Pages

Saturday, March 28, 2009

This Just In Some More.

Email from the County: The Final Community Survey Report has been posted on the project website. The information can be viewed by the website link provided below:

http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/AssetFactory.aspx?did=19753

Start yer Sewer Engines. Question of the Year: When the County's RFP contractor's "short lists" are made available, it should become clearer what (and, more interestingly . . . who) will be heading down the pike. So, Will Los Osos be getting what they asked for? Three out of three? Two out of three?

Survey sez. . . ?

163 comments:

Mike said...

Forget the survey, the BOS are going to make the final decision....

But we should also be asking when will Ann Calhoun, Gail McPherson and/or some othe spokesperson of the PZLDF disclose how much they have reimbursed the LOCSD for the failed PZLDF lawsuit???

CSD's 25% = $80,000
PZLDF's 75% = $320,000

So far PZLDF has NOT paid any of their personal legal fees, yet the LOCSD has paid nearly $80,000...

When are those of you in the PZLDF going to pay your share of $320,000....???? If 32 of you exist, you only owe $10,000 each...

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Let's pull a Ron ...

The Community Survey and the TAC and the County have proven that the STEP Nazis are out of touch with the rest of our community. Gravity is the law. I'm freakin' awesome because I told you this years ago. I deserve a Pulitzer Prize. Please read my link or my other link to prove it.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Mike,

I would contend that if PZLDF doesn't demonstrate proof that they've paid their proportion of Sullivan's legal bills, the LOCSD should sue Sullivan and PZLDF for fraud. After all using falsehood to take money from others is ... indeed ... fraud.

Aaron said...

The problem with the LOCSD, as it stands, is that Chuck Cesena and Steve Senet will vehemently oppose any motion to file a lawsuit and if the vote comes down to a 3-2, you'll have PZLDF members screaming bloody murder. I don't know if Sparks is willing to stick his neck out like that at this time.

As far as the community survey goes, those who are the most informed have already realized that gravity is and has always been preselected. Those who completed the surveys just went with the flow. Regardless of what Semonsen says, though, the survey was biased toward gravity, not STEP/STEG -- but that was expected.

Sewertoons said...

Aaron, how do you know this - that people went with the flow?

Don't you think that the idea you might have to upgrade your electrical box, or pay to replace your driveway, walls, fences or landscaping had anything to do with a person's decision for gravity?

Aaron said...

That's what the County/Carollo/TAC says, Lynette.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve wrote:
After all using falsehood to take money from others is ... indeed ... fraud.

8:54 AM, March 28, 2009

Steve, If the wells tested to established the PZ "test" better today than when they established the PZ, would it be fraud?
My piint is shouldn't those wells be tested as part ofthe "study process?"

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

No ... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraud. You would think that Wikipedia-king would at least look stuff up before making comments.

Besides the obvious ... that you appear to misunderstand the meaning of the word fraud ... one would need to see a clear improvement in nitrate levels over time before one could even say that things are better today.

Mark's point that the wells should be retested again is a good one ... more data is never a bad thing ... but there has not been any decrease in the nitrate levels and there is no reason to think they would drop by good luck alone when the source of the nitrates has not been removed.

Sewertoons said...

Aaron, I'm not sure what you are citing with your last statement, it is too general.

There are very real problems with step - such as granting a permanent easement onto your property. Many people just won't go there. That, and my above mentioned reasons are why people shied away from step. Not that it was predetermined. (I certainly didn't think it was predetermined. And I attended almost every meeting.)

Billy Dunne said...

"As far as the community survey goes, those who are the most informed have already realized that gravity is and has always been preselected. Those who completed the surveys just went with the flow. Regardless of what Semonsen says, though, the survey was biased toward gravity, not STEP/STEG -- but that was expected."

Who didn't see this coming? They're geniuses when they voted for the recall, but just "going with the flow" when they select gravity, right? And of course the survey was biased, right? Predictable.

Here's the only numbers that matter to me:
85%: voted for the assessement
33% and 28%: the numbers that elected Maria Kelly and Marshall Ochylski, pro-county process candidates, to the CSD.
69% gravity

Some might call this "going with the flow." I like to view it as the continued sophistication of the Los Osos homeowner, who have grown tired of the expensive delays, "miracle" solutions, dramatic predictions of Armageddon on Los Osos, and embarrassing conspiracy theories.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve wrote: but there has not been any decrease in the nitrate levels and there is no reason to think they would drop by good luck alone when the source of the nitrates has not been removed.

Where are the current tests from those previously tested wells that proves your "reasoning?"

Hundreds of homes were permitted, by government, after the PZ was implemented

Watershed Mark said...

More Wiki: Constructive Fraud & NPS

Watershed Mark said...

Lynette wrote: (I certainly didn't think it was predetermined. And I attended almost every meeting.)

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Mark,

You have officially jumped the shark.

It used to be cute. Now it's just annoying.

If you have evidence that I am wrong about something, trot it out like a good little boy ... but if you don't, I would suggest you're just fussing to entertain yourself.

Watershed Mark said...

A little more Wiki:

Los Osos' proximity to the Diablo Canyon Power Plant means that warning sirens are located throughout the town so that the residents will be able to wish they had the ability to evacuate if the power plant should suffer a meltdown or other adverse event. The sirens are also found in other cities nearby, including Morro Bay, San Luis Obispo and Avila Beach. Except for yearly tests, the sirens go largely unused.

Someone may want to make a Wiki update contribution for Los Osos.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve, We confirmed Phoenix drinking water supply is sound, unlike yours.

"The cost of the sewer is estimated to be well over $150 million and home-owners have been told that they may be assessed a sewer fee in excess of $200 a month."

Looks like this is a done deal...for starters.

The cost of energy is a key component in wastewater treatment, not to mention the Hutchinson Suggested $4 Million dollar add on tertiay treatment component, which could be the highest energy method as well.

That $400.00 figure is getting closer all the time.

Sewertoons said...

The cost of the project per month seems to be the hot topic at the moment. It was explained once again at the Bruce Gibson meeting by Paavo. I was sorry neither Ed nor Aaron were there. (I didn't even jave a chance to bring up the topic - Bruce and Paavo beat me to it - they must have been hearing from people.)

Here it is for a typical single family residence:

O & M - $40
Property tax - $150
Capital cost - $10
On-lot costs $50
TOTAL AVERAGE COST - $250

Now on-lot costs will vary - yes a person's on-lot cost for a difficult situation could go to $10,000 - but that true for step, too. There are a few of these situations, but it is not typical. These costs do not reflect any grants. If the vacant property owners do not pass their 218, it would raise our costs about $25 more per month. This was based on a figure of 15% of lots in Los Osos as being vacant. But that might not be as bad as that looks as there will be vacant lot owners that will want to and be allowed to hook up thus paying their share.

Those who want to continue to scare people and make them question the process will no doubt do so. It will be what it will be --as stated above. Why encourage people to be fearful - what benefit is that for you?

Aaron said...

Referring to what I said earlier, the people who were in-the-know about the LOWWP went with the flow of the County because gravity was already preselected for the reasons they've stated. Why bother, really?

Lynette, I didn't go to the office hours. Paavo has stated otherwise, contradicting your assessment. If clarification needs to be made, he needs to do it publicly now, not privately.

Ed said...

Hi Lynette,

You are merely confirming my stated point that on-lot costs, in your own words, "could go to $10,000" -- and therefore $400 a month.

You hedge by asserting that: "There are a few of these situations, but it is not typical." Says who? Paavo?

Anyone who has ever had to endure Paavo's long-winded explanations without answers knows exactly what shovel-ready really means.

$250 is just for starters and $400 may hardly be the end of it. Paavo told me it could double, that he couldn't say it wouldn't. That's why he won't be "guaranteeing" the $250 by capping the project at $250...

Off the top of my head I can think of a few reasons why $400 is closer to the mark than $250 -- and still may not be the final cost to homeowners...in the end.

Loans: Who can get them and who can't? What if someone has to charge it on their card? Interest alone on the on-lot costs could double or triple Paavo's low-ball monthly cost. There are too many variables for you or Paavo to say it's $50 a month -- to make any such statement at all.

Foreclosures: Who's going to pick up the tab for homes that have foreclosed and will foreclose after the homeowner has been assessed? Then you have people who can't pay or won't pay? That burden, too, will be spread around to PZ homeowners.

Escalating bills: The County admits it is starting low and getting higher, so $250 is only for Year 1 and does not accurately reflect the ramping-up costs for Year 2 and Year 3 ... all the way up to Year 30 on a 30-year loan that will not be 0%. By then the cost per homeowner is NOT A PRETTY PICTURE. It's quicksand and no one's getting out alive as they were, and no one's there to help.

The assessment does not include the costs of retrofitting (people may even need a loan for that), the SRF loan repayment demanded by the State, the MWH pipeline to Broderson from out of town, tertiary costs, possible imported water; and nor does it account for inflation -- or include sewer costs from the 2001 assessment.

These are just some of the things lapsed-CPA Paavo doesn't talk about -- and won't.

Taking into account ALL costs, known and unknown, present and future, direct and indirect associated costs from the County's sewer plan, the Los Osos Wastewater Project will be the world's first $1,000 a month sewer.

You keep talking about grants but the fact is there are none on the table. Certainly not for gravity! Green, yes, Old, no!

We are looking at a financial Katrina for thousands, and you have the NERVE to ask me: "Why encourage people to be fearful - what benefit is that for you?"

Fearful? Where do you get that crap from, Paavo? You say "fearful," I say "reality." If the people knew what was coming their way, and they deserve to know the truth, and Paavo and Bruce won't tell them the truth.

Benefit? What benefit do I get from writing and speaking the truth? From asking the County to build us a sewer we can afford??

I don't benefit at all. Is that concept alien to you? I see hardship -- hardship you won't face -- and I give a damn about my community.

Mike said...

The Tri-W Plan and location sound better every time anyone tries to put cost figures on the "as-yet-to-be-decided" design (although gravity seems to be the choice) and location... but who am I, I only get to pay for whatever and where ever it ends up...

...which is why I want the PZLDF to reimburse the CSD for the legal fees they stole from our community to support Gail McPherson's continueing crusade to damn the Water Board... I also want the CSD5to pay back the $2M they stole... and then I'd love to see the State AG go after BS&W...!!!! Los Osos has been raped and robbed by the sewer obstructionists...!!!!

GetRealOsos said...

Shark,

I'm answering on this entry because the other will be bumped by the Sunday poem.

I heard 90 plus west of the Tri-W site. Another big project at Sea Pines putting range, and another big project behind the cemetery. I believe those last two projects are over 50 homes each.

Don't know if he's involved with the Pine St./LOVR 17 luxury home project....probably.

I also heard that Jeff is involved with the adjacent property to Broderson -- injection wells perhaps.

...and I just heard that Jeff & Julie foreclosed on the property they were camping on.

Hmmmmmm.....

P.S. I also heard that Jeff was doing another deal out on Chorro Creek and Morro Bay was piping in their sewer pipes (even though it's outside of Morro Bay city limits).

Hmmmmmm....

More to come......I hear lots of goodies.

Sewertoons said...

Aaron, had you been there, you could have asked him to clarify - sorry you missed this one, but the next one is on April 9, hope you can make that one.

I'm not sure what you mean by privately - this information was spoken about at Bruce Gibson's office hours - 18 people were there - some in late, some left early, but 18 altogether.

Sewertoons said...

19 actually - I was there.

Sewertoons said...

Ed, just because a few people will be stuck for the higher amount (and they would be no matter what system we get), why should ALL of us assume $400?

A few people get Achalasia, Histidinemia or Tooth and Nail Syndrome, but should we ALL be worried about getting it?

No bids are in - why should we expect a definitive price? We are getting a ball park price and if you think that the County is not concerned with price - I disagree, they are very concerned.

Ed says:
"The assessment does not include the costs of retrofitting (people may even need a loan for that)…"

Showerheads and toilets. The CSD or Golden State can give you free ones. Have you priced toilets at Home Depot lately? Not a major cost. The $ the CSD has miraculously held for low income assistance is still in the bank from the last project. Maybe that will be tapped for this purpose.


"…the SRF loan repayment demanded by the State…"
Might be forgiven, or folded in - at 0% or 30 years this won't add much, and it has been included.


"…the MWH pipeline to Broderson from out of town…"
Nope, already included.


"…tertiary costs…"
TBD - it should be part of the ISJ and water rates, but we'll see.


"…possible imported water…"
In your dreams - NO ONE is talking about imported water as there simply is no need. Might not even need to do ag in-lieu either.


"…nor does it account for inflation…"
No, you are right. How do we handle that now? Isn't that just part of life?


"…or include sewer costs from the 2001 assessment…"
So unfortunately true. We could have paid our $200/mo., but some people demanded a recall and stopped the project -- that sealed our fate. We will continue pay for the design and get at least the collection system design form that project. We paid for permits and will get nothing. But the land is still something we are getting out of that project, so we won't have to re-pay for Broderson or the part of Tri-W needed.

