Uh, Ya Wanna Run That By Me One More Time?
When I read the ad in the 7/17/08 Bay News, the one by The Reclamator Service, I had to scratch my head. Ad said, "Call today and be one of the 333 to get a $15,000 rebate!" Ad encouraged us to "Join the Revolution!" and noted that this revolution would be:
"FREE from liability" (But not free from Roger Briggs of the RWQCB who, win, lose, draw, will have the Suit Boys from Sacramento -- on the taxpayer's dime -- arriving to drag your ass into court ENDLESSLY from now until the crack of doom.)
"FREE from the big, expensive County project" (Uh, don't think so. Not according to the County. According to them, you'll be assessed pots of money by the county even if you had seventeen Reclamators dotted around your property)
"FREE from high sewer bills" (See above)
"FREE from future assessments" (That's true of all of us Los Ososians at this moment.)
"FREE from drought-vulnerable municipal water." (Uh, o.k. until Roger Briggs hauls you into court and stops you from using the Reclamator as a "greywater" "discharge" system, that is.)
And the ad stated that your "Reclamator reimbursed by 100% upon the sale of our 2008th Reclamator!" an interesting sort of Ponzi Scheme, it seems to me. That is, what happens if only 2007 Reclamators are sold? Is the deal off? Do you get your money back?
Also unanswered in the ad is this: I was under the impression that Mr. Murphy, of Reclamator fame, isn't really selling a piece of machinery but is selling a 24/7/365 monitering/repair/replace servicing service. If so, what happens to economies of scale if only 16 units are sold. Or three units? Seems to me that the service costs would skyrocket if you had to keep a trained service person (and equipment) on hand 24/7/365 for 25 years to take care of, say, one or two units. Wouldn't the cost get prohibitive? Like waaaaay more than the proposed cost for the County project?
Also missing from the ad are any certified "discharge" test results vetted and approved by the RWQCB as being approved in the PZ, for example. I know Mr. Murphy asserts that they have no say in what he's "discharging," and we've waltzed around what the meaning of "discharge" means, but I don't see from this ad that any further progress has been made in resolving that particular issue.
Also no mention of any lawsuit being filed (or won?) in federal court indicating that the federal rules concerning "compliance" has been settled either.
In short, nothing in this ad makes me confident that this issue has advanced so much as an inch. Well, this is Los Osos so we all have to "stay tuned." But if it were me, I'd also count the silverware. A lot of people have been injured in this town on account of lies, bungles, blatant stupidities, Medean craziness and incompetent, run amok regulators. Don't need any more body parts flying about.