Pages

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Planning, Planning

Had to work Monday and Tuesday morning had to take one of my dogs to the vet (not good, a sad matter to time now) so missed most of the Planning Commission meeting on the LOWWP, but by Tuesday afternoon, it was clear that two changes had been made in a day and a half: Tonini spray fields were rapidly being pushed off the table and the Sustainability Group’s project report was being taken seriously, particularly as to water conservation.

The Groups main message was water NOT used is water NOT needing expensive treatment and disposal. Less water to be disposed of means other options for disposal and re-use will work and there could be no need for the Tonini spray fields to “waste” the wastewater outside the basin. (Without a strong conservation component, the county’s plan ended up with too much water to be disposed of, hence the spray fields to get rid of the stuff. In an overdrafted community, NOT using water in the first place and/or reusing water makes sense, while “disposing” of water is nuts.)

But now, in place of Tonini, the Giacomazzi, Cemetery, Andre part 1 & 2 were being seriously looked at with returning water to the basin, urban re-use, purple-pipe sites, recharge, ag use and water conservation now the driving principle. The county’s plan included about a 10% conservation rate, based on encouraging toilet refits, public education & etc. The Sustainability Group’s report indicated the possibility of achieving even higher rates of conservation by taking money saved from not using Tonini and using that to buy and install high-efficiency low-flow toilets, and/or hot-water recirculators and/or high-efficiency washing machines for every home in the PZ. It would come in the form of up to $1,000 per household, and part of the money would pay for trained water monitors who would do an onsite water-check of each house (like PG&E and The Gas Company do now for energy checks) to determine just where the biggest bang for the buck could be made, depending on the size of the house, the number of toilets, etc. (The washing machine suggestion is iffy since they’re portable. So the focus is likely to be on fixed elements that will stay on the property. However, if $1,000 is allocated to each house and homeowners can install the new toilets themselves, they could use part of what they saved out of that $1,000 and apply it to a new washer & etc. which would then have an impact on community water flows It could be set up as a sort of cap & trade deal. The details of this will have to be looked at closer, that’s for sure.)

And, human nature being what it is, including the cost of installation and actually installing the toilets will get higher compliance than just hoping vouchers or rebates will do the trick since the cost to install a toilet can be has much as the toilet itself. And folks who are on a tight budget anyway can easily just let good intentions go by the wayside. Plus, the good thing about using better technology is that people’s bad habits are nearly impossible to change. Technology can save them in spite of themselves. The water savings appear like magic, with little or no effort or sacrifice on the part of the homeowner.

In a straw poll, the Commissioners voted 5-0 to consider making it a condition that if a permit is granted for whatever project is picked, $5 million up-front money would be spent NOW to get those retrofits in place, thereby gaining water savings 3-4 years before the sewer plant is finished. Plus NOT pumping lower aquifer water to flush down old fashioned toilets will help halt the salt water intrusion. Monitoring the water use would also enable the project designers to get a better indication of how much the wastewater flows are actually being saved. And water purveyors are also planning on further hikes in water rates, using a tiered system, charging more for more water used.

One Irony at work, in a project filled with ironies, is according to Dr. T’s text book on small flows, the more water you conserve, the less water is in a gravity system, hence more clogs and need to flush the system with . . . more water . . thereby you often end up zeroing out your “savings.” This sort of wasted water, of course, doesn’t happen in a STEP system.

In the meantime, it’s clear that there will be no new building in the PZ until the water basin issues are solved (also the Habitat Conservation Plan is finished) so if people thought they could build their dream homes one the sewer’s up and running will likely be surprised.

The staff was instructed to prepare language for the water conservation element and also to clarify the various re-use numbers, which were often unclear or in conflict, so the Commissioners can re-add up the gallonage guestimates and thereby see if a system scaled down to reflect post water conservation numbers will allow for water return to the basin, feasible ag-exchange or in lieu of, safe disposal yield at Broderson (without risk of mounding or surfacing) and other schemes will put the disposal numbers into a safe, can-do, guaranteed area, with plenty of contingency left over. If that works, Tonini spray fields may be off the table.

The next meeting in the BOS chambers will be Tuesday, July 23rd, starting at 1:30 p.m. (the morning will be taken up with another issue, they should be through with that by lunch) and will go to the end of the day with the possibility of carrying over to the 24th, if needed.

176 comments:

Watershed Mark said...

Ann wrote: This sort of wasted water, of course, doesn’t happen in a STEP system.

When vacuum collection is employed there are no tanks to install and manage and the three energy/vacuum stations required for Los Osos are located off site of the individuals property.

Why wasn't/isn't "it" being studied???

An ECOfluid USBF(tm) desigh willproduce tertiary water in a very compact low profile design.

Why wasn't/isn't it being studied???

Ann wrote: And folks who are on a tight budget anyway can easily just let good intentions go by the wayside. Plus, the good thing about using better technology is that people’s bad habits are nearly impossible to change. Technology can save them in spite of themselves.


Supervisor Gibson, are you listening???

Aaron said...

The meeting was full of drama. I would leave the room that had the meeting on the TV and I could hear raised voices and Ogren grumbling about the PC's decisions.

Keith Wiemer's informative presentation set the tone for the rest of the meeting. His slides showing the issues of salt water intrusion. His presentation also called into question issues surrounding water conservation, which was Tonini's weakest selling point.

As far as the people who go up to the podium and say, "Let's move forward quickly," like Gretchen Clark, I cite this idiom as my response to them: "More haste, less speed." The faster you try to do something, the more likely you are to make mistakes that make you take longer than it would had you planned it.

Mike said...

...this will eventually come full circle with a WWTF on the Tri-W site ...after several years of delays from that hasty and unwise decision...

Alon Perlman said...

Good news with the Commissioners actually doing their Jobs. At first with going no nonsense on tertiery and Monday wth Tonini. with Tonini (Was it possible to make a worse Sewer than Tri-W? The county answered YES). PC says it's been moved too far.

But.......
Is it simply that Easy? carve out
5 Million from a 218, and throw it at conservation?

The ideas are good in within themselves, (LOCAC asked for higher conservation goals than 10%).(I havn't viewed the presentation in whole at this writing) There was part presented Monday SW Intrusion and Keith had several more opportunities during the Tuesday meeting.

What about people on 218 who have already invested in conservation?The details will not be ironed out in a day. At least it hasn't operated that way in the 5 years that I have observed Local and State Goverment In-Action.

Salt water intrusion was identified in late '05 (Cleath)as not being reversible and that was at FULL application to Broderson. Five water purveyors on the same page?
A Brave New World.
Word verification; Grevates

Watershed Mark said...

Alon,
Where does the 218 state that the county should spend $7 million on study?

It would have been better spent on conservation. But hindsight can be crystal clear.

On-site water reuse for toilet flushing and other non potable uses takes that useage "off grid".
Sadly it may take a real shortage/crisis to bring that thinking onto the radar.

Slow your flushing at will today to conserve, it is that easy and tht difficult.

Watershed Mark said...

Los Osos Wastewater Project
Printer Version
Mission Statement: To evaluate and develop a wastewater treatment system for Los Osos, in cooperation with the community water purveyors, to solve the Level III water resource shortage and groundwater pollution, in an environmentally sustainable and cost effective manner, while respecting community preferences and promoting participatory government, and addressing individual affordability challenges to the greatest extent possible.
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/PW/LOWWP.htm

Too bad that government doesn’t live up to its responsibility, even when they define it…

Alon Perlman said...

LowWaterMark, The county spent 2 million- on research before the 218, actually much more.

but on the announcement of the TAC
formation. ('06?)
I went on public comment to say that I wouldn't be surprised if they would flit away 2 mil and bring it right back to Tri W.
hey, I like being wrong sometimes It happens very rarely. Paavo and Noel King were about 10 feet away where were You? & Murphy?

"This isn't the End. This is not even the begining of the End. But perhaps it is the end of the Middle"-So much for hindsight.

