dollar question that remains unanswered in the hideous sewer wars, it's this: What in the hell is Nash-Karner's agenda?

I mean, nine-years-(at least)-and-counting, of spending every waking moment doing WHATEVER IT TAKES -- forming a CSD with her "behavior based" saturation marketing tactics, playing "bait and switchy" with the Coastal Commission for three years, ripping a town apart, costing California taxpayers millions upon millions of dollars, dissolving government agencies that she created, ANYTHING -- to ensure that a sewer plant with a public park in it is built at the unpopular, expensive, mid-town, environmentally sensitive Tri-W site.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

When I step back and look at those nine-years-(at least)-and-counting, I, like everyone else, have no idea what her agenda is, other than she really, really, REALLY likes parks, and the only way she is going to find funding for her park for Los Osos is if she bundles that park in a sewer plant, and then have the State's SRF loan illegally fund it... just like she previously did.

That's the best "agenda" I can see.

The problem for Nash-Karner these days is, county staff has already said they, unlike SLO County Parks Commissioner, Nash-Karner, will NOT be developing a "project objective for centrally located community amenities" for THEIR sewer project, under-freaking-standably!

So, I have no idea why county staff is spending another nickel evaluating Nash-Karner's Tri-W sewer-park site.

Again, it doesn't make any sense.

I wrote about all that at this link:
http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2007/12/more-evidence-shows-that-additional.html

Sewertoons said...

ron says:
"…sewer plant with a public park in it is built at the unpopular, expensive, mid-town, environmentally sensitive Tri-W site."

Ron, you might be the perfect person to ask. Why is it that when it was ponds on Tri-W it was OK - no MORE than OK -- hugely embraced --and then when it wasn't ponds, it suddenly became "unpopular" for a location for treatment? How did the feeling on that location go from really good to "bad?" Think there was some marketing "spin" involved?

(It isn't mid-town either, but then you don't live here.)

Also, what area around Los Osos is not environmentally sensitive in one way or another?

Oh, yes --- as you are well aware as to the reasons WHY the County WILL look at Tri-W, it seems rather odd that you claim you don't know, as you have read it here, and I'm sure other places, many, many times. It is OK to disagree, but you have an idea as to WHY.

Jane said...

area51
If you were paying any attention to the BOS meetings, you would know that Gibson has twice tried to introduce documents with a RWQCB/Pandora agenda. And he was shot down by the other supervisors both times. Thank God that they are starting to wise up to his manipulating game,

Jane said...

sewertoons,
I am sorry that you felt I was ignoring you. I was in such a hurry wasn't able to read all the comments this morning.

I do believe that everyone has the right to speak, but right now some people are speaking so much that they are clogging the airwaves. As a result, no one is heard. I would like to see the supervisors actually listen to the ideas of everyone, but this will not occur unless someone is actively consolidating the information.

I don't like the TAC controlling this task and you don't like the CSD. I would honestly be happy with a combination, and throw in a reclamator proponent to balance it out. We just have to give up on the idea that bombarding the BOS with two hours of three minute sound bites every week is actually going to make a difference.

Mark said...

Today's SLO BOS:

It's the law.
It's the water.
It's the economy.

It's beginning to get interesting...

Shark Inlet said...

Because I'm feeling as self-referential as Ron ... let me just quote myself at length even though those who are interested probably could find the original content anyways ... after all, my insight is so freakin' brilliant that it bears repeating and repeating and repeating. And my insight is not mathematically chock-full-o-crap and proven wrong like Ron's, so it's a bonus for the reader ... you!


Let's summarize the state of Los Osos today.

There are three kinds of people. One group are the folks who want to continue to fight the RWQCB, SWRCB, County, CCC, etc. until they get their ideal solution (a sustainable plant or collection of plants that costs so little to build and run that no one will be forced to move away because of the cost ... oh yeah ... it also can't be in located anywhere near any homes or churches unless it is the home or church of people who live outside the CSD boundaries). The second group are either folks who like the County running things, like TriW or have simply given up on fighting every regulatory body on every issue (perhaps because the cost of fighting is so darn high). The third group are folks who don't care so much either way ... probably because they live outside the PZ, are really wealthy or because they're renters who were thinking of moving anyways.