We delay, we pay - remember that old saying?

Some portions of the bill will go away - the connection cost of $50 won't last 30 years.

The County HAS heard you - the people you are attempting to scare have heard you. I still ask how that helps. Should they attempt to sell their homes now? Is that what you want? What are they supposed to do?

Maybe you can explain what grants are out there for "green" that haven't been exposed as impossible for here? Please remember that the Water Board has a say in this, so flakey technologies need not apply. A grant won't pay for the whole thing - we need that cheap SRF money to keep the costs down and SRF won't pay for "experimental."

Don't think I don't care about the community, that is simply not true. I care that people are being scared by possibilities in the extreme being painted as the norm.

Aaron said...

I've had a few people e-mail me in an attempt to justify the $250/month, but I've definitely heard otherwise from the County. There needs to be clarification at the following BOS meeting. This needs to be on the record now.

I'm going to be frank with you, Lynette. By missing a very important comment made by Ogren at the last office hours meeting regarding the $400/month, I currently have a hard time taking what you say at face value. I just do. I've already seen the County documentation including the WRAC but Paavo has given contradicting figures. I'm not confident in the information given to me.

Office hours is private because it's limited to the eyes and ears of those who attended, not the world at large. I want to see Paavo break down the costs on TV. I want to be there at the meeting when he does and I want the absolute truth to come out.

Churadogs said...

Aaron sez:"I want to be there at the meeting when he does and I want the absolute truth to come out."

Absolute truth? I hope Aaron is a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very patient man.

Mike said...

Hello Aaron... I'd like to see PZLDF show that they have paid their $320,000.... To do less, is simply lying to the community...!!!!

How much as Gail and Ann actually paid, or did they receive what amounts to kickback payments from the CSD....????? Is that how Ann is going to pay her sewer bill...????

M said...

At least you're not single-minded mike. How do you feel about our CSD paying $850,000 to a Public Information Officer?
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

You are trying way too hard to make us (and yourself?) believe that fabricated rumor... Like so many rumors created by Gail and Julie to discredit the work of many people in the community, they only created rumors and enuendo to undermine all efforts to bring a sewer to Los Osos... Gail has her ax to grind with the Water Boards over her conviction of falsifying records and Julie with her affairs is trying to get her piece of the financial pie...

In short M, you are way off base with nthing to back up your enuendo...!!!!!

Now maybe YOU can show how much the PZLDF folks paid in that failed Lawsuit....?????

Richard LeGros said...

M,

The CSD never paid $850,000 for PIO services under the Tri-W project.

The $850,000 was what was budgeted in the Tri-W project for PIO services over a 4 year time period; to include a salary for a PIO (Mr. Drake) + a salary for an assistant (Ms. Kudart) + a salary for an an ombudsman (Ms. Watkins). As the project was stopped, little of the budgeted amount was spent.

Mr. Drake received about $26,000 in salary for the 4 1/2 months he worked at the CSD plus $50,000 in severence (paid out by the CSD5 in 2006). Ms. Kudart still works for the CSD, but in a different capacity. Ms. Watkins has not worked for the CSD since 2005 (and had received aboout $12,000 in salary).

-R

GetRealOsos said...

Sewer,

I trust some of Ed Ochs' estimates more than Paavo's.

If Paavo would have told the truth just once, maybe it would be different, but he and Bruce have lied over and over again.

What a two-year show from them. They've worked so hard over these two years to con the people into their blank check. Yes, Lynette, a blank check!

Besides, you say, ""…the SRF loan repayment demanded by the State…"
Might be forgiven, or folded in - at 0% or 30 years this won't add much, and it has been included."

The State Water Board CAN NOT ASK FOR THIS MONEY TWICE! It's in bankruptcy court -- pennies on the dollar! For Paavo to let the PZ pay for the loan is legally very questionable, but shows how he is sticking it to the PZ homeowners.

He never required the state or Federal to kick in for their benefit of the Federal bay or state's groundwater. Again, he's only sticking it the the PZ homeowners.

The repayment of the SRF loan should not be put only on the PZ either. The recalled CSD spent $2 million, the Lisa board spent those monies on settlements and attorney fees. Those actions should not be placed on the PZ alone!

What are you thinking?!

Is Ed Ochs scaring people? ... they better be scared. The County pulled a big one on them and they'll be suffering in financial stress for 30 years.

Maybe you're okay. Your husband has a secure job -- not many people can say that. We are in a depression Lynette -- haven't you seen the news?

The County could have chosen Vacuum or something that does work and costs so much less. The County could have had the state and Feds' pay into the project to bring down costs.

The County is working for the developers. They DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE (I don't care how you care to spin the situation -- it's your job -- we get it Lynette!)

GetRealOsos said...

Sewer(toons),

Why should ONLY THE PZ have to put in new toilets and shower heads? This is just another clear example of how the County is letting Cabrillo off the hook and piling it all on the PZ.

Please answer.

Where do people get the free toilets?

Please answer.

P.S. You should change your blog name to "full-of-shit".

TCG said...

The closer that the County gets to making some critical project decisions, the more upset the minority interests become. It has been obvious for a long time that there is no iteration of a community sewer project that everyone will personally prefer.

The logical thing for the Board of Supervisors to do is concur with the recommendations of their professional public works staff--recommendations that clearly have the backing of the majority of the community. To do anything else would only perpetuate, and even worsen, this unfortunate situation that the members of this community have created over so many years in the name of "local control."

Mike said...

Ah yes, GetRealOsos, one of Ann Calhouns favorite debaitors... Love the way he debaits "...P.S. You should change your blog name to "full-of-shit"."... Yup GetRealOsos is a real Master DeBaitor...

Now tell us GRO... just how much has the wonderful PZLDF paid in legal fees for that failed lawsuit...????

M said...

As per Richards response about my post about the PIO, one can see that it was not innuendo, or rumor. That we did not end up paying that amount is irrelevant. We were on the hook for that amount.
Sincerely, M

Ed said...

Hi Lynette,

How do you account for the fact that Richard LeGros, co-founder of Taxpayers Watch, of which you are a proud member, agrees with me, NOT YOU, that the sewer bill will be at least $400 a month?

Is Richard a fear-mongerer, too? Is he trying to scare people, too?
Is he benefiting from scaring people, like you accuse me? Is Richard, a former CSD director, a muckraker or liar? Yes or no?

Please debate the $400 a month here with Richard ... harass him a while.

You have a serious allergy to facts. Is that because you are being paid to pimp for the County? Exactly how much are you being paid to take notes for Gibson and shill for Paavo? Obviously you are benfiting from working so hard to dumb down the community.

Ignoring many of my points and minimizing the damage to LO homeowners renders you useless to the welfare of the community. All you care about is you. Disgusting, really.

I have no evidence to support that the County has heard me, and so I will speak again at the next update and raise the volume to the next level.

I spoke at several meetings and Bruce and Paavo said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Why did they not correct me in public if it wasn't true? They had ample opportunity.

Either Bruce and Paavo ignored me because they ignore all Los Osos speakers and are rude, cruel, cold and uncaring ... or they KNOW I speak the truth and will neither confirm or deny. Pick one. Or both.
They let the $400 stand unchallenged and so did the Tribune. That's confirmation. Paavo whispering sweet nothings in your ear means zilch to the community.

Remember: Paavo himself told me IT COULD DOUBLE, HE COULDN'T SAY THAT IT WOULDN'T!

Again, please address Richard here.

My guess is that Richard is not too thrilled with your unhinged comments and would like to put a pillow over your face.

Once again, if you actually believe it will be $250 a month, then you will demand that Paavo prove this by signing a contract with Los Osos homeowners to cap the project at $250 a month.

I look forward to that announcement... but won't hold my breath because the truth has been told.

Ed

Mike said...

Well Ed... what would the monthly bill been had Tri-W been completed as planned and legal permitted...???

M said...

Hey, easy on the gal Ed. You have to have some compassion for someone that gives as she does. I mean the constant blog postings, even at 3:00 in the morning. Watching archival footage of meetings, to see who said what. Desparaging the dead before they're even in the ground. Handing out kudo's to the troops for their insightful comments. Never letting go of the mantra, "Tri-W is good". Arriving here in 2005 and telling us what we should do, and how it should be done.
Sincerely, M

Richard LeGros said...

M,

Yes, you were spreading rumor.
The CSD did not spend $850,000. Also, you are implying that having a PIO was wasteful; which it is/was not.

Having a PIO was not a luxury but an absolute neccessity / requirement for Los Osos to get through four years of construction of a WWP. The PIO's job was to constantly inform the public and assist them as the project affected their lives. Realize too that the County also plans to provide identical PIO services when they build their project.

As for the $850,000 bugeted, it was a resquirement of the CCC Coastal Development Permit that as the project was being built that the citizens were to be constantly informed. The PIO would handle daily progress reports of the work, inform the public of road closures as it affected citizens and emergency servies, let citizens have direct access to the CSD via the PIO and Omsbudman to answer their questions and concerns, and directly contact citizens when the project would be coming up their streets. Also to be provided was information and assistance regarding the methods of how to connect to the sewer, applications for financial assistance to get grants and loans, etc.

-R

M said...

Mike, why all the !!!!, or ????. ?
Why not let the context of your post make the exclamations and question marks?
Sincerely, M

Ed said...

Hi Lynette,

You ask one good question:

"Should they [the people] attempt to sell their homes now? Is that what you want? What are they supposed to do?"

The people are stuck ... trapped ... they can't stay and they can't get out. The real estate market has crashed nationwide, and Los Osos has crashed more than the nationwide average. It's a lose-lose for PZ homeowners. They are in quicksand, and there's no one there to help them out, the County laughing as they go down...

This is why you are so distant from what's really going on in the community, so remote from the pain of others. It's hard to forgive such colossal short-sightedness. I can only wish you wisdom.

Mike, even if Tri-W cost $50 less a month, compared to the current plan, that is STILL not enough savings to balance the fatal flaws of the mid-town solution, as planned then.

Ed

M said...

C'mon Richard, we're talking about a town of 14,000 with only two roads in and out of. To spend that much money on a pio is ludicrous. And why would the coastal commission have any say so or concerns that the public be kept informed of the progress of a WWTP?
$850,000 was budgeted. That is not rumor. A three person staff for pio? Are you kidding me? How many streets are going to be tore up at the same time? It's not like a daily report is going to be essential. Also, who was in line to take that position when the pio was indeed called back to active service?
Speaking of tore up, how many connections are going to require a pump with a gravity system?
Sincerely, M

M said...

I just did the math. Calculator of course. That was $71,000 each for four years for three people in the pio office.
The highest per capita sewer system in the United States. Is it any wonder?
Sincerely, M

Sewertoons said...

Hi Ed,

How many times has Richard said $400? Once, and in what context, I don't recall. You have repeated the $400 incessantly as fact. We can just ask what he meant, can't we? Ball's in your court.

People who are majorly unhappy with the County were in that room where Bruce and Paavo spoke - the price was not addressed to me. Ask them if you don't believe me. Why don't you simply spend part of your three minutes at the next BOS meeting asking the question?

Meanwhile, please tell me how stopping that project has benefitted the community? That project was to cost $200/mo. at a 40% overbid (thanks Budd Sanford for the threats, you really helped your community), there was no lien on your house and no one had a CDO or a NOV.

Now you are hinting that there ought to be a way to stop this one. Sorry Ed, bad move! You say you would look favorably on people who simply refuse to pay the tax, (while not offering to foot their legal bills, I see). You claim there is something cheaper out there, but don't quite define what it is or who would build it. So my conclusion is rabble rousing. Not help for the people in need, but simply to infect them with fear.

Quote Ed, "My guess is that Richard is not too thrilled with your unhinged comments and would like to put a pillow over your face." Oh dear, my sides are splitting with laughter - great writing, total fabrication!! But go ahead, ask Richard that too!

LOL on the idea that I am getting paid to take notes!!!

My question to you is: All these salesmen and their grandiose statements on how they could do the project cheaper with their special technology - where are they now? So wimpy that they couldn't get a team together to bid in support of their impossible claims? Ripley? Mr. Vacuum? Hmmmmm.

Billy Dunne said...

"This is why you are so distant from what's really going on in the community, so remote from the pain of others."

80% voted for the assessment
A clear majority voted to elect a pro-county project CSD
69% overwhelmingly chose gravity and indicate they want to move forward as quickly as possible on the project

I think we have a VERY good indicator of what's really going on in this community. And it's killing those who continue their vocal desire to delay, obfuscate, point fingers, predicte doom, and fight at every turn.

Richard LeGros said...

M,

Regarding the PIO services and their costs, obviously you do not know what you are talking about......... For a $135,000,000 project, the cost of PIO services equaled less than .0063% of total project costs...which is a very reasonable price for the amount of services provided.