I happen to be off the grid myself
which is the point- How many in LO already don't flush yellow? Can the county force to change people's Habits?
Outdoor usage patterns?
An aggresive Water Cons. program which wouldn't have costed anything (not true but less than anything else done that involved talking) could had decreased salt water intrusion two years ago.
Perhaps I am legally regulatory governmentally naive. But there is a lot more study and paper that will need to be pushed...

"The county needs to obtain guidance from it’s own EIR Document. This need is hampered, by this disparity between what the EIR is stating (secondary treatment), and what will more than likely happen, after more delays (Tertiary treatment).
Wm. Churchill

Just kidding Mark yes there were several things that could had been done. Thanks for posting the mission statement. It is inconsistant with the Memo that went to planning Commissioners for Monday-
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PW/LOWWP/Planning_Commission/Response+to+Comments+and+Questions.pdf

The real waste was of time.
Saline marched on in unabated.

Alon Perlman said...

"WOULD YOU BELIEVE, WINSTON?"
Maxwell Clever

Churadogs said...

Aaron sez:"As far as the people who go up to the podium and say, "Let's move forward quickly," like Gretchen Clark, I cite this idiom as my response to them: "More haste, less speed." The faster you try to do something, the more likely you are to make mistakes that make you take longer than it would had you planned it."

I found Christie's remark wonderful: We know we're going to get sued no matter what we do, so let's at least get sued for doing the right thing. Which reminded me of the old slogan, "Do do it right." We've got a chance here to do it right and, as Christie said, not "punt" to down the road for "later."

and, Mark, that mission statement makes it clear that Level III water severity IS a nexus for a variety of stragegies. The tragedy is that if Paavo and Noel set this thing up beforehand (predetermined) so that it will prevent the best possible solution in order to deliver a bad solution, one that was predetermined.

And Mark, again, no I don't know why vacuum wasn't studied.

Watershed Mark said...

And more planning: http://www.avpress.com/n/26/0626_s3.hts

Watershed Mark said...

Ann,

The question regarding vacuum is one which when answered unravels Paavo's plans for the betterment of society and the environment.

That's why asking it ad nausea until it is answered is so important.
See how the mice run...

Watershed Mark said...

Alon: Are you taking bathwater and flushing you toilets with it?

Watershed Mark said...

And more planning

I like this part best: They decided that the water project was so great, they were going to put $7 million against us in order to extend our very large 24- inch diameter pipe all the way to the city park.

Mike said...

...and will Ann be sueing (and not paying the lawyers) again this time....????

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE: Too bad you and SLOCO aren't more forward thinking. Los Osos is a fantastic opportunity to demonstrate what sustainability is all about. Big leaky sewers aren't...

How is "sorry, I forgot his last name" Lynette?
Have you two been consoling each other over drinks lately?
How did your Florida research turn out?
Did you ever find out where you AZ friends and relatives actually live? Do they know???

GetRealOsos said...

Hey Mike,

Has rhe County considered or done anything like this?

Require energy efficient systems and renewable power sources (solar, wind, or hybrid systems), when technologically feasible and cost-effective, at least for all grant and loan-funded WWTPs, to reduce long-term operating costs.
Electrical power costs can be a relatively significant part of operational costs at many WWTP. A small pond treatment system with a couple of pumps and aerators typically requires $10,000-$20,000 per year in electricity to operate. A $50,000-$100,000 investment in a solar power system would provide most of the power needs for a small WWTP. These systems are reliable, easy to maintain, and have a long life expectancy (solar panels are guaranteed for a period of 20-30 years). Such supplemental energy systems could pay for themselves in a few years by significantly reducing the operational cost of a WWTP.

P.S. If you aren't Richard or Gordon, you're Bob Seminson.

Watershed Mark said...

GetRealOsos:
MIKE is all Quack and Fib.
He ought to be sued...

Mike said...

Q&F... I haven't filed a lawsuit, or even signed on to one... but I pay my obligations...

Richard LeGros said...

Hi All,

Folks, it does not matter what the PC says; or what conditions the PC places on the DEIR. Not one bit.

Why?
Simply as the PC is an advisory committee to the BOS; and the BOS is not required to accept the PC's conditions. I doubt the BOS will adopt few, if any, of the PC conditions as the BOS will probably approve the DEIR as per the staff’s and engineer’s CURRENT STAFF REPORT instead. Regardless of what the PC suggests, the BOS is not going to allow the DEIR as written to be rewritten or extensively modified willingly.

Hopefully the PC will FINALLY make a decision to accept, accept per ‘conditions’ or reject the DEIR by the end of July. The PC circus has been needlessly droning on since April. ‘Time to fish or cut bait’ as the old adage goes. It is best for all of us to let the process play out ASAP.

Insist that the PC make their decision ASAP; as it will be appealed to the BOS.

Insist that the BOS make their decision ASAP; as it will be appealed to the CCC.

Insist the CCC make their decision ASAP as there is where the real drama will happen; and where Los Osos' WWTP fate is determined. Meanwhile, I see no need to opine or argue about 'this versus that' option as it just does not matter. It is the County’s project; so let them do as they currently plan by letting the process proceed to a final solution, ANY SOLUTION, as quickly as possible. Changes come to the current plan will be conditioned by the higher governmental agencies reviewing and issuing permits on the County Plan.

As for lawsuits, any lawsuits filed will only slow the process down needlessly and result in a greater final WWTP cost to us all.

-R

danbleskey said...

Richard,

Maybe some folks, including the appointed advisers to the BOS (appointed by the members of that BOS) see things that concern them and feel that additional time is a small price to pay for the risk of lost opportunities and a mistake similar to those of the past. Maybe they are acting in what they believe is their duty and in the best interest of the citizens of SLO County. The questions they raise are reasonable, they have concerns and those concerns are real. If they have these concerns, won't they be easily answered and resolved it the current plan has addressed all of them? They are acting to advise the BOS in a forthright and honest manner, that should be condoned, and not condemned.

Richard LeGros said...

DB,

Oh, I have no doubt that those doing all the talking believe they are doing the 'right thing' for the community. It is just that what they opine has been review endlessly before; and STILL Los Osos does not have a WWTP.

Meanwhile, Los Osos will soon lose its' sole source of water to salt water intrusion. In short, time has run out for 'planning' and it is time (as it was 4 years ago) for DOING.

All of the current hand-wringing will not result in a 'better project'; just a far more expensive one coupled with the necessity of having to import even more expensive water from unknown sources to satisfy our community's thirst. That just is the way it is going to be; and there is nothing that we can do about it. So if you wish to stay in Los Osos, you better start planning now to pay for the cost of doing so today.

If I appear pessimistic it is not without cause (as based on my own personal experience). Gone are the days when PRAGMATISM guided our collective response to problems. The 'process' itself has become the problem as too many 'chefs' now ruin the 'collective soup'.

Please excuse my impatience with the 'good' these impractical self-appointed guardians-of-the-public-good are doing to the community as they ask their 'reasonable questions'. No good will come of it; only lost time, lost opportunities and ruin.

-R

Churadogs said...

Richard sez:"Gone are the days when PRAGMATISM guided our collective response to problems"

Richard, "pragmatism" was out the door the moment the RWQCB & the Cuesta Report nixed the Ponds of Avalon. At that moment, Ideology took over and the lies started in: out of town is waaaayyyy more expensive, Tri-W is the ONLY possibility (from Stan's mouth), you can't cross a creek with a sewer pipe, there's an overwhelming community value that demands a Park In A Sewer Plant In The Middle Of Town, there are no out-of-town sites, anyone opposing a sewer plant in the middle of town is an Anti Sewer Obstructionist, cut the trees down and strip out Tri-w now instead of waiting a couple of weeks, kill the October Compromise, slap CDO's on 45 citizens and sue them for no reason except illegal electioneering, "fine the CSD out of existence," get LAFCO to kill the CSD, the county will set up a non-partisan TAC but it'll be a gravity system, no matter what, & etc. etc. etc.

No "pragmatism" there, I'm afraid.

Richard LeGros said...

Ann,

So we agree...there is no pragmatism in the process.

As to what you, etal, believe were past 'failures of pragmatism' have no relevance to today's County WWTP process.