I would count myself in the second group. There is nothing inherently wrong with fighting for justice and for your way and the like ... but if the cost of the fight will bankrupt me, I would rather take my lumps and move on. Survival is smarter than winning thru a scorched earth campaign. Or, as Dr. Phil says, "would you rather be right or be happy?"

It is very clear to anyone who has seriously looked into the cost question at all that the cost of any solution keeps going up. Even the "cheaper" Ripley $154/month solution, once vetted by the County engineering staff, consultants and TAC ended up being more expensive than TriW's $205/month.

If the high cost of TriW was one of the key reasons for the recall passing, we're now facing higher costs ... because of the recall.

What is the best thing to do next? Stop going to County BOS meetings and complaining about everything. Start working with the TAC and County to make wise choices. Get with the program. To those who still want to fight the County and RWQCB and everyone else at all costs, I would offer a phrase from Gail: "you lost, get over it." I would also add that you've been gambling with my money for a long time now and you keep losing. I resent that you're unwilling to stop losing my money.

Churadogs said...

Area 51 sez:"It always amazes me that people like you, and Santa Margerita Ron, and Ann et. al. are offended when called "obstructionists," but have no problem referring to all of us who support the county process as tools of Pandora. (By the way, I wouldn't know who Pandora is if she walked into my office with a sign saying "I am Pandora.")

It's just too lazy to do that, and besides, Los Osos' property owners are smarter than that.

Just amazing."

actually what's amazing is you've just gone and done the same thing you're accusing others of -- lumping "people like you," together. I object to the term "obstructionist" because it's simply incorrect and it blinds everyone to the reality on the ground. And lumping "people like you" i.e. Ron & Ann together is equally incorrect and blinding. It is amazing. and lazy. I agree.

Sewertoons sez:"Ron, you might be the perfect person to ask. Why is it that when it was ponds on Tri-W it was OK - no MORE than OK -- hugely embraced --and then when it wasn't ponds, it suddenly became "unpopular" for a location for treatment? How did the feeling on that location go from really good to "bad?" Think there was some marketing "spin" involved?"

Try this: $35-40 a month for ponds that were passive, "green," created a "green-belt" area,a promise it wouldn't smell, be energy smart, progressive, recycle water, hence no imported water,little or no sludge, etc. etc versus the County's traditional sewer plant realistically pegged at about $100 a month, with no clear water recycle component at the time.

Then try, $35-40 month original Ponds of Avalon With Swans, suddenly popping up as a traditional sewer plant at $200+ a month, with more added for buildout etc.and being told, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY, etc.. which turns out not to be true.

Could that account for some unhappy campers asking some serious questions?

Inlet sez;"To those who still want to fight the County and RWQCB and everyone else at all costs,"

Fight the ____ (fill in the blanks) That's another one of those buzz phrases that blinds. "fight the . . . ." "Obstructionist." Those phrases need to be carefully clarified and made specific, otherwise they're just lazy sand in the eyes, with intention to confuse and blind.

TCG said...

I concur with what Shark Inlet said in the above January 15, 10:13 post.

Shark Inlet said...

Sorry Ann,

I apologize about using the word "fight". I just couldn't come up with a better word very quickly to describe the actions of those who have sued the RWQCB, have sued the LOCSD, have filed numerous CDP revocation requests with the CCC and have threatened to derail projects they don't like.

What word or phrase would you suggest I use instead? Even if you feel it was lazy, was it innaccurate?