Additionally, any project of this size will require PIO services...including the County's WWTP. When the County builds their WWTP, expect thier PIO costs to be over $1,000,000.

Regardless of what you think about the need for a PIO, the PIO was / will be a CDP permit requirement. If you have a problem with the need for a PIO and the associated cost, take your complaints to the County or the CCC. Meanwhile, mau-mauing a service that was provided for the benefit of Los Ososians to get through the building of a WWTP is just plain silly.

-R

GetRealOsos said...

(Silly) Billy,

80% voting for the County's 218 is a lie.

Paavo himself admitted it was more like 64%!!

30% didn't vote at all (and on a "pocketbook vote" to boot!) --either afraid of the RWQCB's threats or didn't for some other reason.

The 218 is the "property owners" "right to vote on taxes act" -- in the County's 218 it had a large percentage of County, CSD, and school district votes -- NOT HOMEOWNERS! Also, a very large percent was the VanBurden's and the like -- real estate interests -- NOT HOMEOWNERS.

If you LIE about the 80% yes vote (like Gibson does) then you (and he) could VERY WELL be lying on many other issues. Okay....you guys have lied on other issues!


To Lynette,

Since you know where we can get free toilets, I'm assuming that you know of "free" plumbers too! Tell us about free plumbers to install the free toilets!

Can you answer why only the PZ has to retrofit???

...and you think that the County isn't screwing the PZ homeowners?

Get real!

Mike said...

Soory Ed... The Tri-W WWTF project was NOT "fatally flawed"... That is only a continuation of the "move the sewer", "no sewer" sewer obstructionists... You may want to think the project flawed, but if you could have been open minded, you would have seen that was only the campaign to discredit led by a handful of very vindictive folks in and out of Los Osos... You've listened to Gail McPherson, you think she had an agenda to halt any sewer any where in Los Osos....???

..but a lot of that is now past history that we shouldn't ever forget... Tell us Ed, why hasn't the PZLDF paid their legal fees....???????????

Billy Dunne said...

Conspiracy Boy:
Please send me the link whereby Paavo admitted 64%, not 79.6%, voted for the assessment. Also, please send us any documentation you might have that anyone who voted AGAINST the 218 was punished by the RWQCB.

Thanks.

Watershed Mark said...

I received a response to my FOIA request in part it read:

"Initially, we estimated the contents of the files to be 422 pages, the actual amount is 256 pages for your first request, and 5 pages for you second request."

I suspect there are 422 pages but 166 pages of detail may have withheld for some reason.
Carollo Project Manager Lou Carella’s billing rate was $205.00/hour in January 2007 and is now $230.00/hour on February 11, 2009 billing for Project No: 7630D.00 Invoice No: 0103623 in the amount of $114,450.78.

On the lighter side: There was a charge for a single box of Cascade Automatic Dishwashing Powder, 20 oz. Box for $3.75 plus $0.30 Tax for a total of $4.05.
You’d think that a company the size of Carollo should be to keep its dishes clean on its own dime…

Here is something to consider for anyone who might actually be waiting to hear more about how your money was and is now being spent.

What a Wonderful World (for a change)- Louis Armstrong

Watershed Mark said...

I will be getting a refund from the county for the money that they said "my project" would cost.

I hope they can do the same for you all too.

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
The Tri-W didn't get built.
What don't you get about fatal flaws?

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
"Get a lawyer" if you are so interested.
You could make a FOIA request to LOCSD and the billings in your hands.

At least then you could scrutinze how the money was spent.
That may be all that can be done at this time, so get to it.

It could be the biggest bargain in the whole project.

Mike said...

Anyone who believes the Tri-W design was flawed, doesn't understand small minded politics...

We all do understand however, that a gravity collection system will be constructed in Los Osos inspite of the pipe dreams of some very small minded individuals...

Is there a reason PZLDF is hiding why they haven't paid for their Gail McPherson led lawsuit...??? What are you hiding....????

Watershed Mark said...

It takes one to know one MIKE.

Ed said...

Lynette,

Until and unless Paavo signs a contract and caps the project at $250 ... I'm right.

'Nuff said.

Mike, if you think I listen to Gail McPherson, then you REALLY SHOW you don't know what you're talking about.

Keep preachin'!

Mike said...

ED... I know you don't really follow lock-step with Gail, but you did put on blinders as to what the pre-recall CSD was able to accomplish... They did produce a state-of-the-art WWTF design and then obtained every one of the permits from every governing agency with oversight of the project... They did a marvelous job even in the face of a handful of vicious folks who did not want any sewer in our community...

Those pre-call folks have never been properly recognized for all the good they accomplished...no one since has produced a completed design or even obtained permits...

The post-recall folks on the other hand accomplished exactly what they wanted...a lengthy delay, possibly a move to another contentious location and huge costs to everyone of us...!!!!

..and the costs continue thanks to the CSD5... just when will PZLDF pay their legal bill....?????

Sewertoons said...

No Ed, you are not right. No one knows the cost - or will for some time. The bids have not come in. $250 is an estimate by the County, just as $400 is your estimate.

Sewertoons said...

GRO if people don't vote, it means they agree to go along with the majority, whatever that turns out to be - and for whatever speculative reason.

GetRealOsos said...

Silly Billy,

The proof of punishment from the RWQCB is in the NOV.

Paavo stated 64% to someone in private. Ask Paavo who he told.


Looney Lynette,

Where do we get the free toilets again? Where are the free plumbers to install the free toilets?

You can not say exactly why people didn't vote. I know some people that didn't vote because they wanted to vote no, but were afraid to.


Mike,

Why don't you go to Gail's meeting tomorrow night and ask her yourself regarding the questions you have about Sullivan. That would be a riot....or don't you have the "balls" to go and ask?

Mike said...

The question GRO, is why don't YOU have any "Balls", only your filty mouth and headed for a massive stroke.... Have fun with all the tubes and meds... :-)

Billy Dunne said...

"The proof of punishment from the RWQCB is in the NOV."

CB......are you saying ONLY those who voted against the assessment received a NOV? Please explain.

"Paavo stated 64% to someone in private. Ask Paavo who he told."

More than anyone here you throw around crazy, wild accusations constantly. But when asked, you put the burden of proof on everyone else but yourself. That just doesn't cut it.

So I'll ask again, please let us know when and where Paavo stated only 64% of Los Osos voted for the assessment, and let us know how the RWQCB punished those who voted against the 218 assessment.

And when you're at it, can you also provide proof that mostly "real estate interests" and not homeowners voted for the assessment; who the developers are the "county is working for;" and how Shark; Lynette; Bruce Gibson AND the Attorney General (I assume you mean Jerry Brown) ALL work for Pandora (yes my friend, you have made ALL these accusations.)

When you're gathering all this incrimminating proof for us, can you also throw in what exactly is buried in Al Capone's vault!!? I really think Geraldo dropped the ball on that one.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

GRO,

Yes, Jeff does seem to get around and has a lot of pans in the fire ... but none of what you listed would seem to be of the sort which would require a gravity sewer as opposed to STEP.

Secondly, I happen to know a bit about the Sea Pines project that you refer to and there are two homes to be built on a lot which is already Sea Pines property ... it is an expansion of the resort and certainly not 50 homes. If you are thinking of the driving range, that wasn't Edwards and the potential development has been effectively killed by the real estate market.

No matter ... the key here is that any new development inside the PZ would need a sewer online before they could move forward and the sewer they need isn't necessarily a gravity sewer.

Churadogs said...

TCG sez:"The logical thing for the Board of Supervisors to do is concur with the recommendations of their professional public works staff--recommendations that clearly have the backing of the majority of the community."

Yep. And since projects of this kind are all tar-baby hooked up, link by link, as each piece is hooked up it locks in place and limits (and often determines) the next link. So long as the public isn't paying much attention to what those links are, they remain in the dark as to the final outcome, even though people paying close attention will see the form and shape early on, simply by knowing that if you do A you MUST then do Z. If you check out the short list of who will be at the table you can see what the deal will be simply by looking at the "parts" (and people) sitting at that table.

The average citizen has no clue. They want "something" as soon as possible. Jes get 'r done! And that's what they will get, followed by the bill and if many of them turn out to be shocked! shocked! at the bill, too bad. It will be too late.

And the BOS will defer to Gibson, since this is his district. Paavo will have made sure the players he needs to be at that table are there (WMH anyone?) so as to cover the County's interests and behind. Any "unpleasant" past history will be buried, along with a good many citizens in Los Osos, and the deal will be done.

And that will be fine with the majority of the citzens. The rest will have to sell, move or get foreclosed on, a process one Los Osos observer refered to as "getting rid of the riff-raff."

Meanwhile, the only question now worth considering is this: Will the RWQCB issue a "permit" to allow regular cap and bell gravity pipes to daily and regularly "discharge" X amount of raw sewage in the PZ while still holding CDOs on 45 people with threats of $5,000 a day and jail time if they "discharge" anything in a ZERO DISCHARGE ZONE. In short, I can't wait to see the Animal Farm language that legally declares that regular County gravity pipe "discharge" is GOOD while septic tank "discharge" is BAD in a ZERO DISCHARGE ZONE.

That will be interesting. (Plus, both the Coastal Commission and the Planning & etc. will all have to sign off on that bit of business as well. Unless the project suddenly lurches into requiring welded pipes? That might make a stir, unless that can be kept under the radar, again until it's too late.) So, stay tuned. There's a couple of interesting wrinkles left to massage.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Ann,

When you write that the average citizen wants a sewer done quickly and that they will get "the bill and if many of them turn out to be shocked! shocked! at the bill, too bad. It will be too late." why do you not also step forward and take credit for some of the increases in that bill?

After all, you supported both the formation of the CSD and the recall. Each of these two decisions, which you advocated for, has raised the price considerably.

When you say you want more study, more science, more options and more time, you don't point out that these requests raise the price each and every time.

If 30% of the town is forced to move away now instead of just 20% or 10%, it is partly because of the actions of the LOCSD, actions which you bear some responsibility for. If you want to complain about government and representatives hiding truth from us before taking decisive action, why do you not every write about the post-recall LOCSD board choosing to stop TriW and the great costs of that decision? We were never told, in advance, by those running for the recall that they intended to lose the project to the County, create five to ten years of delay, increase the price of the sewer and to take on tens of millions in debt ... and yet that it is exactly what they did. Nope, you and the public ... well, all but the 49.8% who voted against the recall ... were "in the dark as to the final outcome, even though people paying close attention ... (saw) the form and shape early on."

Stand up and take credit for what you've done! Be proud.


Lastly, on the supposed RWQCB inconsistency that you and Mark seem to both revel in ... if these "leaky" pipes convey the vast majority of sewage properly to a treatment plant we will be polluting far less than we currently are. Arguing that we should not reduce pollution at all unless we reduce it to zero is just plain silly. It is the same argument as saying we should keep all our troops in Iraq for the next 10 years if we can't reduce the number to zero. It's bogus and while I don't believe you've intended to make that argument, your isn't it ironic comment relies on this fallacy. Certainly welded pipes would leak less and at a greater cost ... the question is this ... how much greater is the cost and how much less would they leak and is it worth it? Raising this issue (leaks) as if it were key will create another park versus no-park debate. The CCLO complaint about the park components being reduced caused them to be put back in and the cost was raised which CCLO complained about. Be careful what you ask for ... you just might get it!

Richard LeGros said...

Ann,

1. The RWQCB has already approved a gravity system for Los Osos. They will approve the County's collection system too.
Also, the 'zero discharge zone' is focused on discharge from on-site septic tanks...not 'zero' leaks from a collection system (gravity or STEP). No collection system is 100% leak proof. You know that...so does the RWQCB. Leakage will be minimized via constant collection system inspection and repair (which is a required part of any project). Ann, you're just plain incorrect as to the definition of the 'zero discharge zone'. LOL

2. Los Ososians are not dumb or uninformed as you suggest...they know the issues.

They know that the project will be expensive; and want the project done as soon as possible in order to minimize costs.

They understand that a project's cost does not excuse them from meeting the requirements of the law.

They understand that the cost will displace some homeowners; but those remaining are willing to meet their social responsibilities.

Others, like you, are not willing to meet their responsibilities; hence oppose any solution. Fight Fight Fight what is Right Right Right cuz you're Tight Tight Tight!

Lady, you ain't foolin' anyone!

-R

Watershed Mark said...

Then there is the energy (in)efficiency of the treatment process selected.
That will impact on the long term O&M costs which by way of survey is important to a majority of respondents.

Watershed Mark said...

It is interesting how bold Richard's opinions are given he doesn't live in the PZ and won't be impacted at all.

GetRealOsos said...

Silly Billy,

You are the new twister of what's been written by me.

What I've thrown "out there" is more fact than you'd ever know or admit to.

Maybe I'm wrong about the number of homes at Sea Pines, but not wrong about the rest.

Are you saying the RWQCB didn't use blackmail to pass the 218?