You need to focus Ann....TODAY what is the most PRAGMATIC way to resolve the issue before us. The past is moot. Unclutter your mind of the past's baggage and open up all the pragmatic options; even those you not like. That is what a pragmatist would do.

-R

M said...

What exactly is your relevance to this issue?
Sincerely, M

Richard LeGros said...

M,

Assuming your definition of 'relevance' means 'significance to' then I have no 'relevance' to the County's WWTP Planning Process at all; as I have not interfered or involved myself in that Process.

However, I do not have to be 'relevant' to the process as a prerequisite to my offering commentary that is 'pertinent’ to it.

-R

Watershed Mark said...

"r"- you must be factual to be relevant, something you seem to avoid at all costs…

If you want to pertinent how about cutting and pasting that AB 2701 language that supports your statement about county being given LOCSD WWT assets.

Of you can continue to Quack and Fib as usual.

Watershed Mark said...

"Or" you can continue to Quack and Fib...as usual.

Steve,
Has the State notified you that you'll be receiving IOU's yet?

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

I'm still waiting for you to answer. Are you a man or mouse?

Hey Mike,

Has rhe County considered or done anything like this?

Require energy efficient systems and renewable power sources (solar, wind, or hybrid systems), when technologically feasible and cost-effective, at least for all grant and loan-funded WWTPs, to reduce long-term operating costs.
Electrical power costs can be a relatively significant part of operational costs at many WWTP. A small pond treatment system with a couple of pumps and aerators typically requires $10,000-$20,000 per year in electricity to operate. A $50,000-$100,000 investment in a solar power system would provide most of the power needs for a small WWTP. These systems are reliable, easy to maintain, and have a long life expectancy (solar panels are guaranteed for a period of 20-30 years). Such supplemental energy systems could pay for themselves in a few years by significantly reducing the operational cost of a WWTP.

Mike said...

...the question really is, why are you concerned...??? You have no idea who I am... I have no plans on providing you with anything you can twist... You've already tried that with others and failed...

You have tried too many times to make up your own "facts", such as your very own "home depot" type cost estimates and especially your personal attacks... pure bull shit on your part...!!!

...but keep on playing with yourself, you really have no say in what and where the Los Osos WWTF will be...

I do wish you a long life, but as angry as you get over being caught in your lies, I hope your impending stroke is indeed quick and you aren't left as a financial burden to the community... Q&F...

Now have a nice day yelling at your neighbors....

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

The truth is that the County presented the information that construction costs are down -- some 30% I believe.

Also, I have to wonder why Paavo and your friends would promote a company like MWH who is known to do business by increasing their costs on every single project they're involved with. That's the way they do business. Why would we want that?!

Why won't you address the information I provided in my post above?!

It's from the State Water Board and what they will discuss on the 7th. Notice they mention wind, solar, and ponds.

You try to make me out to be a nut when the information I provide is from either the County or State Water Board.

You have nothing to contribute other than threats and a lot of shouting. That's about it.

Mike said...

...YOU are a NUT...!!!

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

Yep, maybe the sewer has made me a little nuts. Isn't 95% of the town? Anyway, the corruption here will do it too.

You are nuts, a screamer and shouter with nothing positive to offer and/or any intelligent thoughts.

P.S. You say I lie, but can't name or come up with one lie that you said I've told.

Richard LeGros said...

FYI All:

AB2701

SEC. 2.

Section 61105 of the Government
Code is amended to read:
61105(b)(C):

(C)Promptly upon the adoption of a resolution by the Board of
Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo requesting this action
pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 25825.5, the district shall
convey to the County of San Luis Obispo all retained fee interests in any real property, rights-of-way, licenses, other interests in real property, funds, and other personal property previously acquired by the district in connection with construction projects for which the district awarded contracts in 2005.

Alon Perlman said...

6:02 PM, July 03, 2009

Alon Perlman said...
Is this language:
NEXUS 5)Specify that the County's effort may include programs and projects for recharging aquifers, preventing saltwater intrusion, and managing groundwater resources to the extent that they are related to the construction and operation of the community wastewater collection and treatment system.
In a final form of 2701?

7:08 PM, July 03, 2009

Alon Perlman said...

BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2701
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 2701 (Blakeslee) As Amended August 17, 2006
Majority vote
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 11, 2006) |SENATE: |33-0 |(August 22, 2006)
(vote not relevant)
Original Committee Reference: E.S. & T.M.
SUMMARY : Removes the power to construct and operate a
wastewater collection and treatment system from the Los Osos Community Service District (District), then transfers this power to the County of San Luis Obispo (County) and authorizes the County to undertake any efforts necessary to construct and operate a wastewater collection and treatment system to meet the needs of the District. The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill, and instead:
1)Make findings and declarations regarding the ongoing problems with the discharges in the prohibition zone, as defined.
2)Make findings and declarations regarding problems with the District and the need for the County to temporarily take over the duties of eliminating these discharges. 3)Define "prohibition zone" as territory within the Baywood
Park-Los Osos area of the County that is subject to the wastewater discharge prohibition imposed by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality (CCRWQ) Control Board.
4)Allow the County to construct and operate a community
wastewater collection and treatment system for the prohibition zone.
5)Specify that the County's effort may include programs and projects for recharging aquifers, preventing saltwater intrusion, and managing groundwater resources to the extent that they are related to the construction and operation of the community wastewater collection and treatment system.

Watershed Mark said...

“r” ,
For the record,
You wrote: This is unmitigated bulls**t as AB 2701 TRANSFERRED ALL LOCSD WASTE WATER PROJECT ASSETS TO THE COUNTY.

However, AB 2701 reads: (C) Promptly upon the adoption of a resolution by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo requesting this action
pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 25825.5, the district shall convey to the County of San Luis Obispo all retained rights-of-way, licenses, other interests in real property, funds, and other personal property previously acquired by the district in connection with construction projects for which the district awarded contracts in 2005.

Because there has been “no” resolution requesting this action your statement is incorrect.
The County has not decided to “take” the project.

Like whacking those trees at Tri-W, you have gotten ahead of yourself again. Such a Quack and Fibber…No wonder you were removed from office.

Watershed Mark said...

GetRealOsos:

MIKE is a mouse.
He is scared "$hitless".

He probably is using that "computer" that disappeared.

Watershed Mark said...

Alon,

In your opinion, is the County following the law?

Alon Perlman said...

Word verification:-myoss
Lets first define what "Is" Is.

MarkL Iv'e a good record on interpreting documents but I'm not a s familiar with some of the legislative process to the degree that given the amendments to, and language still remaining in the bill, that I am confidant that I am viewing the senate amendments versus an earlier interpretation.
In other words once we have agreement on this blog as to which version + which amendments apply and are in affect at this time.

Then I hope we can all get into it, and in time to participate in the real world where interpretations of the law are currently germain to the differences between County staff and county planning advisory council (Acting in advisory capacity but also simultaneously as a semi independant role in that PC has decision powers in overlapping areas and is the detail genarator in the county planning planning arena.
commission commission.

Which is why there is also a nexus in that conservation elements are coming up before the commission.
Serendipity? findings in the DEIR relate to concistancy to the area plan Etc...

Watershed Mark said...

The Court of Public Opinion is the precursor to an actual Court battle.

SEC. 3. Due to the unique circumstances concerning the wastewater treatment needs in the Los Osos Community Services District, as set forth in Section 1 of this act, it is necessary that, and the Legislature finds and declares that, a general statute cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the California Constitution.

Let Freedom Ring

Watershed Mark said...

When we love, we always strive to become better than we are

Churadogs said...

Richard sez:"You need to focus Ann....TODAY what is the most PRAGMATIC way to resolve the issue before us. The past is moot. Unclutter your mind of the past's baggage and open up all the pragmatic options; even those you not like. That is what a pragmatist would do."