And if you're gonna complain about folks being lazy in their analysis and descriptions ... why haven't you complained about some of the rhetoric from the other side? "Ginormeous mega sewer" and "$100 per month" come to mind as two things that you should have dealt with as examples of horrible sloppiness in the past.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

One more thing about your most recent comment. When you write "$35-40 month original Ponds of Avalon With Swans, suddenly popping up as a traditional sewer plant at $200+ a month, with more added for buildout etc.and being told, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY, etc.. which turns out not to be true" surely you realize that you're oversimplifying much like those who refer to obstructionists. Surely you also must realize that you're lying, both about the buildout increasing costs and being told there is no other choice. Buildout would reduce the costs (Julie Tacker herself made this point during a BOS meeting in the last year and Richard has forever been telling you that you are wrong ... please either explain your claim or stop making it ad nauseum) and the LOCSD, RWQCB and SWRCB have never said TriW is the only choice ... just that switching to something else would be even more costly and would delay the solution ... which we now know is exactly what happened because of the recall that promised us $100/month.

I also not with interest that Ron did not address the $100/month issue even though he's had ... um ... two and a half years to do so. It seems as if he would rather focus on the 1998 campaign which presented a completely analogous campaign promise. Why he focuses on one so much and has always ignored the other, we can only guess.

Jane said...

Shark,
Are you saying that the individuals fighting CDOs are obstructionists? Should they just accept a lien placed on their home that could cost them up to $500 a day retroactive to 1988 for circumstances that are beyond their control? Based on past experience, should they just hope that the RWQCB changes their ways decides to treat the individuals fairly? Or do you just expect these people to sacrifice their home and security for you?

The fighting will continue in LO and with many different agendas, some more obvious than others, but 45 individuals are paying the ultimate price. Their homes are on the line. Unless you are willing to give your home up to a CDO/CAO recipient that loses theirs, don't criticize this group for fighting, for lashing out at everyone who has lied, cheated, and manipulated the people of LO over the past 30 years. These people were given no choice as to their course of action. The RWQCB randomly selected them as the "test case" in January of 2006 and the persecution continues.

Sewertoons said...

jane, have you read the Sullivan suit? Do you not see the implication in some of the language regarding the PZ?

It is clear by the numbers of CDO people who did NOT sign onto that suit, that even among the 45, not everyone feels the same degree of ''threat."

ALL our PZ homes will be"on the line" as much as the 45's if the WWTF is not built. I see this "fight" as putting the PZ in jeopardy for litigation, which is tantamount to the 45 shooting themselves in the foot. Do you really think that if a mess ensues over the PZ, that the Water Board will just say to Los Osos - "Oh, sort it out, take your time, and let us know what happens?"

People might be mad over what came down over the last 30 years, (and rightly so - plenty of blame to go around on this one) but this venue is just the wrong place for that fight.

If Ms. Sullivan wants to make headway with the Water Board toward dumping the CDO's, she might want to clean up some of that language she has written. If she did that she might win and the pressure will be on us all, equally with possible CAO's.

Shark Inlet said...

Jane,

I am not saying that individuals fighting CDOs are obstructionists. I am saying that the folks threatening to derail a County project they don't like are obstructionists. I am also saying that any lawsuit that would open the door to other lawsuits which would likely delay a project are (perhaps unwittingly) obstructionists as well. If the PZLDF suit successfully challenges the PZ definition, the RWQCB would need to re-work their PZ definition and that won't save us money on our ultimate project. Additionally, if the County tried to move forward with a project voted on by the (what would be) defunct PZ, there would be additional lawsuits which would have little impact on my costs other than raising them through delay and inflation.

However, let's get directly to the point. You say that unless I am willing to have my home with a CDO I should not criticize the PZLDFers for suing. That is horrible reasoning. If the PZLDF lawsuit is good, it is good. If it is bad, it is bad. My CDO or lack of CDO status is not relevant.

Along those lines, if a friend of mine is hurt in a bar brawl and I jump into the brawl with a knife to protect him ... my motivation is not relevant if I injure someone with the knife. Similarly, if the PZLDF suit has the unintentional consequence of hurting people by raising their sewer bills, the folks behind the suit are those who should be blamed. It doesn't matter if they thought they were doing the right thing. If they cause harm, they've caused harm.