Are you saying that the County and RWQCB didn't work as good cop, bad cop to get the 218 passed?

Are you saying that a "expandable" plant won't promote heavy growth up and down LOVR for developers?

Are you saying that Van Burden doesn't own many, many properties in the PZ? Or that the County, CSD and school properties are homeowners?

Your comments are simply way too silly and spun way too much to answer. Either you simply can't read or are simply stupid.

P.S. ...never said the AG works for Pandora, that office works for the water board. The water board works for M/W/H (obviously..)

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Mark (with a subtle change) wrote "It is interesting how bold Mark's opinions are given he doesn't live in the PZ and won't be impacted at all."

Hahahahaha

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

GetReal,

I still fail to see why Edwards would care about gravity versus STEP. You haven't explained this.

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"Any "unpleasant" past history will be buried..."

I'm not so sure about that one, but, I am sure that they will certainly try. Good luck.

M wrote:

"$850,000 was budgeted. That is not rumor. A three person staff for pio? Are you kidding?"

Don't forget, in 2003 - 2004, the Los Osos CSD also spent nearly $600,000 of the community's money on "a few spiffy quarterly newsletters," that they then used to lie to the community about the project.

Nice.

I first reported on all of that at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2007/05/she-is-los-osos-part-ii.html

Great story. (And, that reminds me, has anyone heard from Maria Singleton lately? I have a couple of questions for her.)

Finally, can't you people read?

According to a COUNTY DOCUMENT, the estimated monthly bill with "federal and state assistance" is "$92."

Now, everyone fly off to speculation land, again.

Los Osos, you guys are too much.

Oh, and by the way, you're welcome... again.

Aaron said...

John Waddell and John Diodati issued a viewpoint announcing gravity collection as the best solution for Los Osos. Click here to read the article.

Ron, you have to understand that your presentation of hyper-inflated self-righteousness is getting stale. Please stop citing yourself as a source. It's giving me a headache.

Mike Green said...

Thanks for the link Ron,
You just gotta love the schedule "C"
with the question right on top" Can we make the project affordable?"
Then on the bottom a big "Yes We Can!"
With circles and arrows pointing to two figures that both state the project is UNAFFORDABLE according to the EPA
What it should say is that with the best possible case of Federal and State help the project is ALMOST affordable.
Question: Why does a County Document have to be so propagandized?

Ron said...

Aaron wrote:

"Ron, you have to understand that your presentation of hyper-inflated self-righteousness is getting stale. Please stop citing yourself as a source."

I'm pretty sure that I didn't create that WRAC staff report, that I linked to... just like I didn't create all of those other excellent, primary sources, like Steve Monowitz, and the Questa Study, and Tri-W Development Permit, and the Tri-W Facilities Report, and on and on and on and on, that I've exclusively cited since 2000.

Yep, pretty sure those aren't me as a source.

Mike Green wrote:

" You just gotta love the schedule "C"
with the question right on top" Can we make the project affordable?"
Then on the bottom a big "Yes We Can!""


and;

" Question: Why does a County Document have to be so propagandized?"

EXCELLENT point. I spotted that, too. And, I hate to go to the speculation card here, but I recognize that style -- the font, the "Yes We Can!" crap.

It's eerily similar to that Solution Group newsletter (a great, primary source, that I scanned in myself a few years back, converted to a pdf file, and now host on my web site, exclusively, for all to see, because I realized what an important document it was).

When I saw that attachment "C," Mike, I almost blasted off an e-mail to Ogren asking him who created it. I'll go and do that now... just gotta know.

Mike said...

Zippp... right over Ron's head....again...

Too bad he doesn't own a house in Los Osos....

GetRealOsos said...

Shark,

I'm not a developer. Jeff said he needed the big gravity sewer to build. He said what he said.

Anywhere I've seen developers, it seems they want gravity to be able to build fairly large developments. I guess Step doesn't appeal to developers, maybe that's why Jeff never wanted Step (same goes for the County and Blakeslee).

I don't know why you want me to explain what goes on in the developers minds. I'm a "slow" growth person anyway...

Hey, now do you want to take a crack at my top ten questions to you?

Sewertoons said...

Step apparently doesn't appeal to most homeowners, either.

Aaron said...

Gravity didn't appeal to most homeowners in 2005. The difference between then and now is the County's involvement in the project, but homeowner opinion can change over time depending on whoever can be the most persuasive.

Realistic1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Realistic1 said...

Hi Aaron,

In 2005, exactly half (minus 1/10 of one percent) of the community preferred gravity. If that vote had been up to property owners alone, it is my opinion the percentage preferring gravity would have been much higher.

I'm not sure why everyone is fussing about gravity collection being "pre-determined". After AB-2701 passed, I remember hearing a county official (can't remember if it was Paavo or his predecessor) saying as much at the very first public meeting following passage.

Aaron said...

Hi Realistic,

That's probably so, but more than 3,200+ votes (both property owners and renters) went toward three directors that would ultimately succeed Richard, Gordon and Stan. I highly doubt those people were on the gravity train.

On November 4th, 2009, it was a similar turnout with Maria Kelly receiving 3,250 votes and Marshall Ochylski receiving 3,760 votes. Both were avid supporters of the County process and were supported by people who campaigned against STEP/STEG. You can see a very clear shift in preference of technology and leadership.

I don't see why people are shocked about the "pre-determined" aspect either. My educated guess is that people found the history of the County process to be a bit fuzzy around the beginning. The County didn't provide as much documentation then until late-2007 when people started to apply for TAC.

The reason I made that comment at 4:45 PM was to illustrate the dramatic change of opinion over the course of four years. That speaks volumes of how our district handled this situation.

GetRealOsos said...

Real,

You say, "I'm not sure why everyone is fussing about gravity collection being "pre-determined". After AB-2701 passed, I remember hearing a county official (can't remember if it was Paavo or his predecessor) saying as much at the very first public meeting following passage...."



...That's the problem Real, if the County knew then it was gravity -- and they did -- and stated so -- ...then why waste two years and six or seven million to try to convince the community that they actually had a choice?

The community NEVER had a choice, but will indeed pay for the County's dog n' pony show!

...and that is very wrong...

GetRealOsos said...

Sewer (toons):

Why don't you ever answer any questions like:

1) The horse stables are outside the PZ and they don't pollute? Why are they outside the PZ? Also, there are homes just a few feet away from homes in the PZ with the same size lots -- One house pollutes, and another house a few feet away doesn't? What gives with that Lynette?

2) Why didn't the County have the State and Federal kick in for their benefit? They should be paying to clean "their" water (along with homeowners) -- that's the law Lynette.

3) You said that the Morro Bay plant wasn't polluting through these years, but the pipes are leaking and cracked and some homes aren't hooked up at all (no lateral) ... how can you say they are not polluting?
Can you address?

...I know you guys won and your job is almost over, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on these three questions.

Mike said...

Because GRO... too many vocal extremists put the County and the State Water Board into a position of having to be prepared, even overly prepared, to defend every step of the "process"... That's a simplification, but you get the idea... There will never be any sewer, any where that will satisfy those extremists... They will and have, sue the State, will probably sue the County and maybe the Federal Government because they want every possible solution, no matter how untested, unqualified and just plain snakeoil examined by every panel of experts they can find... all to create more and more delays...

...and GRO, that was always Gail and her CSD5, plus cheerleading from Ann, to create so much dissention in the community that any sewer would be delayed and delayed and made to cost more than most of us can pay... Remember Al Barrow saying he could tie up any sewer forever...??? Well they have just about gotten their wish... If you want to vent your anger, aim it directly at Gail and Lisa, Julie, Chuck and Al... They are the key players in this farce....!!!!

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

The "Lisa" board (completely run by Gail) did lead the community into a much more expensive, bigger sewer that will allow heavy development (both here and on LOVR) -- we will be taking shit in from all over the County.
Great job they did, huh? I agree with ya there...

But, the County needed to have the State and Federal pay towards the project (no matter what project) because it is the Prop 218 law. The County could have brought the bill down to an affordable bill (no matter what project).

You think people should trust these water board agencies when they are stupid attorneys (RWQCB) breaking their own rules (i.e. "Fair Firm & Consistent"), have used no science to draw the PZ line, let corporate polluters off the hook, let Morro Bay with their terrible sewer plant get away with so much pollution -- and then the State Water Board with their fake environmentalists. Have you seen their bios?

You can not blame their bias and behavior on any Los Osos citizen. You can't blame the Taylors for stopping the County's old project, (didn't Stan and Gordon try to stop the County's old project? You don't mention them) or to imply that Budd caused the overbids with Tri-W. Nope, you're wrong.

No, it's very clear (to me at least) that the State likes M/W/H and keeps the work coming their way and that Blakeslee did AB2701 for the developers throughout the County.

P.S. Guess you didn't go to Gail's meeting tonight.

Mike said...

..nor did you

Sewertoons said...

Aaron says:
"Gravity didn't appeal to most homeowners in 2005."

Do you mean other than cost? Or was cost the issue? We came here in 2005, but the people we met were not against gravity, but middle of town.

I would say that we who pay attention at all to these things have learned quite a bit about both systems since 2005.

Sewertoons said...

To answer GRO who said - "...then why waste two years and six or seven million to try to convince the community that they actually had a choice"

I agree with Mike - that is the bottom line reason. But I will also add that the County wanted to show the "green" supporters that step, with all of its costs to property owners, was not quite what the step pushers led them to believe. There are huge impacts for step on individual properties but these facts were not mentioned. I guess if you don't care if you have to replace your driveway, landscaping, walls and fences it would be OK, but most people ARE concerned about those things. I always felt that step was pushed hard by salesmen. But when the rubber met the road, they apparently didn't think their cost savings were so truthful that they would bother to put a team together and bid. Ripley never even surfaced. THAT says a lot to me about the cost savings of step. It was just advertising in hopes of making a sale.

There is still one question I have about step that I heard asked the other day - but I didn't get the answer. If there is a power outage and the town's tanks are pretty full and in need of that little motor to start up - what happens when the power is suddenly back and all the lights come on and all those little motors start up at once - is PG & E up for that kind of a shock to the system?

Mike Green said...

Toons projected:
"Do you mean other than cost? Or was cost the issue? "
Yep, Yes, Absolutely, no question.

There needs to be a law against making fraudulent election claims, and a law against sitting electors setting the date of their own recall election.

Either one and Los Osos slides....

Sewertoons said...

GRO asks:
1) The horse stables are outside the PZ and they don't pollute? Why are they outside the PZ?

How many horses? Does the entire stable even equal the density of one block here in town? How many acres per horse? Sure, they are polluting, but to what degree? Do birds and raccoons poop? The horses aren't over our basin if you mean the stables on the way to MontaƱa de Oro. Cabrillo waste goes in a different direction than PZ waste. That is why Cabrillo is not in the PZ. If there is stable run-off, they will be hit with the new County stormwater pollution rules and have to build some swales.

Also, there are homes just a few feet away from homes in the PZ with the same size lots -- One house pollutes, and another house a few feet away doesn't?

Crazy, huh. Can you tell me just how many homes were accidently off the list? Maybe they can hook up if they like. If they pay in, that would be good, right? Clearly not including them was a boo-boo, if only for the reason that we have to hear about it on this blog over and over.


2) Why didn't the County have the State and Federal kick in for their benefit? They should be paying to clean "their" water (along with homeowners) -- that's the law Lynette.

Gee, as I have repeated ad nauseam, we are the ones polluting the water. If we didn't pollute it, we wouldn't need to clean it up, now would we? Gee, the water was clean when they let us use it, wasn't it?


3) You said that the Morro Bay plant wasn't polluting through these years, but the pipes are leaking and cracked and some homes aren't hooked up at all (no lateral) ... how can you say they are not polluting?

No, that is NOT what I said. I said that when the system was new, it cleaned up the pollution. It worked for a long time before they let it fall into disrepair. Had it been maintained, it would still be working. I never said anything about homes not being hooked up, nor have I even heard about that.

Aaron said...

I was talking about gravity collection in general.

At the time, I remember people having environmental concerns about the project, not just the costs. I don't remember who said this specifically, but in mid-2005, there were people who had issues with the increase in construction costs due to accommodating the slope requirements, but I remember vividly the times when people raised issues about dealing with untreated water seeping into the soil via exfiltration ("leaky pipes").

In 2005, the problem is that the pre-recall board was not as forthcoming as the County has been with their information. Those who watched and attended the CSD meetings heard about results that came out of this "objective screening process," that was really just smoke and mirrors. The board would post announcements once in a while in the Bear Pride.

Only those who actively followed CSD affairs through and through were more educated about both systems than the rest of the homeowners in the Prohibition Zone. In light of the lack of information, recall proponents exploited the pre-recall board's weakness by being more communicative with the community at large just so they looked like they knew what they were doing.