The past, Richard, is prologue. Right now, it's repeating itself. Want pramatism? Take a look at the sustainability group's basic real-time issue: Water NOT used is cheaper than water used and cleaned up and "disposed" of. Dosen't get more pragmatic than that. Or the Planning Commission thinking, Hmmm, if we DON'T use X amount of water in the first place, we won't have to "dispose" of it and could get a smaller project and return more of the water to the basin, thereby helping to mitigate sea water intrusion faster, hmmmm. Also doesn't get more pragmatic than that. What's isn't pragmatic is superinposing a pre-decided plan over real-time problems no matter what -- that's like papering over a sucking chest wound and declaring that you've saved the patient. That isn't pragmatic. That's insane and that's a return to the blind, insane ideology that kept getting us into trouble in the past.

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

Ann,

FIRST, the past is only repeatng itself in that there is a familiar group of folks/activists who are interfering incessently and needlessly with the empowered WWTP authority (the County) to get a WWTP built ASAP.

Even if you do not like the County's plan, if you were 'pragmatic' you would support it TODAY AS IS; as the County needs to build a project...any project... ASAP in order to even begin resolving the problems you just espoused.

Additionally, do not forget that in 2005 the LOCSD had a WWTP project under construction at a lower price that RESOLVED ALL THE BASIN'S WATER ISSUES AND WWTP ISSUES YOU, ETAL, ARE TODAY WRINGING YOU HANDS OVER.

Why were you not 'pragmatic' in 2005 and do what needed to been done then ASAP? Cuz you were being a NIMBY?

SECOND, your WWTP handwringing is insincere as your past actions belie your core belief that you do not think a WWTP is needed at all; and that you think the RWQCB is out of control in requiring one too.

Sorry Ann, your past behavior has clearly shown that you are not 'pragmatic'.

-R

Watershed Mark said...

Soory "r", you are no longer relevant.
You have been shown to be incorrect in your facts.

Quack and Fib all you want it won't change a thing.
Your leaky logic has been exposed, so that even your supporters no longer have anything to say.

Yeap, you have been removed, again...

Ann, is spot on point and over the target.
Your are living in the past and this discussion is in real time.

Keep up your quacking, it is entertaining.

Watershed Mark said...

So sorry "r"...

Richard LeGros said...

M. Mark Low:

Mes commentaires étaient avec Mme. Cahoun et pas avec toi.

S'abstiennent de svp avec être l'âne qui vous êtes. Je sais que vous ne pouvez pas s'empêcher d'être un âne parce que c'est votre nature. Cependant, ce n'est pas une excuse pour votre comportement spécifique anal.

Sincèrement, M. Richard LeGros

Watershed Mark said...

Little Ricky a écrit:
My comments were with Mrs. Cahoun [Calhoun] and not with you.
Please refrain from being with the donkey who you are.
I know you can not help being an ass because it's your nature.
But this is no excuse for your behavior specific anal.
Sincerely, Mr. Richard LeGros

“r”:
Vous voulez mai de limiter vos commentaires à la défense de la merde que vous écrivez que la plupart de tous, il est composé de merde.
Pourquoi êtes-vous si peur de répondre aux questions concernant vos déclarations inexactes?
Il n'est pas étonnant que vous et votre équipage ont été retirés de mandat électif.
Il est dommage qu'il ait fallu plus de temps que ce dd parce que vous croyais que vous étiez au-dessus de la loi et a décroché la date permettant ainsi inutilement de coupe-vous à la Tri-W.
Pourquoi êtes-vous luttent d'arrache-pied pour éviter les vraies questions?

Si vous ne pouvez pas courir avec les grands chiens, vous devriez rester sur la terrasse ...
Ou mieux encore, il suffit de fermer la bouche. I hope this helps.

Sincèrement vôtre,

Mark
Spero Meliora "I aspire to greater things"

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Can you put that in Latin or perhaps Sanskrit? I don't read French.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve, If you highlight the text then select "Google Translate" you can get it into English.

Google doesn't offer Latin...

Richard LeGros said...

Hi Shark,

Do not worry...Mark does not 'read', speak or write French either.

His French grammar is terrible, he uses verbs incorrectly, and cannot translate properly either.
For example, "S'abstiennent de svp avec être l'âne qui vous êtes." correctly translates (in today's conversational French) to "Please refrain from being the ASS that you are." I gues Mark's electronic translator does not know this, LOL.

I will not even bother to translate his last post for what Mark writes is ASSine; and true to his persona. I do not ever bother to respond as he is a bore who just picks nits.

On to more important things.

It is nice to see you posting again; we have all missed your coherent posts. In your absence, Ann, Mark, Ron, etal, have just continued 'stirring the pot' over nonesensical issues while slinging chum for responses.

Hope you had a great 4th!

-R

Alon Perlman said...

moi dux.
Alors, vous dux, prenez enchambre avec une bell vue du la rocher.
"le boucher de lengua franca"
1. power to request conditions on a project
2. Power to not accept a CUP.
3. Power to not Certify an EIR.
4. Power to back away from a project under provisions of a special legislation.

Like Ann's poem posting this day about living in the present while allowing the past to penetrate.

Regarding County File Number: DRC2008-00103 as reviewed by LOCAC.
"And I have a comment regarding CUP. I understand the
need to prepare; my suggestion is the County could have
prepared multiple CUPs, and that would increase the County’s
flexibility."
Mr Hutchinson did not concur.
By deciding the prefered project specifically in the DEIR, the EIR is now out of synch, with the eventual project looking different from the preffered by having tertiery and location(?)differences.
In this (evolving) process the agencies have a larger role than if the (eventual) project matched the DEIR more closely.

Richard LeGros said...

Hi Alon,

Yep...the County's project is out of synch with the DEIR.

The DEIR was 'out of synch' when written it did not review all viable projects per the CEQA process....let alone becoming out of synch when the County decided to go to tertiary treatment (a treatment option which opens up the need to review under CEQA alternative WWTP locations and disposal other than use of large tracts of AG land).

Be that as it may, best just to get the project to the CCC ASAP if you wish to alter the projects current configuration. So just take heart and get the process through the PC and the BOS ASAP.

-R

Watershed Mark said...

"r", Are you certain your Doctor has released you for duty? You seem to laugh at the wrong time and at the wrong things.
Boy did you reveal your real agenda, thanks! Again..

Your ineptness, for instance: regarding length of pipe and lack of knowledge about treatment technologies is "laughable" and would be really funny if it didn't cost the citizens of Los Osos/Baywood Park sooooo much time and money. Your understanding of AB2701 is lacking as well.

Alon,
Good Points all. The County “should” have done and should do now “much more”.
Too bad they are lost on "r"...

-“Butcher of the Tongue?” Some meaning gets lost in translation.

Watershed Mark said...

Yeap, just as I suspected Alon, your logic is lost on "r".

GetRealOsos said...

Richard,

Why don't you respond to the State Water Board's statements below:

Require energy efficient systems and renewable power sources (solar, wind, or hybrid systems), when technologically feasible and cost-effective, at least for all grant and loan-funded WWTPs, to reduce long-term operating costs.
Electrical power costs can be a relatively significant part of operational costs at many WWTP. A small pond treatment system with a couple of pumps and aerators typically requires $10,000-$20,000 per year in electricity to operate. A $50,000-$100,000 investment in a solar power system would provide most of the power needs for a small WWTP. These systems are reliable, easy to maintain, and have a long life expectancy (solar panels are guaranteed for a period of 20-30 years). Such supplemental energy systems could pay for themselves in a few years by significantly reducing the operational cost of a WWTP.

Richard, why do you "Dreamers" always say we can't do ponds when the State says we can?!?

I'd love YOU to answer.

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

GR,

The answer to your question is that there is no reason for me to answer.
I decline to answer not because I am being obstinant or impolite; rather because I am not involved or relevent to the County's WWTP process; nor do I care to be.

Best ask the County your question if you want an answer. The County is the authority trying to build a WWTP; not me.

-R

Mike said...

Good Morning Richard... You are right on when you tell GRO to ask the his questions of the authorities with the real responsibility to design and build the LO WWTF... GRO is so wrapped up in proving his conspiracy theory against individuals ans self interpreting laws, facts or even reason, that nothing he states makes any sense... He has only proven that he knows nothing about politics, economics or engineering...