I think that the CDO group has a lot of reason to be very very angry ... at the County, the RWQCB, the LOCSD the RWQCB again and the LOCSD again and the RWQCB yet again. Even so, they shouldn't do something that will likely make things even worse ... for them and me as well. All those in the PZ are in the same boat as the 45.

You say these people were given no choice as to their course of action. You are wrong. They didn't have to sign on with PZLDF and their agenda. The very fact that not all CDO recipients are participants in the PZLDF suit makes this very clear.

Nope, we've all been cheated by the County, the LOCSD and the RWQCB. However, if those very same groups still have all the good cards in their hand, is it time to go all in? Fold when you have to so that you have a better chance of winning in the long run.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"Surely you also must realize that you're lying, both about the buildout increasing costs and being told there is no other choice."

Lying? Nope, there is no other choice, this is the only way, etc came directly from Stan's mouth, face to face, from his lips to my ears. Was HE lying? Ron's evidence is persusasive that he was, indeed. (Or had been lied to . . . by whom? ) In addition, the previous CSD repeatedly told the endless supply of people who came to beg for alternatives to be looked at, nope, this is the best solution, the out of town plan would be waaaayyyy more expensive & etc. All of which turns out not to have been true. There actually WERE alternatives that would have cost the same or been slightly cheaper. Even the TAC report now points to the fact that clearly something really went awry here. (Paavo, I think, had it right when he said that the CSD simply didn't have the resources the county has to do this (Process)right. To that I'd add the unsupported SOC regarding the non-existant "strongly held community values" vis a vis centrally located amenities, plus a misstep in NOT bringing the community on board via the Chinese Menu method vote/survey & etc. and you have the ingredients of a train wreck.)

"Nope, we've all been cheated by the County, the LOCSD and the RWQCB."

You said it, Inlet. Not I.

As for build-out, am I mistaken that there were to be additional components added on to the Tri=W later, costs vis a vis sludge, water reuse, etc.?

Mark said...

Sewertoons said...

jane, have you read the Sullivan suit? Do you not see the implication in some of the language regarding the PZ?


Mark says- Toons, you do not see or comprehend the implications of the PZ. Good for you others do. I understand you believe the government has your best interests at "heart", as you stated they "live here"... Government is not the solution to the LOSTDEP...

It is clear by the numbers of CDO people who did NOT sign onto that suit, that even among the 45, not everyone feels the same degree of ''threat."


Mark says- Toons, Would you please tell us what was in the hearts and minds of those who did not vote on the 218.

ALL our PZ homes will be"on the line" as much as the 45's if the WWTF is not built. I see this "fight" as putting the PZ in jeopardy for litigation, which is tantamount to the 45 shooting themselves in the foot. Do you really think that if a mess ensues over the PZ, that the Water Board will just say to Los Osos - "Oh, sort it out, take your time, and let us know what happens?"


Mark says- You are getting warmer...Think elimination of the pollutants sans the unnecessary and overly expensive "big public works project" paradigm. It's the law.

People might be mad over what came down over the last 30 years, (and rightly so - plenty of blame to go around on this one) but this venue is just the wrong place for that fight.


Mark says- Time to fight back, technology and the law make winning a sure thing. Fight law with law...that is what is being done. The citizens of Los Osos/ Baywood Park will be the first to benefit. Be brave, stay strong, wait for sign...

If Ms. Sullivan wants to make headway with the Water Board toward dumping the CDO's, she might want to clean up some of that language she has written. If she did that she might win and the pressure will be on us all, equally with possible CAO's.


Mark says- Toons where did you study law? You sure do give out plenty of advice... I haven't seen anything regarding "requests for more info" from anyone yet. Would you please supply me a copy of the one you are reading? Mark@Nowastewater.com perhaps we could chat off blog??? 480.363.1154

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

The cost of moving from TriW in 2005 to out of town is the sum of

the cost difference between the two facilities

the cost of inflation due to a time delay

the cost of dealing with the increased saltwater intrusion and pollution during the time lag between when TriW would have been finished and when the other one would be.