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Aaron,

I think that the Julie, Lisa and the recall candidates were masters of FUD (even if they believed it themselves ... you know, like the big lie). They preyed on the very human tendency that those in the media (ahem, cough) exploit when they try to sell us an interesting story instead of a careful and factual analysis. Take Ron, for example, he says that he doesn't bother reporting on some Los Osos topics because he doesn't find them interesting but he'll spin a good yarn about Pandora controlling the Pope and the UN and OPEC because he finds it fills a personal need of his.

Fear, uncertainty and doubt have taken over many in town and unfortunately, they are easy to lead (or mislead, as it were) like sheep to the slaughter.

The problem is this ... we all get to pay the same cost as those damn fools who voted for the CSD in the first place (I'm raising my hand here) and those morons who voted for the recall. Heck, I was willing to vote for the recall until I started looking carefully and asking questions and found that there was little but FUD behind the campaign. Certainly the lack of willingness to present any details about the plan they had or any assumptions which would justify $100/month was a dead giveaway. Nope, FUD it was.

The problem with a FUDmonger is that they react so very defensively when you question them. Another tell tale sign.

Some are still unwilling to grapple with the fact that they were wrong. Ron, for example, still asks to be thanked that he saved us money based on a misreading of the County plan which will cost us about $50 more each and every month than the TriW plan. Nope, defensiveness is a dead giveaway ... it tells us that we should not trust that person.

Sewertoons said...

I'll bet if a public policy researcher went across this country and looked at towns of comparable size involved in a major public works project, Los Osos would probably stand out as having far, far more data and research and public meetings done here than ANYWHERE else. Nothing would probably even come close. So to say that the Old Board should have done more communicating is lovely in concept, absurd as to the cost to our citizens, and completely unnecessary if people had only agreed that they needed and agreed to pay for a sewer. They didn't and that was the problem.

Leaky pipes makes me laugh. What do people think they are putting into the ground daily, year after year because of the delay? Does the magic sand take care of it until that perfect - (and free) - system appears?

You are so right about recall proponents "looking like they knew what they were doing!" We see the results of their hubris.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"If 30% of the town is forced to move away now instead of just 20% or 10%, it is partly because of the actions of the LOCSD, actions which you bear some responsibility for."

Actually, think it was Stan Gufstafson who used the %30 displacement figure.

Inlet also sez:"When you say you want more study, more science, more options and more time, you don't point out that these requests raise the price each and every time."

I'm not saying that. The county will do what the county will do.

Inlet sez:"Lastly, on the supposed RWQCB inconsistency that you and Mark seem to both revel in ... if these "leaky" pipes convey the vast majority of sewage properly to a treatment plant we will be polluting far less than we currently are"

I "revel" in this because it's so fascinating to see the RWQCB acting exactly as I've described them: Humpty Dumpty defining words however he sees fit. While claiming "science" for his word use. I think this is both hilarious and incredibly dangerous.

Richard sez:"Ann, you're just plain incorrect as to the definition of the 'zero discharge zone'. LOL"

You need to ask a CDO recipient why he has a CDO on his home. He was found "guilty" of "discharging" in a "zero discharge zone." That's what I find so hilarious about the RWQCB. Humpty Dumpty.

Richard sez:"2. Los Ososians are not dumb or uninformed as you suggest...they know the issues."

34% returned the county survey, which means a clear majority of the community didn't care, didn't know, didn't have the strength to lift up a pencil, or couldn't figure out how to put the survey into the pre-paid envelope and mail it back. And this on an issue that will have a direct effect on their pocketbook. That's amazing to me.

Richard also sez:"Others, like you, are not willing to meet their responsibilities; hence oppose any solution. Fight Fight Fight what is Right Right Right cuz you're Tight Tight Tight!"

Once again, Richard's making stuff up.

Realistic sez:"I'm not sure why everyone is fussing about gravity collection being "pre-determined". After AB-2701 passed, I remember hearing a county official (can't remember if it was Paavo or his predecessor) saying as much at the very first public meeting following passage."

I suppose the "fussing" is a result of being told that systems would be given a fair, impartial hearing, the implied focus on "design build", which would keep all options on the tble & etc. when what was actually being set up was a done deal with the selection process determining exactly what could even be brought to the table, and with the survey now being used to eliminate even the appearance of "design build" by eliminating any STEP companies from the short list. As I noted above, this is tar-baby linkage: Once you pick A you are then locked into X & Y but you cannot possibly get to Z. Z is permanently locked out once you pick A. Now, you can pretend that you've allowed best technology to float to the top, but that's simply not true. Do A and you've automatically crossed off Z. When Noel King spilled the "gravity"beans, everyone should have known how the table was tilted, so to speak. That's how you do it -- in plain sight, sleeves rolled up, hands waving, magic: Shazam! Done.

And as for "cost" being the top concern, I found it fascinating that the survey found people were willling to pay $50 more a month to get gravity.(They'd only consider STEP if it saved $50 a month) That indicates to me that the majority of folks who answered the survey have $50 a month "discretionary" income to pay "extra" for their prefered (gravity) system. Survey takers who truly were strapped, would have jumped at anything that was cheaper, no matter what. I find that interesting, in all this handwringing about cost.

Sewertoons said...

There are still the huge up-front costs and that fee of $400 or whatever to pump every 5 years if inspection requires it. Plus decorating your front yard with a man hole cover… Maybe the idea of step is so odious that people would rather move? Or maybe the people themselves pushing so hard for step make it seem like a bad idea because they are so strident or were associated with stopping the last project?

So just who was doing the hand-wringing then - the no-sewer people, or there actually aren't as many as the reported "5,000" that will be forced to move?

if you don't respond, you are basically saying you are fine with whatever is chosen.

Ann, tricky sidestepping of Shark's comment by invoking the name "Gustafson."

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Ann,

I would like to point out that in each of your "replies" to me you did not ... at all ... address the issues I raised.

If you don't think you've been asking for more options and more study you are confused. I guess the beauty of writing a commentary piece means that you don't have to take ownership for anything you advocate and that you can avoid the real issues if they are inconvenient because, after all, you are not the decision maker.

Fussing at the RWQCB for defining words differently than you do is just silly. Anytime someone is required to make a decision before full information is in, there will be someone out there saying "it's not scientific" because they don't like the result. Perhaps if you would explain what they should do differently and explain why the likely benefit of your proposal is worth the likely cost of your recommended action you would have a greater appreciation of what they do. Another thing immediately comes to mind. If the RWQCB were to require each and every Los Osos to obtain a professional certification as to the amount of nitrate pollution their home is capable of producing for our aquifer and bay, it would be a HUGE cost and you would be one of the first to complain about the costs.

There is pollution. We are polluting. We need to clean up the mess we are making in our aquifer or else all the conservation efforts will be of no value. If our aquifer gets toasted like I've heard has happened in Phoenix (and Mark has not disputed this with evidence, so it must be a fact), we will need to take on an expensive and unnecessary water project ahead of us.

Cleaning up the cost of your own mess is expensive. People who spend years mulling over and studying all the options for repairing their damaged car find that their car is falling into greater disrepair over that time period and the costs keep going up.


On the STEP vs Gravity question and those who would be willing to pay more to get gravity ... it makes sense because of the lower O&M and long term costs of a gravity system. Some folks (but not all by any means - those who are financial handwringers were clearly not the ones who said they would pay more for gravity) would simply want a system where they don't have any hassle on their property. Flush and forget, I guess.

Richard LeGros said...

Ann,

LOL....so you are standing by your belief that 'Los Osos is stupid' just because they do not act the way you wish. What a gal!

As for 'making stuff up', your ACTIONS speak much louder than what you words, Ann.

Looking at your actions, all you do is fight fight fight.

You FOUGHT the CSD WWTP; and in doing so needlessly prolonged the remedy to stop and clean up the intolerable pollution of our water; while further driving up a project's costs for all....the very costs you complain incessantly about. What a gal!

You and PZLDF FOUGHT the RWQCB over 'process' issues and their legislated duty to enforce the laws; laws that you refuse to obey. What a gal!

You FIGHT or just plain IGNORE any attempt to make PZLDF truthful and transparent as to its' intentions; or fess up that they used only CSD / public money to pay for their / your private lawsuit. Gosh, while touting the lawsuit you tried to hide the fact that you were a litigant in that lawsuit. What a gal!

You and Citizens for Clean Water are now FIGHTING the RWQCB to NOT implement stricter on site septic system standards to ensure our water remains clean. Just how does CCW behavior improve water quality?Just what has the Citizen for Clean Water done, or is doing, to clean up our water? Nothing...just more craziness by Gail McPherson, you, etal. What a gal!

So Lady, you ain't foolin' anyone!

-R

Realistic1 said...

"When Noel King spilled the "gravity" beans, everyone should have known how the table was tilted, so to speak. That's how you do it -- in plain sight, sleeves rolled up, hands waving, magic: Shazam! Done."

You are absolutely correct, Ann. The County said it. "Gravity". Loud and clear. Day One. It's time to get over it.

They've vetted other locations and vetted other treatment technologies, just like they said they would. We now have an out of town location. That's what you said you wanted. Declare a partial victory, accept that gravity is a done deal and move on.

Watershed Mark said...

Seems C.E.Q.A. wants a few answers which will require some more study Steve:
Effluent Quality-
Please describe design/expected nitrogen concentrations in the effluent from the various treatment methods. Page 3-57 says a separate nitrogen removal process is required for Proposed Project No. 4, what is it and what are the expected monthly average and daily maximums? What is the margin of safety for meeting effluent requirements? Note that Table 2-1 should refer to Biochemical rather than Biological Oxygen Demand.

Ron said...

Richard wrote,

"You (Ann) FOUGHT the CSD WWTP... driving up a project's costs for all....the very costs you complain incessantly about. What a gal!

Eeeeasy, Richard.

If you could actually read, you would have noticed that I posted a link above to a County document (a primary source, as usual) that read "with federal and state assistance," the estimated monthly payment is "$92."

And, according to last weekend's editorial by county staff (another primary source), the State and the Feds are down wit da process (that means "good," for those that don't speak hip-hop).

Dude, I've got some very, very bad news for you... (and Gordo, and Pandora, and, my main man, Bruce Buel, who, I just noticed, this morning, is a member of the WRAC Board, that will be hearing the Los Osos issue this Saturday. Absolutely friggin' beautiful! If I didn't have, oh, say, a million other better ways to spend a Saturday, I'd go and watch that meeting, just to see the awkwardness of Buel being involved with the issue again. That is sooooo rich!)... and that bad news is 90-percent of Los Osos is on my and Ann's side -- they don't want a "sewer-park" in the middle of their beautiful coastal town for no reason whatsoever -- other, of course, than the fact that Nash-Karner wanted to cover-up (scroll past the Viewpoint, if you've already read it in the paper, to where I lay out my beautiful case for cover-up) the fact that the only reason she formed the LOCSD in the first place in 1998, had failed, predictably, two years AFTER she used it to form the LOCSD.

Other than that, of course.

That's BAD NEWS #1 for you, Richard.

BAD NEWS #2 for you, is that a recent county documents reads, "with federal and state assistance," the estimated monthly payment is "$92."

"90-percent," Richard. (And the only reason that's not 100-percent, is because of the tiny handful of Los Ososans that either directly had a hand in developing the Tri-W embarrassment, or were Jedi-mind-tricked by Nash-Karner to the bitter, bitter, end.)

"$92," Richard.

"Driving up a project's costs for all?"

We saved you a friggin' fortune, AND did what 90-percent of your town wanted.

You're welcome.

By the way, in the survey, it asks which information sources residents "used" or found "most helpful" regarding the subject, and it didn't even mention blogs, unless you count us as "other."

I make the argument that if blogs had been as popular in 2000 as they are now, the train wreck would have never happened, because the CSD wouldn't have been able to cover-up the fact that the "better, cheaper, faster" project that formed the LOCSD for no reason whatsoever in 1998, had failed in 2000. And, the EXACT same thing that is happening today, with the county's process, would have happened in 2001.

That 2009 survey is EXACTLY what should have happened the moment "better, cheaper, faster" was tossed in the dumpster, in 2001, eight years earlier.

If a similar survey HAD happened in 2001, 90-percent (at least!) of Los Osos would have said "out of town."

That 2009 survey was THE FIRST TIME, since the 1998 election that formed the LOCSD, that residents had an official, level-playing-field say on the location, and lookee what it was.

There's nothing left to explain why the Tri-W location was selected for the second CSD project, other than Pandora Nash-Karner, as vice-president of the Los Osos CSD in 2000, made-up that "strongly held community value," like I've been reporting forever, and then used it, as an elected official, to lie to the Coastal Commission in an effort to keep her second project at the exact same location as her "better, cheaper, faster" project, in an effort to cover-up the fact that the only reason she used to form the LOCSD in 1998 -- her "better, cheaper, faster" project -- had failed in 2000.

What an amazing story, and Homeboy's got it all nice and time-stamped, like.