Actually the same could be said of the over draft snakeoil sales persons trying to gain a foothold as a springboard in a foolish attempt to sue the Fed EPA...

There will be a flush and forget sewer in Los Osos inspite of the transparent efforts of the sewer obstructionist activists... They have all begun to sound crazier and crazier each day... The sad part is that they aren't paying for all the time wasted... They can say anything they want, sue all they want and apparently have no conscience about not even paying for their own lawers...

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,

After blowing $7MM the County may not "take" the project MIKE.
Their conflict of interest in voting for it is of interest inside and outside SLOCO, you can count on it.

Business as usual is no longer usual and all you and "sorry, I forgot his last name" Lynette have to do is sit back and watch.
I'll be happy to buy you two a drink at happy hour when I get to town to review the project docs.

There is still plenty of fun still ahead reviewing, analyzing and using every bill that has been generated and every bill that "may" be generated as a way of helping to illuminate how this BOS will choose to “build” the future for the citizens of Los Osos and Baywood Park. The LOSTDEP is making history and will continue to do so. So sorry that it cannot be helped or prevented.

What would be funny if it weren't so tragic is that "r" delayed and he won't pay a monthly fee here on earth.
Why don't have any answers to the questions you yourself raised about where your relatives live or your research results in Florida or the several other questions that your stupidity keeps opening?

I hope there is a flush and forget wastewater collection and treatment system built in Los Osos/Baywood Park!
As the county stands to profit from any project it “may” build, questions like these help to illuminate the appearance of a severe conflict of interest:

Why wasn’t/isn’t vacuum collection studied by Paavo’s handpicked/no bid/sole source consulting engineer?
Why did the county release and RFQ that included a gravity design before the DEIR was final?
Has the County actually chosen “Design/Build” as they claim?

GetRealOsos,

“r” doesn’t want to look at any information or think about anything that destroys his pipe dreams.

It is obvious he has nothing of consequence to offer.
He has his facts jumbled and has drawn many incorrect conclusions and when called on that he feels “nit picked” as he continues to write his ignorant statements about the “process” and technology he doesn’t understand. Being forcefully removed from office really says it all…

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE:
Why don't "you" have any answers to the questions you yourself raised about where your relatives live or your research results in Florida or the several other questions that your stupidity keeps opening?

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

Hi Mike,

Good to hear from you. Hope you had a great 4th too. I did!

I agree that the rhetoric from the sewer obstructionists (and we know who they are)is geting shriller and crazier by the minute. No doubt the BOS is fed up with it too.

If the obstructionists keep behaving the way they are they are ensuring something they really fear and despise; which is the restart of the Tri-W Project. Their bad behavior and sandbagging of the County's efforts is beginning to make restarting Tri-W a really, REALLY, good idea to the BOS and the citizens of Los Osos. I say let them keep up the good work! LOL

I for one have decided that they will reap what they have sown; as they have for many years. Sadly, their sociopathic silliness has cost us all.

Regards, R

Watershed Mark said...

"r" How do you pay? You are such a quack and fibber...

Mike said...

HAHAHA... Yes Richard, the circus parade is actually helping show that Tri-W was and still is, a very, and maybe the most, viable location for the WWTF... and the technological design you guys were able to get legally permitted remains one of the best overall solutions... Lisa certainly wasn't able to push her holistic agenda anywhere near the permits stage... The CSD5 weren't able to produce anything except the bankruptcy...

Yes, all those clowns, ax grinding cheerleaders, snake oil sales persons, gossip columnists, wantabe PI's and fat ladies are the biggest jokes in SLO County...

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE, "r", You guys ought to get a room...

Aaron said...

As I've said before, there's plenty of blame to go around. Stop blaming. Stop painting people as "sewer obstructionists," and let's have a discussion.

Richard, as a pragmatic man insisting that the County go with your pragmatic solutions, as someone who is involved in the County WWTP (by opinion) and formerly involved in the LOCSD's project (by district), you should be able to discuss what GRO said.

You shouldn't be able to plead the fifth when there are views and ideas that could potentially contradict your own.

It's premature to call the opinion of who you call sewer obstructionists "sociopathic silliness," but then your comments are followed up by someone who has threatened people's lives and wished people strokes, but that seems to be fine with you, Richard, because "Mike" agrees with you.

Enough with the character assassinations.

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

Hi Aaron,

As far as I can see, what is there to discuss?

Going on and on reviewing (again) technologies, siting, etc is a waste of time and money.

Additionally, WWTP issues are now the purview of the County as the LOCSD gave away the community's ability to solve these issues directly.

County Staff and Engineers have designed a system that will resolve the core problem (the disposal prohibition) and bring Los Osos into compliance with the law.

Their solution will be very expensive.

Their solution will put off Los Osos water issues for later review and resolution.

Their solution most likely will result in Los Osos having to import water at great cost. This is the direct result of Los Osos own action of postponing to build a WWTP solution.

That just is the way it is. None of us like it; it makes us sad. But we must accept it.

So what exactly is there to discuss?
Nothing, as it would only waste our time while solving 'nada'.

+++++++++++++++
Let us talk of 'character assassination' for a second.

Yesterday your father posted on 'The Razor / The Rock" a particularly vicious comment that he purposely wrote to assassinate the characters of LOCSD Directors Maria Kelley and Marshall Ochylski.

Your father's comment was written in SUPPORT of YOUR posting a blog string topic that was written solely to assassinate the character of Maria Kelly.

His post has been erased from the 'comment section' of the very website you both operate.

Why?

Are you not concerned with 'transparency', keeping the 'record' complete and maintaining the honesty of your own website?

Now Aaron, how exactly have it both ways?

-R

Watershed Mark said...

"r", You are wrong again.
A leaky bell and spigot will not solve discharge of pollution (nitrogen) into the soil.

Point of discussion: Why wasn't vacuum studied?

Why didn't you and your crew study it?

Ron said...

Richard, you sound more and more like Pandora with every misleading, misdirecting, lying post.

Thus, I have glossed you: Richdora Nash-LeGarner.

Richdora wrote at 10:35 a.m. (and then "deleted" it less than an hour later... but not before I got to it ;-)

"I find it appallingly amazing that the CSD5 actively petitioned the State to take away the LOCSD's waste water authority; and give it to the County.

That was a HUGE ERROR as the CSD5 harmed the community by GIVING AWAY the community's sole controlling ability to craft its' own WWTP; OR directly resolve directly the community's water issues.
"

Absolutely disgusting.

Uh... dude(tte):

As I first exposed at this (hilarious) link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2008/09/i-want-to-be-like-gordon-hensley-in.html

"... in the 'bill analysis' for AB 2701, the legislation that handed SLO County officials the reins for the Los Osos sewer project, that Hensley controlled, in-part, before he was recalled, it reads:

"SUPPORT:

- Local Agency Formation Commission Serving San Luis Obispo County
- Regional Council of Rural Counties
- San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper
- San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors
- San Luis Obispo County Employees' Association
- Sierra Club
- Taxpayers Watch"

And, Richdora, as I also exposed in that (hilarious) story, your pal, Gordon Hensley, IS San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper AND Taxpayers Watch.

Uhhh... dude(tte), two of the seven "groups" that "SUPPORTED" "GIVING AWAY the community's sole controlling ability to craft its' own WWTP," was your buddy, G. Hens.

"I find it appallingly amazing..."

"CSD5 harmed the community..."

Can you smell it? The stink of "behavior based marketing."

"TO: Bruce Buel, Stan Gustafson, Richard LeGros, Gordon Hensley, Jon Seitz, Michael Drake

SUBJECT: Can we transfer the project this week?

Granted, it's late, but could the LOCSD transfer the sewer project to the county BEFORE the current CSD-3 leave office?
"
-- Pandora Nash-Karner, Sept. 28, 2005, 12:40 a.m., the night of the recall election

You know what my favorite part is about you guys, Richdora?

Your sloppiness.

You DO realize I'm SewerWatch, right?

-SW

Mike said...