The TAC report (and you and Ron and many others) have only considered the first of these three costs and act as if inflation doesn't exist or as if once the County picks a site, the plant will be up overnight. I would bet on at least five more years before anything is online. Why? Lawsuits and permitting.


Just writing that TriW is "waaaaaay more expensive" than an out of town site is the sort of gross oversimplification that you rail against when others use terms like obstructionist.

Mark said...

Shark:

Sorry for the repeat cut and paste off of Ann's Land, but I could not resist the comment given your post above.(Laws, suits and permits- prermitting)

If we can follow the law that calls for the proper technology use there won't be a sewer or centralized treatment plant to leak, spill, permit or pollute.

So sorry, I just couldn't resist this- When you talk "costs", don't forget to put this in the "~P~I~P~E~" before you smoke it-;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Derrick [mailto:wheels@cvn.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 3:02 PM
To: Onsite/decentralized wastewater management issues
Subject: [decentralized] Ruptured Pipe Spills Sewage Into Schuylkill River

Ruptured Pipe Spills Sewage Into Schuylkill River

HARRISBURG (Jan. 11) - The Department of Environmental Protection is helping
with efforts to repair a ruptured sewage line near Reading.

A 42-inch pipe ruptured Thursday evening between the city's 6th and Canal
streets pump station and its Fritz Island wastewater treatment plant. The
estimated 10 million gallons of sewage that normally travel through the pipe
to the treatment plant are, temporarily, being discharged into the
Schuylkill River until repairs to the line are completed.

Downstream public water suppliers have been notified and will protect the
public by monitoring the quality of raw water. A bar screen is being used at
the pump station to remove solids.

The City of Reading continues to experience problems in repairing the break.
The discharge is on-going and DEP staff will remain on-scene. Currently,
there is no time estimate for repairs to be complete.

Meanwhile, back at the California State Budget Deficit: Belshé said the budget cuts highlight the need for the governor’s health reform proposal, which would raise additional money outside of state spending to qualify for $4 billion more in federal health care grants each year.

The additional state money would come from a variety of sources, including increased taxes on tobacco and new taxes on hospitals and employers. http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/248686.html Mark says- Why should be accountable for spending the taxpayers money, they just tax some more...

Jane said...

Shark,
You say that we are all in the same boat. This is absolutely wrong. The people who received the proposed CDOs have been all alone in a small rowboat bailing out water as fast as they can, while the RWQCB has tried to sink them.
If
You did not have to stand alone in front of the RWQCB at the kangaroo court. You did not have to endure the attempts to keep your family together, and your boss content, while fighting the RWQCB for your home. Many of those who dropped out did so because they could not fight anymore. Their work and family were suffering too much.
Most of those remaining in the fight are retired with no children at home. Fighting a CDO became a full time job.

And you don't like some of the truths from the past that have been revealed, tough. If you had been there for your fellow citizens when they were first targeted by the RWQCB, (instead of the typical reaction in this town which was to shun them and pretend that they somehow deserved this action), you might have had some influence in how the process proceeded. But since others stepped up, they were allowed to contribute their ideas.

The RWQCB was wrong to randomly select and persecute individuals. If you did not stand up to help protect those individuals, you have absolutely no right to tell them how to defend their homes.

Shark Inlet said...

Jane,

Our gracious host has repeatedly told us that we are all in the exact same boat as the 45 CDO recipients. Based on reading and listening to the RWQCB I have to agree. The only way in which the CDO recipients are in a different position from the rest of us is trivial in the long run. If the WWTF isn't built, we're all in the same boat. If the WWTF is built, we're all in the same boat.

Focusing on the small details (that these 45 have already received CDOs that are essentially the same as those the rest of us will get) is a distraction from the real issue.

The big question is this ... what is best for our community. I am convinced that suing to overthrow the PZ definition is harmful to both the process of getting a WWTF and to the cost of the WWTF we need.