(boo-yeah, hop, hop, hop, fist bump)

Mike Green wrote:

"There needs to be a law against... sitting electors setting the date of their own recall election."

I like your taste in laws. Please tell that to Sam Blakeslee.

Mike said...

Ron, What are you drinking this early...??? You made as much sense as a rock...

When was the last time you actually got paid for any of your "investigative" reporting...??? You certainly couldn't get a job with a legitiment publication...

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Ron's a hoot.

As his way of trying to say that we're saving money by the recall fiasco is to convince us that we're gonna get handouts from the State and Feds. First, a state handout is laughable. The feds are handing out money for "shovel ready" projects to boost our national economy. There is no way the County project is gonna get any of that money because it won't be designed in time.

So Ron ... your attempt to save us from thinking you're a math moron (remember that you told us that $250 is less than $200) boils down to an assumption that we're gonna get a free gift. How likely do you think this is? Do you you also bet money on the lottery simply because you might possible win even though losing is far more likely?

On the matter of the survey ... I find it Amazing that some 70% of Los Osos says that gravity is the preferred system and yet the post-recall board stopped construction of a gravity collection system. Ron, if you're gonna use survey results today (which are based on the public's current perceptions) to justify your statements about what people believed in the past you are gonna catch some flak ... cause doin' that ain't legal. It is like saying Bush didn't win in either 2000 or 2004 because his approval rating in 2008 was in the teens.

I would also suggest, Ron, that if TriW and $200/month had been on the list of options, along with the variety of County plans at approximately $250 ... you know, if there had been a question of "Would you be willing to go with Gravity and TriW and save $50 per month and we get to keep water in our aquifer too?" ... TriW would have cleaned up with over 90% of the vote. We all know this ... we all know the only reason the recall succeeded is because of the 2005 version of the "better, cheaper, faster" lie.

So Ron, if you care about Los Osos (we doubt you do, but you say so) and if you really like history (and you seem to ... after all, you spend more time discussing pre-2004 things than anything else) why have you never ever ever written anything about the recall campaign claims and the post-recall hosing of Los Osos by the gang who couldn't shoot straight who just fell off a turnip truck?

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

Richard, Sewertoons, & Steve Rein,

If Los Osos (only the PZ of course) is polluting, then why have the test wells shown improvement or remained the same -- and are below allowable amounts of nitrates except for below Cabrillo!

Linde Owen points this out.

Why would the County and RWQCB force a "COMMUNITY" sewer system on Los Osos and claim nitrate pollution when it's NOT THERE?!?

That's fraud and easy to prove fraud in a Court of Law (not this County though)...

Richard LeGros said...

Ron,

LOL...you still think the project will cost less? And you base that assertion on a single County Document (a source which you often criticize)?....LOL

First, the County has not qualified for one damn cent of State or Federal money or assistance. Their project does not meet the definition of an old project ready to start. Never did. Do not forget the State made it very clear that Los Osos will not receive once cent until the CSD honors its obligations to the State.
(By the way, your COUNTY link above does not work...never did.)

Second, the County project only at the conceptual design phase... and lacks enough specificity to determine final costs. At this phase, industry standards allow cost estimates to have a variation of +/- 40%!
Just wait until the County really starts designing....and the permitting agencies start sand-bagging their project with other requirements mandated by law. Add in the cost of environmental mitigation on 160 acres of Ag land, an HCP, higher degrees of water treatment, additional water transport lines for maintaining and balance water levels in the PZ to maintain wetlands, ETC.

Third, add in the inflation cost s associated with the delay to get the County project to construction. Add about $20,000 per day each day that the County is delayed to start construction. I believe construction will not commence until 2011 due to delay caused project add-ons and opponents playing the process.

Fourth, the cost to Los Osos is not only the costs of the County project, but also the costs of not building the prior project. Do not forget we are already paying $21 per month to pay down the 2002 bon d assessment; and will have to pay down the $25,000,000 CSD debt consisting of contractor debt, payback of State SRF funds, the RWQCB fines and the sewer prepay funds collected from CSD citizens.

When all is said and done, Los Osos will be lucky if the true cost per month is less than $300.

So Ron, thanks a lot for 'saving' Los Osos soooo much of our money! LOL

-R

Richard LeGros said...

GRO,

Go right ahead and prove your fraud case in Court. If your claims are backed up by fact and the law, you will win; and do Los Osos a great service too!

Actually do something in court, please! Meanwhile your implication that the Courts are corrupt in Los Osos; hence will not rule your way is just a lame excuse not to do what you know believe to be right; and your responsibility as a citizen too. Gee GRO, you are not lazy or anything like that are you?Or does the thought of actually proving your point prove too tiring for you?

-R

Watershed Mark said...

We welcome the opportunity to meet with County staff to discuss both wastewater and stormwater issues as the project evolves. Sincerely; Roger W. Briggs- Executive Officer

It really is important to consider the cost of the WW project technology because the stormwater issue is also on the table.
If there is a significantly less expensive technology that exists, it would be stupid not to actually study and consider it.

But that’s just my opinion.
Paavo Ogren said such technology would: "become(s) the new standard and all others would fall away.”

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
My opinions when engaged, explored, studied, reviewed and "reported", save money, energy and time, while Richard's do not.

Mike said...

...but Richard...the cost will come down, because all new construction projects that will follow once the infrastructure is begun... and that will be tied to the recovery of the economy...

It's going to be great to see 50,000 new homes filling Los Osos Valley...

Watershed Mark said...

RL wrote: At this phase, industry standards allow cost estimates to have a variation of +/- 40%!

-40% good!
+40% bad.

Mike said...

...and all on a nice big conventional and proven, gravity collection system...

Mike said...

Linde Ownen is somehow a recognized "sewer chemistry expert"...??? She can't even speak without Gail making the cue cards...

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

GetReal,

I have not seen any numbers which show nitrate levels decreasing. Where would I find details of these tests which show this?

Mike said...

...and where is the PZLDF legal fee payment Ann...????

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Mark,

You write that your opinions save money but Richard's do not.

Um ... no. Richard opposed the formation of the LOCSD in the first place and opposed the recall. In both cases he ended up on the short end of the vote which ended up costing our community just like he said it would.

His track record is far better than yours ... after all, you don't even know how to appropriately get your product in front of County decision makers at the time they are reviewing various options.


Word Verification for Mark ... "failing"

Richard LeGros said...

Hi Mike,

Geee...you know darn well that Ann never does any splain' for her own behavior. She just demands that others have splain' to do cuz it's her blogsite! So there!

You know.....
Don't look at what I, Ann Calhoun, does/did/imply/promote/can't prove/am mistaken in/lack critical thinking about/won't admit to/am in denial of.....
instead look over there at those other bad bad folks! LOL

-R

Mike said...

...Yup Richard, Ann is a real piece of work... guess I'd put her "opinion journalism" right there along side the wantabe gossip columnists, certainly not a ligit journalist by any stretch of the immagination... and let's not forget how she doesn't deny stealing tax dollars from the community to pay her share of the pizzelflop lawsuit... Gail must be real proud of her duped puppet...

...anyone have any idea of when PZLDF will pay their share....??? Apparently Ann doesn't feel a need to pay... I do understand that the CSD may be finally looking into that whole shoddy, typical post-recall, agreement to spend tax dollars on another lawsuit they had to have known would not fly.... Maybe there will be another lawsuit to recover the money the CSD paid Sullivan...????

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Richard,

That's the beauty of being a commentator. Your only job is to complain about and criticize others and to point to what you believe might be better. But if decision makers (or the public, thru a vote) adopt your advice and it turns out badly, shame on them for not being careful.

It's sort of like being an astrophysicist or a dermatologist or a lawyer ... whatever happens ... even if you are the one who advocated a path which ended up badly ... you still have people coming to you for help.

Sewertoons said...

HEY GANG! Read the CCC letter to Paavo (off Aaron's site) - thank you Aaron for posting this letter.

Gee, maybe Ron's claims at how the CCC was "baie and switched" by the old Board aren't exactly true - or even close to it.

Mike Green said...

From the CCC letter:
" The project must be sited and designed in a manner that respects significant public visual resources and public recreational opportunities"

Yep, You better put in a tot lot and doggie park by gum! Just like all the other sewers in SLO county.

Looks like schedule "C" is going to get a quick rewrite

"YES WE CAN" not.

Mike Green said...

Ron, any idea what happened to the county document link?

Churadogs said...

Toonces sez:"Ann, tricky sidestepping of Shark's comment by invoking the name "Gustafson"

That wasn't "tricky," it was Gufstafson who used the 30% guestimate. Strangely, during all of this, there has never been an official feasibility study so nobody really knows (exactly) what percentage will be forced to leave. I've always found that odd for such a huge project that could have such devastating impacts. Either the powers that be didn't care or they had a pretty reasonable guestimate that that amount was o.k. with them or they had a guestimate and it was not good, but so long as nobody made the number "official" and accurate, it could be denied or ignored.

Inlet sez:"Fussing at the RWQCB for defining words differently than you do is just silly"

It's not an issue of defining words differely from me. It's a problem of defining words differently to suit their agenda. It's not only a case of Humpty Dumpty but a case of Animal Farm. Some pigs "discharge" and get CDO's other pigs "discharge" and that's o.k. This kind of stuff is dangerous in a regulatory board with no checks and balances in place and with the power to destroy lives and put people in jail.

Inlet sez:"There is pollution. We are polluting. We need to clean up the mess we are making in our aquifer or else all the conservation efforts will be of no value."

You're missing the point. There's "collective" pollution wherein you hold the whole collective responsible and fine the entity or require it clean up the pollution & etc. i.e. you sue the city or county or whoever has legal control over legally permitted septic tanks, for example. When you single out an individual and put a legal lien on his house and threaten him with jail time (all in the statute the RWQCB used against the Los Osos 45) you'd better have a better level of proof that the person you're accusing of breaking the law actually IS breaking the law and polluting the waters of the state of California. HUGE difference. During the Mad Hatter tea party, the RWQCB was asked repeatedly, Do you have any emperical evidence that Mr. X is polluting the waters of the state of California? and the answer -- repeately -- was NO.

Realistic 1 sez:"They've vetted other locations and vetted other treatment technologies, just like they said they would. We now have an out of town location. That's what you said you wanted. Declare a partial victory, accept that gravity is a done deal and move on."

This mantra is a puzzle to me. "moving on." What does that mean? Who's NOT moving on? From the moment the County took the project, here's what I've repeated endlessly: PAY ATTENTION, WAKE UP, STAY INVOLVED, ASK QUESTIONS, RAISE ISSUES, PUT YOUR TWO CENTS IN WHILE YOU HAVE TIME OTHERWISE IT'LL BE TOO LATE, YOU WILL HAVE TO FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE, THIS TRAIN IS LEAVING THE STATION, CHUGGA-CHUGGA. That'S all about a Process that has been moving on from day one. I suspect this mantra of yours is another one of those meaningless phrases.

Ron sez:"If a similar survey HAD happened in 2001, 90-percent (at least!) of Los Osos would have said "out of town."

There, in a nutshell, is the tragedy of Los Osos.

Inlet sez:"you know, if there had been a question of "Would you be willing to go with Gravity and TriW and save $50 per month and we get to keep water in our aquifer too?" ... TriW would have cleaned up with over 90% of the vote. We all know this ... we all know the only reason the recall succeeded is because of the 2005 version of the "better, cheaper, faster" lie."

Before the recent survey I would have agreed with that opinion. After the survey, however, I'm not at all sure you're right. I was and am surprised that the majority who answered the survey actually were willing to spend $50 MORE to get the system they wanted. Why wouldn't they do the same thing here: Pay $50 MORE to have a sewer plant outside of town.

Richard sez:"Second, the County project only at the conceptual design phase... and lacks enough specificity to determine final costs. At this phase, industry standards allow cost estimates to have a variation of +/- 40%!"

If Richard isn't making this up, and it's true, why are all of you guys constantly chewing on each other's ankles over what this will or won't cost?

Ron said...

Mike Green wrote:

"Ron, any idea what happened to the county document link?"

Well, that's very interesting, huh?

And, no, I do not have a primary source on what happened to that link, but, if I were to take a guess on what happened to it, I would say that it probably has something to do with my e-mail to Ogren from the other day:

"Hello Paavo,

Real quick,

In the WRAC staff report for April 4, there's attachment "C" on page 12. Who created that document?"


His reply:

"Public Works staff prepared Attachment 'C' "

Great. Thanks for that non-answer, P.

M.G. also wrote:

"Looks like schedule "C" is going to get a quick rewrite

"YES WE CAN" not."


Funny.

"From the CCC letter:
"The project must be sited and designed in a manner that respects significant public visual resources and public recreational opportunities"


Sounds like ol' PNK has Jedi-mind-tricked the staff of the Coastal Commission... again!

God forbid that Los Osos builds a sewer plant that doesn't also include a picnic area.

Yum.

Realistic1 said...