Aaron, quite a number of folks in the community agree with Richard now that most of the smoke and mirrors of the sewer obstructionists has been stripped away...

All that is left is the same old bull shit being spread by those who didn't like any sewer... They would like to have the community believe they somehow "saved" poor little downtown Los Osos by stopping the very legal WWTF being constructed on the Tri-W site... They had no alternative, so they began a very nasty character assassination... You were and are still part of spreading your character attacks... They are now indignate that some of us still remember those extremely nasty CSD "meetings... Poor babies...they screwed this community, one of them quite figuratively, but now the community is fed up with the crazies... The BOS is fed up with the same old antics of these clowns and sideshow freaks...

If you were to honestly want to end the character assassinations, them grow up and get your family and pals to post a full apology for the lies and the attacks they have made on some very good citizens of this community... or are you merely an adolescent trying to sound like a man....????

Richard LeGros said...

Ron,

Thanks for reposting my deleted post. I mistakenly deleted it as I thought I had double posted my post to Aaron. I will gladly reconstruct it if need be; but you got the bulk of what I wrote on that post. Again, thanks.....as what I wrote / posted had to be said.

As for those groups that supported AB2701, those groups saw the writing 'on the wall'.

And what ws the message on the wall?

The State would not allow the misbehavior of the CSD5 to continue; hence that the transfer of the WW authority to the County was nessessary to realize a WWTP.

The State correctly analyized that the ability of the LOCSD to proceed with a WWTP had been destroyed by the CSD5's actions of defaulting on numerous State and private WWTP contracts.

What the CSD 5 did was to precipitate that disaster; directly causing the Community to lose total control over its' WWTP and Water issues.

The fact that AB2701 was supported unaminously in both houses of the Legislature just underlines how serious the State viewed the activities of the CSD5.

As for realizing 'who you are and what you do', I am not impressed or intimidated either. LOL

-R

Mike said...

...err Ronnie... Your post was even more confused than usual... Who are you trying to convince that you apparently and single handedly stopped the very legal sewer...???

...and damn Ronnie... you certainly make Mr.Hensley out to be the most powerful individual in Los Osos... and Pandora... wow what a dynamic duo you make them out to be...

I'd sure like to see your article on why Ann Calhoun has never paid for her portion of the failed PZLDF lawsit...but being the weasle dung you really are, and certainly not a journist, you just keep on extolling the virtues of the leaders of a community where you don't live or pay taxes...

Watershed Mark said...

Enocrine Disruptors, they just don’t reach the main stream media…

Watershed Mark said...

“r”,

It is apropos that you would be talking about walls, what with all you stonewalling and all. LOL!!!

You and MIKE should put on some dark glasses and get yourselves a couple of white canes and consider a Bip Pipe Dream stand-up routine. You guys are a riot!!!

Watershed Mark said...

“r”,

It is apropos that you would be talking about walls, what with your stonewalling and all. LOL!!!

Maybe you could juggle some chainsaws to spice up your act???

Watershed Mark said...

April, 28th, 2008.
Looks like they stopped reporting their shrinkage.

Things sure are changing.

Ron said...

R.N-LeG wrote:

"I will gladly reconstruct it if need be"

Yes. Please do.

But, don't "reconstruct." Just re-post what you posted at 10;35 a.m., please.

Thank you.

Ed said...

Hi Richard(s):

Greetings from my cozy hideaway estate in Cabrillo overlooking the Prohibition Zone I once lived in and helped destroy ... No, wait a minute, that's you.

Erase that. Let me start over.

Aaron asked me to review my post on his blog, "The Razor" at www.rockofthecoast/razor, titled "Maria Kelly: One Opinion, One Story, One Bias." I could tell Aaron didn't think much of it.

Out of respect for Aaron -- it's his site, not mine -- I took down my post to take another look at it and change this or that. Before I could put it back up there with the changes I accidentally deleted it, which I've done many times before.

Somehow I don't think you, Maria or Marshall would have liked my revised post any better than the version you read, because I didn't change a whole lot.

I'm sorry (not really) that you can't embrace my opinion of you, Maria and Marshall, but I wouldn't expect you to.

I mean, if you called me a bagman for the Pandora, RWQCB and County, I wouldn't like it either. But, of course, I'm not. And I never get upset at being accused of something I'm not or never did. Only the guilty react and over-react ... and screw up.

I would also submit that in order to indulge in "character assassination," as you call it -- something you have never done or would ever do -- you would first have to have "character" to be "assassinated." Which eliminates you, Maria and Marshall from having to endure unjustified criticism.

That should make you feel a whole lot safer from the likes of me and my pen.

Let me know if you really would like me to regale this esteemed audience with how Maria and Marshall were handpicked for the gravity Tri-W TAC, how they were promoted for the CSD by the County, and why they serve only one master and less than half the community -- the less than half that didn't recall you.

I'm honored that your escalating Tri-W paranoia has elevated me to occupy such a lofty position in your hierarchy of those you call obstructionists for getting in your way. While I respect your opinion, I don't deserve the accolade, since I had nothing to do with the fact that you did it to yourself. Take the credit you have earned.

Yet, I do admire how, even though you fled the Prohibition Zone and CSD you left in ruins, you remain somewhere in the background, dedicated, obsessed, passionately fighting the good fight on the blogs, standing tall as a symbol to remind us daily, if not hourly, of all we should never become or fall prey to, to make sure we reject the corruption of weakness and arrogance whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head, so that the community never goes down that potholed, deadend road again.

Without you here to constantly remind us, Richard, we might one day forget.

Watershed Mark said...

Man oh man that is First Class SMACK.
Actually it is BRILLIANT insight written with World Class intelligence and style!

Bravo Ed, BRAVO!!!

Richardora, you have been outclassed, again. When you are standing in a hole, stop digging...
Now get out those dark glasses, white canes and chainsaws, I'm ready for your act now.

(If that doesn't bring out "sorry, I forgot his last name" Lynette, nothing will)

Mike said...

Say Ed... have you been drinking out of your Wrecklamator or is your brain simply that dead...???

I'm sure glad you are such a role model for your kid, especially during his attempts to work through puberty... He seems to think that character assassination began with the pre-recall Directors... probably from listening to your phycobabble...and you continue to babble today...

Ed, you've never had a positive thought in your life... just a born loser who apparently revels in his silly attempts at muckraking... You Ed, are just one of the reasons this community finds the No Sewer Obstructionists to be so disgusting... but do keep up the smear tactic's, you're helping put Tri-W back as the most viable solution...

Richard has more Class than you will ever display... and he actually has facts, where you have only enuendo... Richard helped direct a major sewer project through all the legal hoops and obtained all the permits required... what have YOU ever accomplished...?????

Aaron said...

Aside from me going through the awkward stages of puberty at 24 years old and listening to psychobabble on my iPod, I wanted to saw a few quick things.

My article on Maria Kelly was not "solely" based on character assassinations. I talked about her speech and I responded to each point she made. Later I questioned the intentions behind her speech without making any assertions. Following my speech transcript were comments regarding the LOCSD's strategic planning.

When I disagree with someone, at least I can explain why I do without referring to labels and name-calling. If you're reading my words, looking for slander and defamation without reading everything else, you're going to come up short.

Richard LeGros has a lot of valuable information and reason to back that information, but the way he treats people is unreasonable -- and I reject that. I reject the way he has treated people on here and I reject the way "Mike" treats people.

Richard LeGros said...

Ed,

My mistake.
As you deleted your post by accident, then that is the reason why it disappeared.
A completely honest mistake.
Heck, I've done it myself!

Folks would just love to read it though.

Is reposting it a possibility?

While you are, rightly, a lofty obstructionist, I have to add to that title that you're an honest obstructionist too. You have made it very clear that you oppose the WWTP because you will not be able to afford paying for it.

Yep! An honest statement on your part; abet maybe a slightly selfish one as nothing has come out of this brouhaha other than higher costs for yourself and your neighbors.

Not to worry though; I will have to pay may share of the LOCSD bankruptcy costs as those costs are shared by all property owners regardless of living inside or outside the PZ. I figure about $5,000 each.