If you would care to show how this suit will lower our costs or help us achieve a WWTF, I remain open to changing my mind ... however until then, I'll just remind you that fighting a CDO is a choice (one that not all recipients have chosen) and that the devil is in the details of any lawsuit. In this suit, if successful, the details will derail yet another process and project. This would not be good.

Jane said...

Shark,
I think I am beginning to understand your point of view: as long as you get Tri-W, you could care less what the long term consequences are for others.

The RWQCB would love to have the CDOs drop the appeal. They would then issue CAOs to everyone. CAOs do not have the legal protections of a CDO, because they are for emergency clean-up situations (spills, etc.) that need to be solved immediately. Since no alternative compliance is allowed, there is no way for an individual to comply. This is only a reasonable solution for someone who is comfortable selling their soul to the RWQCB, such as the proposed CDO recipient who accepted a CAO in return for approval to add a bathroom in his remodel. Anyone who is financially or corruptly invested in Tri-W would probably want the town to risk CAOs.

The downside of dropping the appeal is far reaching. Individual enforcement for government failure should never again be tried in California. This appeal must proceed through the courts to dissuade RWQCBs throughout California from trying this in another small town. The RWQCB needs to be reformed. They need checks and balances. They need specific regulations so individuals receive constitutional protections and rights. They should not be allowed to randomly seek and destroy citizens of California. So which is more important, you or the democratic principles upon which our country was formed?

Sewertoons said...

So jane, if a community fails to clean itself up, how would you propose the Water Board resolve the issue? Be specific.

Shark Inlet said...

Jane,

You completely misstate my point of view. I don't care if it's TriW or something else. I do care about the total cost to us all. If the total cost I have to pay is lowest with an out of town site, I prefer that site.

I just don't believe out of town is any cheaper and I don't believe that TriW is as bad as some have made it out to be.

If you can convince us that out of town will save money, you'll have converted me to the "move the sewer" side.

You are definitely right about at least one thing for sure. Individuals should never be prosecuted for the failure of government. The Los Osos mess is unique and frustrating in so many ways. Presumably there is a problem in the way the water laws are written and the mistake should be rectified. However, please don't do anything in your attempt to fix the broken law that will end up hurting the pocketbook of most of us in town ... middle class folks who can barely afford our bills now.

Sewertoons said...

Ann answers my question - How did the feeling on that location (Tri-W) go from really good to "bad?"

Ann says:
"Try this: $35-40 a month for ponds that were passive, "green," created a "green-belt" area,a promise it wouldn't smell, be energy smart, progressive, recycle water, hence no imported water,little or no sludge, etc. etc versus the County's traditional sewer plant realistically pegged at about $100 a month, with no clear water recycle component at the time.

Then try, $35-40 month original Ponds of Avalon With Swans, suddenly popping up as a traditional sewer plant at $200+ a month, with more added for buildout etc.and being told, THERE IS NO OTHER OPTION, THIS IS THE ONLY WAY, etc.. which turns out not to be true."

OK - was it then that people just didn't want to face reality? They tried to fix the sewer issue themselves, couldn't and decided to crucify those who had done the best they could for trying. Gee, what great compassion and fuzzy warm feelings!

The Water Board wanted proof of nitrate removal. The CSD couldn't get that from Oswald. Was their no sympathy for them at the onset of this news? Did the emotions suddenly ramp right up to blind rage?

Out of town was the County's plan. OK no water recycle. What was the knowledge about the condition of the aquifers then? It wasn't level three - what was it?

Meanwhile, we all know delay is going to up the price.

I had heard that originally the CSD thought it was going to be able to do what the County had intended to do - partial sewering. This is where the cost was $35-40, partial coverage. The Water Board said no - hadn't the rules changed between the time the County had the project and the when the CSD got the project? Was there no understanding of that? The Feds toughened up the regulations, the Water Board is required to comply. (Like now.)

So how was the water going to be recycled in town? You have a pond - presumably with a liner. Where was that water going? I don't recall a purple pipe component, nor would the Water Board go for that with just pond water. If there was no liner - what happens to spills - what about liquefaction?