"This mantra is a puzzle to me. "moving on." What does that mean? Who's NOT moving on?"

Every person who has been (and is still) kvetching at the Sups, at the CSD , at LOCAC and on various blogs about STEP/STEG v. gravity. It is a waste of EVERYONE'S time and energy to keep harping on or lamenting a decision that was written in stone from day one. The usual suspects were still harping about it at the sups meeting yesterday. Enough already! Gravitty is in, STEP is out. Harp about something else, for God's sake!

Mike said...

It's just possible the CCC report was refering to acceptance of the Tri-W WWTF being mostly underground and with a spiffy "wave wall" and landscaping to provide some needed viewscape improvement of the view of those rusty trailers...

The small "park" Ron likes to condemn was only a part of a compromise to obtain permits and some funding... Compromise is something Ron would never understand... As much as Ron likes to complain, then Ron, just how many "parks" do we have in Los Osos...??? YOU don't need to come visit since you don't live here anyway...

BTW... When is PZLDF going to be "exposed" for their fraudulent use of taxpayer dollars Ron...???

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...

Ron,

Nice try. Blame Pandora or Gordon for anything that doesn't turn out the way you want.

Sounds to us like you simply misled us about CCC staff opinion.

I don't know whether you were being dishonest when you misled us or whether you were simply too dumb to understanding what Monowitz said. There is a logical third possibility ... you so much wanted to believe you were right, you read something into his words which wasn't what he meant but your ego kept you from understanding that there was another, far more likely interpretation.

Nope Ron, you've misled us. The CCC staff report along with the County plan costing us more than TriW was gonna shows us that most of what you've written about TriW since 2004 has been crap.

Nice journalism skills ... perhaps you should call yourself an opinion author like Ann does. That way you don't have to justify your mistakes.

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

As far as the State and Feds paying their share on the 218. The law says NOTHING about who caused what. If government agencies benefit, they are to pay. Besides, the (Federal) bay is not polluted by PZ homeowners anyway. Wasn't it Alon who pointed out in the Kitt's study we were polluting one tenth of 1%? The list goes on and on of polluters of the bay. Your argument is silly.

And, by the way, where do we get the free toilets again? Free plumbers to install the free toilets?...


Real,

Why was vacuum never considered? Why is it just between Step and gravity? Clever on the County's part I'd say...

Mike said...

GRO... Do YOU really understand what the "vacuum" design meant...???


...and call julie for your "free" toilet...

Realistic1 said...

"Real,

Why was vacuum never considered? Why is it just between Step and gravity? Clever on the County's part I'd say..."

I don't know, and I don't care, because it doesn't matter why. It never did. The County was given final approval on all technical aspects of the project by AB2701. Day one they said "gravity" - and gravity it will be.

Get over it.

Aaron said...

I've been over it since the County took over the project, but my concern is that co-equal environmental analysis (using CEQA's guidelines) was an enormous waste of taxpayer money. How does this analysis benefit anyone when the County preferred gravity all along?

Realistic1 said...

"Sounds like ol' PNK has Jedi-mind-tricked the staff of the Coastal Commission... again!"

Yep, Ron. Maybe Pandora's up to her evil tricks again...or maybe Steve Monowitz wasn't speaking for the CCC after all.

GetRealOsos said...

Real,

Please don't tell me to get over it. The County promised a fair process, but it was anything but.

The County stalled a project for years, permitted tanks, spent 7 million dollars for the "fair" process of PZ homeowners money to trick the community into thinking they would look at alternatives. They had NO intention of considering anything but gravity. They single sourced at that. For the County to spend millions of dollars for a dog n' pony show is criminal in my opinion. It's certainly a waste of public funds.

Gravity will not work in the sand and hills we have here, add earthquakes on top of that.

You will make money off gravity though. Good for you. You don't care about the environment obviously. Oh well.


Mike,

Lynette said free toilets were available. Let HER ANSWER.

Sewertoons said...

GRO, see Mike's comment as to where to get toilets - just forget the reference I made as to their being INEXPENSIVE at Home Depot, (I never said free)!

Who benefits more - we, with a water supply to use, or the "state?" Again, WHO messed up the water?

The Kitt's study is one of many. So?

If you don't want to pay to clean it up, why don't you move?

The word verification is "dissed."

Realistic1 said...

"You will make money off gravity though. Good for you. You don't care about the environment obviously. Oh well."

GRLO,

How do you figure that? I am not a developer, a contractor or anything else related to those fields.

I have a small home on a small lot and have no one to help me maintain a STEP system. I want gravity because it's proven technology and involves the least amount of maintenance. It's no more or less expensive.

As for the environment, I care about it just as much as you do. I'm just not inerested in delaying protection of it for another 20 years.

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

You did say "free" toilets. You said free toilets and shower heads. You can't even admit to any mistake. Wow.

You don't speak the truth, to say the least.

Thanks to you I can not move. I'm stuck. Who's gonna buy here with construction for 5 to 10 years and a lien that is a blank check? Someone would have to be nuts. How much did you pay for each of your houses? How much could YOU get now do you think? ... maybe half?

Who messed up the water? Well, start with the RWQCB saying there was pollution and not doing anything about it when discovered as they are supposed to do. Since 1983 no septic management? ..no septic survey at all? 25 years doing nothing???

Who messed up the water? There are a list of at least 25 polluters (bay) from people living on boats to the Morro Bay sewer plant.

You ask, who benefits more -- our water is used by the entire district Lynette. You make my point now about how the PZ is illegal. I'll repeat, the entire district benefits, not just the PZ. Yet, the County has determined that only the PZ will pay for the benefit of clean water for the state, federal and entire district.

BTW, the horse corrals are right on top of the land Jeff is using for injection wells -- adjacent to the Broderson site. Of course the corrals with horses aren't polluting.

It wasn't the septics in the PZ messing up the bay. I'm glad you know of other studies besides Kitts, why don't you share them with us? I'd love to see them.

Hey, it's law the the water board has the burden of proof of pollution -- not the other way around Lynette.

I'm so sick of your lies and spin. You are ice cold just like Gibson.
Thanks again for ruining my financial situation Lynette!

Realistic1 said...

"Hey, it's law the the water board has the burden of proof of pollution -- not the other way around Lynette."

The Water Board obviously believes they have met the burden of proof. The issue of whether or not we are polluting was litigated a long time ago. The fact that you can't accept it is your problem. I am just as sick of people who refuse to accept what has already been decided driving up the costs for everyone else.

Focus your energy on what you can control instead of being pissed off about what can't be changed.

Mike said...

Hey GRO... I'll buy your property right now for Market Value... I am a licensed Appraiser, so you'll understand that I can determine the current Market Value of that parcel... Are you ready to write that Contact of Sale....???

No sense you continue to go through that build up to your inpending stroke...

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
Shouldn't you get another licensed Appraiser to appraise a property you will be buying, to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest?

Mike said...

Like all Mark's BS, he never read the answer, only what he wanted to see.... &%$#@ idiot... no wonder he was not taken seriously by the County...

Sewertoons said...

GRO said,
"Thanks again for ruining my financial situation Lynette!

WOW!!! How'd I get so much power???? LOL!!

GRO, I said the showerheads are free from Golden State and the LOCSD Water Department.

Maybe you can explain how water from "people living on boats to the Morro Bay sewer plant" got into our upper aquifer?

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

You dope. It's a federal bay. I spoke of people living on boats pollute the bay along with other sources. I didn't say they polluted our upper aquifer, you KNOW I was referring to the bay. After all, that's all you dreamers have talked about, the septics polluting the bay! But, twisting is your game!

Who IS polluting the aquifer are the horses, homes in Cabrillo (that's where the wells tested highest), natural vegetation, and surface runoff according to the RWQCB.

Hey, wanna site all those other studies you talk about (besides the Kitts' study) done on the bay?

You did say "free shower heads and toilets" -- that's what you said. You were trying to make a point that it wasn't expensive to retrofit. No, Lynette, you have to buy toilets and pay a plumber to install. It's just another cost that is added on to the sewer cost. All those costs add up. Go ahead and admit you made a mistake. It would be good for you. And please tell us WHY ONLY THE PZ HAS TO RETROFIT while others outside the PZ don't. Wow.

You twist your facts because you don't want to admit to anything.

You played your part, or did your job that helped result in the most expensive sewer per capita in the US. Thanks Lynette. You should be proud of yourself and I'm sure your job earned your husband extra brownie points at work.

I'm glad you think it's all so funny. That's what makes you cold. You think it's funny that so many people can't afford the thousands extra each year and that will rise year after year...so funny Lynette. Your promoted what the County was doing, the big $6 million dollar dog n' pony show. If a sewer is indeed needed, the County could have researched and found ways to deal with the affordability issue.

Lynette, you can't possibly have children. You're too selfish and don't have a heart. And you probably stuck your mother in a nursing home like Pandora did!

GetRealOsos said...

Real,

You say, "I am just as sick of people who refuse to accept what has already been decided driving up the costs for everyone else..."

Real, it's the County who has driven up the cost, both with their $6 million dog n' pony show, and them not selecting an affordable alternative, or having the State and Federal pay for benefit.

Besides, contractors are working for half of what they were before because of the recession.

Not Montgomery/Watson/Harza though. They'll charge top dollar and that's fine with the County, and obviously fine with you. You support the fraud and the forcing of the most expensive system ever. Don't blame others. Take some blame too Real and deal with the fact that the County has made the cost higher. Heck, they didn't do the sewer when it could have been really inexpensive.

Mike said...

GRO.... Not sure where you're digging up your "facts", but don't try making up crap like: "...contractors are working for half of what they were before because of the recession."

It ain't true...!!!! In fact, it's just another damn made up lie that you apparently would like to believe and pass off in another of your BS enuendo style....!!!!

But it's simply NOT TRUE...!!!! If you are so sure, then state your source...

...and how much do you want for that shack of your's...??? It isn't worth much, but I'll take it off your hands and doze it over so a real house can be built...

I've listened to your bullshit for more than 3 years, either put up or shut up... You are one miserable ass....no wonder you don't have any friends....!!! (if you can use profanity so freely to "make your points" on this blog, then so can we all....!!!)

Q&F GRO, Q&F

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

I've blogged an article on contractors working for less here before and won't do it again.

John Fouche while on TAC said the same.

It's fact. Contractors are desperate for work.

If you deny that the County put on a $6 million dollar dog n' pony show for the PZ to pay for, or that the entire district doesn't benefit from clean water, etc. etc. too bad. The truth really seems to make you steam! Who's gonna get the stroke?

Also, you have no idea who I am or where I live or if I have friends. Where do you get off? You're just one heck of a nasty guy.

Alon Perlman said...

Ok, for starters- All indications are that part of the GRAVITY system will have to be sealed.
Why ? among other things Salt water intrusion. only in low lying areas where there will be contact betwen saltwater and pipes. sprayfields at tonnini- well the county cant put a bujillion acre feet of secondary treated water in a pond can they? some wastage will have to occur. If the wastewater is denitrified it is not usefull for farming. Catch 22 If there is salt in the wastewater it can't be used in ag exchange. read the agencies comments including the late submitted coastal commmission
copy is on aarons blog(ochsnation.blogspot.com)
$400 versus 250? I remember when it was 105 or so and Several people includin Ed O and myself stated that it was going to be $200 and $250 with water importation (oh 2005 or so).
We were right then.
The agencies responses to the DEIR- Tertiary
Thats not in the bill is it?.

Nitrates
They seek them here. they seek them there. They pollute the Bay , the aquifer and the blogs.
Looks like GRO got called on Linde's comments re decreasing nitrates. Los Osos is suffering as usual from the use of the LOGICAL Fallacy "appeal to inappropriate Authority". Who hasn't commented on nitrates?.
Piper Riely and Chuck Cessena both submitted to the DEIR and they semi-referenced their sources for their nitrate values. The person who did the most research was Bruce Paine
you will find their comments here.
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Page11149.aspx
Bruce paine's appendices have the actual graphs by Corrolo.
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PW/LOWWP/EIR+Comments+P/DEIR+Payne+01.30.09+attachments.pdf
I'm seeing the values over time as flat. I could spend more time eye-balling them and I'm fairly sure that I could make the case for them decreasing slightly. On the other hand it is possible that even taking into account that there has been new construction in and outside the prohibition zone, Horse corrals, effects of percipitation etc.. I may come up with a no change or slight increase. And I would have to report it. Ah, to live the life of care free opinionated Los Osos activist. Unfortunately I can't shake the years of scientific training. A real handicap here in Osos town.

Interesting where Los Ossosians get their info- survey page 15 Cable television being the most comprehensive carrier and probable source for the most categories (TAC BOS LOCSD).
No listing of blogs as an info source
Survey says-59 percent got info from "Neighbors, friends, family" but only 23 % found that Info useful- we really do need to heal this community.
Categoies;None-Other-Draft EIR Report-Board of Supervisor's Meetings-LOCSD Board Meetings-Project's Web site-TAC Meetings-Neighbors, friends, family-Project Status Report-Newspaper-County brochures, mailings.