Hey! This honesty-thingy is contagious!
I'll be honest too!
If you feel the need to blame me or others for all matters-wrong with Los Osos and the LOCSD, feel free.

If you find the outcome of the policies set by the CSD after the recall were not good (maybe even a tad disastrous), then by all mean blame me and other pre-recall board members even thought I/we had no control over the LOCSD as those decisions were being made.

I see no reason for you (or the other voters who voted in the majority) to bear any responsibility for your/their willing decision to support the anti-WWTP candidates or their subsequent policies. After all, the recall board was forced...FORCED DARN IT!...to react to the mean, snarling and nasty State, RWQCB, County, Dreamers, Pandora, the recalled LOCSD board, the other 49.9% minority voters (losers!), and the tooth fairy as the recall CSD was just obeying 'the will of the people'. No need for the law to get in the way!

The recall board was absolutely correct to disregard their Oath of Office to uphold the law or the need to protect the taxpayer. After all, the Oath of Office is just meaningless words that got in the way of their good intentions (Righteous!).
No biggie! Live and Let live!

Kumbyah y'all!

-R

Ps. ED,
Placing my and your sarcasm aside, I really did enjoy the satiric humor of your post above. I hope you enjoy my little attempt at satire too. Peace to you, Pam and Aaron.

Mike said...

Poor little Aaron... I really don't care what you think about the way I "treat" people, actually it's the way I "treat sewer obstructionists... As long as the sewer obstructionists attempt to blame and smear the very good pre-recall folks, the more I will treat those sewer obstructionists with the outright contempt they deserve...

Think Lisa, Julie, Gail, Chuck, Joey, Piper, Ann, Kieth and never forget the GRO with his tin foil hat... Think what total failures they are and what they have cost our community...

M said...

Obstructionist, no sewer obstructionist, enough already! We didn't want the sewer you gave us at Tri-W and we had no choice in it. You can spin it any way you want, but that is what it is. I always have to go back to the picture of 800 people with the big sign that says "MOVE THE SEWER".
If it "had" to go there, then why are any other options being looked at now?
You two just keep it up with your labeling, name calling, obsessive posts. I think it just gives us that are ready and willing for a fair solution more credibility. The obvious one-sidedness of your solution tends to give one doubts.
Sincerely,M
P.S. So Mike, did any of those you listed in your last posts yell "I have f****** balls"! ?

Mike said...

...I don't give a damn what you think either M... The community, the WHOLE community elected Directors to build a sewer... They did what they were elected to do... The sewer was not YOURs personally to design and build...!!!!! You are pissed because you didn't get your "design" on the table...??? Well, you won the f*cking election... Why didn't you build YOUR f*ucking sewer...??? or was the expensive delays YOUR PLAN all a long....????

I suppose you will be still bitching when the County builds some sewer and YOU have to pay for it... You sure aren't going to have any say on that sewer, but sewer there will be....!!!! I hope you enjoy paying for a bankruptcy also....!!!!!

ps..I don't believe I said (or even yelled) and you know, I didn't have an affair with Jeff either or have someones little bast..d "love child"... are you jealous that you don't have balls or just bitter....????

Aaron said...

Keep digging, "Mike."

Watershed Mark said...

Wow MIKE talk about clowns and sideshow freaks...Gags, bits and business as usual for you.
You have your own three ring circus under your "Big Top", just don't blow up.(Q&F...)

Sewertoons said...

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090707/NEWS/907070331

Sewertoons said...

http://www.dailynewstranscript.com/state/x737357749/Sewer-failure-closes-18-Cape-Cod-beaches

Mike said...

Oh My... There apparently is a massive VACUUM line failure from all reports.... and something about VACUUM alarms showing failure.... We sure want to send a technical task force delegation there to investigate so we can clearly advise our own BOS on the risks of VACUUM line sewer systems.... We best delay any Los Osos waste water treatment until the perfect sewer has been studied for a few decades... meanwhile, let's get a pipeline built from Naciemento to bring in some clean drinking water...

Thanks 'Toons for sharing that info... guess VACUUM isn't very safe either...

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,
Thank you for posting the story of the first major failure of a 300 unit Vacuum system installed in 2001, good work!

There was a very specific reason for the failure including the reason for not catching it sooner.
How many Parades does Los Osos have in a year? How many tourists?

Too bad you are missing the bigger con-gravity sewer failure stories and therefore the real meat of the matter.
Allow me to help you out on that:

Lorena or Los Osos, it isn't too late or is it?


-----Original Message-----
From: Waterguy [mailto:waterguy@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 10:39 AM
To: Onsite/decentralized wastewater management issues
Subject: [decentralized] Fw: Lorena

For whatever interest it may hold.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Waterguy" waterguy@ix.netcom.com
To: dorih@ci.waco.tx.us
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:34 PM
Subject: Lorena


I have been carrying on a conversation about water resources management issues in and around Lorena, which prompted me to look into the background and current situation regarding the Bullhide plant, and I found you listed as the contact point on this website.

Also on that web site, I found what I expect to be rather specious claims. I would bet the farm that the investigations undertaken "... to perform value engineering ... to ensure that the most cost effective alternatives had been selected for implementation ..." were conducted within the narrow confines of ONLY a conventional centralized "waste" water management concept, focusing solely and exclusively on the "waste" water as a NUISANCE to be made to go "away". ONLY at the end of the pipe, once it came out of that far, far away (and very power hungry) treatment plant might this water be understood to be the RESOURCE which it is. Having spent huge sums of money to do nothing but move pollution from place to place (and spreading some of it along the way, as the conventional collection system will inevitably suffer leaks, manhole overflows and, most critically, lift station failures with maddening regularity), it is quite likely that this RESOURCE would be WASTED into Bullhide Creek -- indeed, the whole regulatory process revolves around evaluating that fate for the water.

Meanwhile, it is understood that the area being served is experiencing water supply issues, even to the point that one city manager has suggested that individuals implement unregulated greywater systems in an attempt to achieve water conservation. Yet this entire process chooses to focus on the "waste" management process, totally divorced from the broader water resources issues in play here. Again, the vast majority of the money is dedicated to addressing and managing this resource as a nuisance, solely and exclusively.

Isn't it pretty ridiculous to suggest that, because those entrusted by society to manage our water resources adamantly refuse to even consider reorganizing the system to accomplish this reuse through a publicly sponsored and managed process, individual citizens should take up the slack, totally unsupervised and without expert input, on their own nickel.

Watershed Mark said...

Perhaps the knee-jerk response might be to point out that the treated effluent out of that far, far away plant could be addressed as reclaimed water and redistributed in the service area to meet non-potable demands. That is indeed the strategy that the City of Austin is pursuing. But this is very expensive -- again, you spent all the money making the stuff go "away", so how would you finance that? -- and so requires a very large end user to make this strategy appear anything close to cost effective. Thus, by their own calculations, Austin will reuse only a minor fraction of its total "waste" water flow by this means by 2040. Which is to say that this is not a realistic avenue to broadscale maximization of water utilization efficiency -- the systemic inefficiencies are deeply rooted in the very essence of the conventional centralized management paradigm, simply because it is a very "truncated" understanding of the whole water resources cycle.

I expect that anyone who might question this process, who might suggest that before all this money is committed to making this resource go "away" you should go back and ACTUALLY consider the FULL RANGE of available options for how you organize and run the management system, will be told that the process is way too far down the road to be revisited in any holistic manner at this point. Add to that the whole regulatory machinery is also invested in this process of managing the water as a perceived nuisance, in particular TCEQ's "regionalization" policy -- a lunkheadedness that society will rue in
the years to come, I have no doubt -- and that all the mainstream consultants are highly motivated to go along with this lunacy for the sake of their payday -- to simply question "The Paradigm" which controls all this would be to appear "out of step" and thus not a "serious player", and so deemed not to merit consideration for the job -- and it is no surprise that WMARSS has apparently never considered a "decentralized concept" strategy which focuses on the resource value of the water first and foremost and manages it as a resource, not a nuisance, from the very point of generation.