The sludge was going to be in the septic tanks - and it was going to be step. I head that - so the sludge component was in your front yard. No smells? Well, Tri-W wasn't going to smell either. Tri-W was going to have a park - isn't that "green" enough?

(Please tell me birds weren't going to poop in that water!)

Ann, there are always "other options." We still do not know what REAL cost options are just yet for anything.

I'll add this again - delay means it will cost more. So it went from partial collection at $35-40/mo. - lawsuit after lawsuit causes delay - and the collection of the ENTIRE PZ costs more money. Well - DUH! Hauling water out of town and back in again has its own energy issues.

The threads of this complex story need to be parsed out and re-examined. There is just too much anger around this issue. It seems like some people feel that their religion has been attacked, and really - it is just sanitation.

Churadogs said...

Toons sez:"OK - was it then that people just didn't want to face reality? They tried to fix the sewer issue themselves, couldn't and decided to crucify those who had done the best they could for trying. Gee, what great compassion and fuzzy warm feelings!

The Water Board wanted proof of nitrate removal. The CSD couldn't get that from Oswald. Was their no sympathy for them at the onset of this news? Did the emotions suddenly ramp right up to blind rage?"

I suspect that one of the big problems came when the CSD didn't go back to the community early on and say, ooops, no go, now, what do you want us to do: return this to the county? proceed ahead? We don't have the resources to give you any more than a best guestimate of in-town, out of town, gravity vs step, but we'll let you vote on which you want (that didn't happen).Nor did the CSD say, "We're keeping this sewer plant in the middle of town no matter what because of a strongly held community value of wanting a sewer plant in the middle of town so we can attach a park to it and get the rate payers to repay the cost of the park & etc." Instead, things just kept morphing and 'splaining it all stopped, and slowly more and more people had serious questions about all this, with fewer and fewer answers.

Quick now, who knows exactly WHY the old CSD didn't, for example, structure this into a Chinese menu option, with an advistory vote, for example. That way, the folks could have chosen which type of system to "buy." That option would only have worked if the CSD genuinely looked at an out of town system, which they clearly didn't do because of that phony SOC. so we're back to an honesty issue. And hidden agendas. And so it goes. Hip bones connected to thigh bones & etc.

All of which is why I want a Truth & Reconciliation Hearing. Time to fess up, and bit by bit tell the story truthfully so it can become coherent. Right now, it doesn't hang together.

Sewertoons said...

I agree, the communication between the CSD and the community wasn't good when the ponds were shot down.

I don't know what their options were though, as the CSD was formed to take over the sewer project from the County. Maybe the BEST solution would have been the County never giving up the project, ofering the Community the Chinese menu. That direction would have been far too expensive for a fledgeling CSD.

But the County is now making up for that hindsight error in judgement by throwing its best and brightest resources at the project now.

Mark said...

Toons wrote:
But the County is now making up for that hindsight error in judgement by throwing its best and brightest resources at the project now.

Whom might that be?
The "county" squandered a golden oppourtunity to participate in a PPP that would have made them millions more than the non-compliant sewer project they are currently considering.

The LOCSD will have that bal, shortly. It will be intereesting to see how it is handled.The peopleof LOs Osos/Baywood Park should demand integrity and make certain the LOCSD Board gives the AES DES PPP in a timely andfiduciary manner. If the oppourtunity to participate is lost, it will be a shame...

The "hindsight" from the county's perspective should serve as a good "experience" for the LOCSD now

Mark said...

The Poeople of Los Osos/Baywood Park must demand integrity and make certain that the LOCSD Board gives fiduciary and timely due diligence in the matter of the CDO's/NOV's and the AES DES PPP/BK Re-org "offering"-

If that oppourtunity is lost, it will be more than a shame, it would be a tradegy waterwise/moneywise/energywise and legally speaking which could have been "avoided".

I had to "re-post given the flawed posting above.

Forgive but don't forget the past.
Focus on the present to insure the future...