Mike said...

GRO... Working for "less" is a long way from your dramatic "contractors are working for half...

That has been your typical enuendo for as long as you have been blogging... You deliberately mislead and infact, do lie....!!!!

You constantly make up facts to support your personal beliefs or idea of what you wish the world around you to be... but it's not truth...!!!!

You liked to "out" Steve as if you know him personally....well you might consider that you may also be known personally also... Have a nice day... Q&F....!!!!!

Churadogs said...

Realistic 1 sez:"The usual suspects were still harping about it at the sups meeting yesterday. Enough already! Gravitty is in, STEP is out. Harp about something else, for God's sake!"

Public comment is public comment. It's part and parcel of the system. You get our two or three minutes, legally mandated under the Brown act. Anybody can "harp" on about anything they wish. Has nothing to do with "move on."

Aaron sez:"I've been over it since the County took over the project, but my concern is that co-equal environmental analysis (using CEQA's guidelines) was an enormous waste of taxpayer money. How does this analysis benefit anyone when the County preferred gravity all along?"

Ah, that IS a most interesting question. Plus, if you pre-select certain technologies, then have you violated the basic premise of "design build" and short-circuted the process by which the best technologies will come to the top?

Toonces Sez"GRO said,
"Thanks again for ruining my financial situation Lynette!

WOW!!! How'd I get so much power???? LOL!!"

Sorry, Toonces. Don't you know that it was I alone who destroyed this community, all by myself?

Mike sez:"The small "park" Ron likes to condemn was only a part of a compromise to obtain permits and some funding... "

If the small park you mention was some minor, uninportant "compromise" then please explain the SOC and the ferocity with which the CSD fought -- against all odds -- to keep that sewer plant in the middle of town? That's hardly anything you'd do over some minor item. You'd say, heck, we'll dump the park since there is no overwhelming community requirment that it be there, at which point the CC might say, Well, in that case -- no overwhelming requirment -- then since that's ESHA land, you must relocate the plant somewhere non-ESHA,since there really is no need to keep the plant there in order to have a centrally located public amenities,ie. a park.

Mike sez: refering to GRO: "I've listened to your bullshit for more than 3 years, either put up or shut up... You are one miserable ass....no wonder you don't have any friends....!!! (if you can use profanity so freely to "make your points" on this blog, then so can we all....!!!)"

I think you're looking in the mirror again, Mike.

Alon sez:regarding nitrate levels:"Bruce paine's appendices have the actual graphs by Corrolo.
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PW/LOWWP/EIR+Comments+P/DEIR+Payne+01.30.09+attachments.pdf
I'm seeing the values over time as flat. I could spend more time eye-balling them and I'm fairly sure that I could make the case for them decreasing slightly. On the other hand it is possible that even taking into account that there has been new construction in and outside the prohibition zone, Horse corrals, effects of percipitation etc.. I may come up with a no change or slight increase."

To me, those numbers speak to basin loading,which the moritorium sort of stopped. Doesn't "fix" the problem, but stopped it from getting worse. Also makes the 1,100-some 'additional' homes the RWQCB allowed to be fuilt AFTER the moritorium all the wierder. You don't declare a nitrate/septic emergency then build more septic tanks. Right there the problems of credibility and defintion started. All dishonest tar baby from day one.

Ron said...

Ann wrote, to Angry Mike:

"If the small park you mention was some minor, uninportant "compromise" then please explain the SOC and the ferocity with which the CSD fought -- against all odds -- to keep that sewer plant in the middle of town? That's hardly anything you'd do over some minor item. You'd say, heck, we'll dump the park since there is no overwhelming community requirment that it be there, at which point the CC might say, Well, in that case -- no overwhelming requirment -- then since that's ESHA land, you must relocate the plant somewhere non-ESHA,since there really is no need to keep the plant there in order to have a centrally located public amenities,ie. a park."

Perfectly put. Ann, I can't tell you how refreshing it is, for me at least, to see that at least one person in Los Osos "gets it."

One tiny correction, though...

Ann wrote:

"...at which point the CC might say..."

That wouldn't have been a "might." They would have HAD to say that. CEQA demands it.

Ann also wrote:

"Sorry, Toonces. Don't you know that it was I alone who destroyed this community, all by myself? "

What? No love for me? ; - )

Finally, while I'm here, I also want to call my shot (kinda-sorta) -- It'll be very interesting to see if Bruce Buel recuses himself from the WRAC meeting this Saturday.

If someone goes, I'd be interested in hearing an update on that question.

Aaron said...

Ann writes, "Ah, that IS a most interesting question. Plus, if you pre-select certain technologies, then have you violated the basic premise of "design build" and short-circuted the process by which the best technologies will come to the top?"

That's what I'm thinking. When I spoke with Paavo and Bruce Gibson during their office hours, they were rather unapologetic about the process being "biased," and it was almost at a point where they felt that adding a STEP/STEG team on the design-build was an act done out of pity.

I really don't understand how legal the county process can be when the decision-making "judgment call" aspect of the process was closed. The County has disclosed everything but the decision they personally made on day one.

Realistic1 said...

"Sorry, Toonces. Don't you know that it was I alone who destroyed this community, all by myself?"

No, Ann. According to Ron, it was Pandora who single handedly destroyed Los Osos, and according to you, it was Stan, Richard & Gordon. According to GRLO it was the County & Lynette.

Mike said...

Aaron... you need to look back in history, like to the pre-recall... There was a very legitimate, very legal, fully permitted project that was halted by the decision-making "judgment call" without regard to the consequences... Do you think that those years of difficult work and decision making went un-noticed, especially in-light of the manner in which the recall campign was run by a small group of extremists and then the continued nastiness toward the past Directors, the Water Baord and the BOS...???

Do you think that possibly the same small group of vocal extremist dissenters influenced the BOS decisions...??? Did the nasty threats play a part in the BOS decision...??? Could Gail McPherson's past activities have influenced the BOS...???

There was more at work behind the scenes than we are ever going to know, but the circus of clowns, trolls and cheerleaders were a very negative factor. The financial mismanagement disaster attributed directly to the post recall leaders and followers certainly was an influence...

It is naive to think the BOS put more weight on the arguments of the extremists than on the quiet voice of the conservative community... This was never a technology decision, it was always a political decision... It may not be perfectly correct for all people, but it was legal...

Aaron said...

I understand what you're saying, Mike, but I think we're talking about two different things. You're talking about the history of the project based on the pre-recall LOCSD's process. I'm talking about the County's process that started after the passing of AB2701.

I'm only going to talk about the history that is relevant to the decisions that are currently being made -- but I don't disagree with you, Mike.

You wrote, "This was never a technology decision, it was always a political decision." You are right and that's a problem in my opinion.

Going back briefly to the post-recall board's actions. I believe that what they did (and what they didn't do) contributed to the County making the decision to get a project that can get off the ground quicker than any other solution in hopes of beating out the rising costs of inflation. Richard LeGros estimated daily delay costs at $25,000-$30,000. If that's true, that's a lot of our money slipping away.

At the same time, even though many people -- who are in the know and who had a brain -- knew that gravity was a preselected solution, the County led many people into thinking that there were other possibilities beside a hybrid gravity system. I don't know if that was due to "vocal extremists" or what, I can't say for certain, but the process on face value was definitely ambiguous.

TCG said...

In Aaron's 11:07 post above, he states "The County disclosed everything but the decision they personally made on day one."

I disagree with Aaron and others who have been on this issue for a while now. When the Counry was asked under what circumstances they would consider taking on the sewer project, they addressed the issue in a Board of Supervisors meeting on June 19, 2006. I remember the meeting well, and it was heavily attended buy Los Osos residents.

The County stated that it's strategy for doing the project would be to construct a gravity collection system.

To see this clear policy statement,
go to the County's Sewer Project website, BOS Items, 2006 Archives, June 19, 2006, staff report Item A-1, Section E County Project Objectives and Strategies, B Scope Strategies. It reads " a. Based on District's Fall 2005 compromise,i. Conventional Gravity collection, essentially as designed."

The staff recommendation, which was adopted, was "Support legislation that allows the County, at it's discretion and upon confirmation of conditions as outlined in this report, to assume responsibility for the design, construction and temporary operation of a community wastewater treatment system in Los Osos."

The gravity issue was not glossed over--it was clearly discussed. At later Board meetings, this policy direction was referred to by Paavo Ogren's predecessor.

Subsequently, after public input requesting that the County look at a STEP approach, the Board authorized the Public Works staff to do so. The concept was that if the Public Works staff saw enough to determine that STEP was clearly a superior collection option, they could recommend a change in the predetermined project strategies.

After all of the reviews of the past couple of years, the staff has apparently concluded that STEP was not clearly superior and they are now focusing on getting the project done as soon as possible.

Realistic1 said...

"The County stated that it's strategy for doing the project would be to construct a gravity collection system."

Exactly, TCG. I remember the meeting well also. There was nothing ambiguous about that statement. I think people projected their own desires about collection onto the process for treatment technology. It was always clear in my mind that gravity was the County's plan.

Aaron said...

I disagree with TCG because he or she is factually incorrect.

I also remember the June 19, 2006 meeting and have it archived on my PC as well as the agenda and minutes.

Staff report Item A-1 was discussing the Fall 2005 compromise as an option (one of a few additional "scope strategies"), not a formalized, stated preference on the record. The adopted staff recommendation was, in short, to support the legislation of AB2701 and assume responsibility for the construction of the LOWWP. Saying "yes" to gravity collection as part of the earlier Blakeslee compromise was NOT part of staff recommendation. The minutes of that meeting can be found here.

At the meeting, the only mention of the Fall 2005 compromise came from Paavo Ogren who addressed it as a "near-compromise" as part of outlining previous project strategies and objectives, not as a definitive decision.

For those who want to see the June 19, 2006 Staff Report A-1, you can click here for easy access. That specific handout shows an early draft of the project timeline.

It was more clear that the County was going to go with gravity when Noel King announced it at a BOS meeting several months later.

Mike Green said...

Aaron quotes Mike :
"You wrote, "This was never a technology decision, it was always a political decision." You are right and that's a problem in my opinion."
Yup! it's always been about the politics.
Politics trump any kind of science or even common sense
Heck what woulda happened if Richard had held the solution groups feet (his words) just long enough in the fire to cause them to call it quits and admit they were wrong and require the county to appoint CSD directors that would have given the whole mess right back to the county in 2001?
Heck, I speculate that there would be a sewer right now.
Politics 1- Los Osos-0
Maybe some first year Cal Poly political science freshman should have given a lecture to three recalled Directors about the perils of letting the opposition have enough time to make indefensible accusations and the need to engage the voters quickly.
Politics 2- Los Osos-0
Lets just go ahead and default on those contracts, we have a plan.
Politics 3- Los Osos-0
Hey, we worked long and hard here at the CCC for that tot lot and dog park! don't even think about leaving them out of your new plans!
Politics 4- Los Osos-0
Politics a problem? Nahhh.
The problem is we have the worst politicians.

Mike said...

We did have a chance to admit the CSD was wrong for Los Osos, but the wantabe politico's of LAFCo wanted to keep their own seats on their Board...

I really don't care which or where the sewer goes... I just don't like paying the growing costs when we had a design and fully permitted sewer started... There was absolutely no need for this whole sewer saga, the WWRF as designed was good enough, better in fact than anything put forth as of this date.... but hey, all the wonderful folks who tied this up... well, I may never have to spend any more money in my life... just keep on bitchin' and dragging it out..... I just want to make sure the future estates of Gail and Ann and Ron and GRO and all the perfect folks who have held this up get to pay and pay and pay....!!!! Have a nice day children...

Mike Green said...

We did have a chance to admit the CSD was wrong for Los Osos, but the wantabe politico's of LAFCo wanted to keep their own seats on their Board...
Politics 5 Los Osos 0

Sewertoons said...

The Lisa Board has a chance to admit they were wrong too, soon as the TW case is heard. But the court of public opinion may come to its decision sooner than that.

Mike Green said...

court of public opinion

Yep, remember them plainly, used to end with drowning the witch

Politics 6 Los osos 0

Churadogs said...

Since gravity was preselected, then the TAC spending so much as one minute on STEP was simply phony window-dressing designed to fool people into thinking that they were, indeed, fairly evaluating all feasible technologies and would let the best technology float to the top? Gee, we're shocked, shocked.

Sewertoons said...

No, the TAC's time spent provided a service to the community.

Step had been touted by the alternative group to the point that it had to be addressed. It would have been wrong to not show that it was NOT the end-all, be-all solution to collecting wastewater. The downsides were downplayed by the proponents of step and the community needed to know what they were.

Studying step fends off the accusations that the County was unfair. The fact that they knew the best answer in advance should not condemn them for showing why.