The future is holistic, integrated water resources management, not nuisance-based addressment of "waste" water in a totally separate "silo" from the overall water resources management picture. The reasons for this are encapsulated in the attached piece, reviewing how people at the very highest levels of the mainstream engineering field are now coming to understand the need to move to what one has labeled "fifth paradigm" strategies. You can also view this piece on my website (link is in my sig line below), along with more information on integrated water resources management in general and the decentralized concept of "waste" water management explicitly. You might also check out the Living Building Challenge (http://ilbi.org/) and learn that the emerging holistic viewpoint is to manage water resources even at the building scale. I trust that WMARSS will find this all to be interesting and useful as it considers how to best carry out the public trust of managing society's precious -- and in this region increasingly strained -- water resources.

Thanks for reading.

David Venhuizen, P.E.
Planning and Engineering as if Water and Environmental Values Matter
www.venhuizen-ww.com

Your old road is rapidly agin'
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend a hand
For the times they are a-changin'
-- Bob Dylan


Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,
Perhaps you might adjust your RSS feeds to include the con-gravity sewer spills, you will be shocked…

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
Vacuum is safer than con-gravity..it doesn't leak, costs less and uses less energy.

Make sure you read David's comments above.
He makes sense which is hard for some to take...

Watershed Mark said...

L'emplacement de l'installation de traitement des eaux usées qui a été finalement retenue le long de Bullhide Creek était fondée sur les meilleures informations disponibles à la WMARSS Conseil. L'étude de l'usine et de la coordination avec les propriétaires locaux sera nécessaire de veiller à ce que l'usine de répondre aux besoins de WMARSS tout en minimisant l'impact de l'usine à la zone locale.

Meilleure information disponible ... La question est de savoir "de qui?"

Celui qui contrôle «l'information» de l'issue des contrôles.

Sewertoons said...

http://www.porthadlocksewer.org/pdf/Ch%205_Pt_Hadlock_Sewer_Facility_Plan_09-08.pdf

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

Richard sez:"Today I can say for certain that for me to continue reading and posting on this site is just a huge waste of MY time and energy."

Promise? I thought you said that once before but showed up again. Good luck with your resolution!

Mike said...

I'll still be here Ann and asking when will you pay your rightful share of the failed PZLDF lawsuit...??? Don't you have any social consciousness....???? You'll just let the taxpayers pay 100% on what was supposed to be 25%...??? Come on Ann, do the right thing, encourage your PZLDF friends and pay your portion of those legal fees...

Watershed Mark said...

Village Mayor Robert Blais said he thinks approximately 8,000 gallons of sewage leaked into the lake.

Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,
I noticed that the words “”Leak, Leaks or Leakage” were not in the COLLECTION SYSTEM ALTERNATIVES reportyou provided.
Any thoughts about how that “disadvantage” was omitted? Surely it wasn’t “overlooked”…

Watershed Mark said...

Good Luck "r".
MIKE, Let the lawyers sue.

Watershed Mark said...

Why are you so concerned with a lawyer's unpaid bill anyway?
Did you ever find out where in the world your friends and relatives actguallyu live?
How is your Florida research coming along?


By the sound of "r" not answering questions and
bowig out" and Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette's recent feable attempts to put leaky con-gravity in a good light, it looks like this blog and it's supporters are having the desired effect.

Ron said...

Richdora wrote:

"What matters to me is Love. Loving my wife, family, close friends, creativity, beauty, and being helpful to others (even helping those who do not realize or acknowledge they are being helped). The rest of the world can just fade away into the background."

Sniff...

(Not exactly Billy Collins, eh?)

"Folks I respect. Lynette, Steve, Mike, Realistic1;"

Folks you don't respect:

"Pandora Nash Karner has absolutely no affiliations with; and absolutely no input into; the Taxpayer's Watch organization at all. Neither now or in the past. Period. Those folks that claim Pandora is part of the Taxpayer's Watch organization are are incorrect and uninformed. After this post, those that continue saying she is affiliated with Taxpayer's Watch are lying."
-- Richard LeGros, February 27, 2009

What was that, about "Love," and "beauty?"

"On that note, I am signing off."

Before you do, could you do me a solid, and re-post that 10:35 a.m. post that you deleted above, and then, after I caught you deleting it, you said you would repost it, and then I said, "o.k.," but you never did?

Could you do that? That would be loving and beautiful.

Ann, wrote:

"I thought you said that once before but showed up again."

S/he did.

See ya soon, Richdora!

Ron said...

Wait a sec... I just thought of a humorous sequence:

R.N-Leg wrote:

"What matters to me is Love."

and then s/he wrote:

"Folks I respect... Mike"

And Love-filled Mike wrote (just in this thread alone):

"I hope your impending stroke is indeed quick..."

and;

"...YOU are a NUT...!!!"

and;

"Yes, all those clowns, ax grinding cheerleaders, snake oil sales persons, gossip columnists, wantabe PI's and fat ladies are the biggest jokes in SLO County..."

and;

"All that is left is the same old bull shit being spread by those who didn't like any sewer..."

and;

"...being the weasle dung you really are..."

and;

"...is your brain simply that dead...???"

and;

"...you've never had a positive thought in your life... just a born loser..."

and;

"...I don't give a damn what you think..."

and;

"...are you jealous that you don't have balls or just bitter....????"

Ahhhh... the "Love," the "beauty"... what's not to "respect?

Mike said...

Thanks Ron... I almost forgot all those absolutely right on the mark and correct statements... too bad you have never been honest and looked into the lies spread by that perfect CSD5 or the PZLDF "agreement" with the CSD4(not including Mr Sparks)... Is there a honest reason Ann Calhoun won't pay for her portion of that extremely poor lawsuit she signed....???? Is she too broke and needs public assistance in sueing the State....????

Shark Inlet said...

That PZLDF question is still a very good one and has yet to be answered. I presume that someone who knows ... or could ask ... will comment on whether PZLDF has paid (or has a schedule to pay) their $600k legal bill ... after all ... the LOCSD has already paid their 25% share of $200k.

The question has been raised and I would think that all with any affiliation with PZLDF or the lawsuit (read "Ann") would want to explain that there has been no defrauding of the LOCSD.

Watershed Mark said...

Let the lawyers sue.

Watershed Mark said...

That's what Lawyers do.
I'm waiting for everyone to wake up to the fact that there is no scientific proof that the septic tanks are polluting.
Talk about what Lawyers do...

And then there is this:
“Water is going to become a bigger political issue,” says Pittman. “Most certainly, it’s going to become a greater economic issue over the course of the next 25 years.

Watershed Mark said...

A few weeks ago, Public Works Director Paavo Ogren placed Ghezzi and Keller on paid administrative leave while the county opened an investigation into allegations of fraud prompted by a whistleblower.


County sources, afraid of retaliation, have asked to remain unnamed.
Could this be the tip of an Ice Berg?

Aaron said...

Hi all,

Just a really short note.

I see trees of green, red roses too. I see them bloom for me and you, and I think to myself: what a wonderful world!

What matters to me is love, love, love. Love is all you need.

I love my family, my friends both real and imaginary, creativity (I'm quite skilled in the art of Mad Libs and falsifying public records), beauty, Botox injections and helping others by not doing anything at all.

I will remain in my sky palace that hovers over the town most commonly referred to as "The Bears."

Today, I can say that everything I have done was a waste of time, but it was worth every second.

I can also see that it has been a waste of time for all of my multiple personalities to post on the blog: Gork, Gorlock, Gordo and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

Folks I respect: Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, Son of Sam, Jeffrey Dahmer (great cheeseburgers, by the way), Iranian President/BFF Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Zodiac (I can never get enough of your crossword puzzles).

On that note, I will be back in two hours.

Sincerely,

Richgordora Nash-LeGustafson

Alon Perlman said...

Darnit Richard, I was hoping yu would continue to waste your time and energy on this blog.
In any case some of your comments were correct and some were educational.
Why dont you take a yar off
Word verification; restyar

Mark identifying where nitrates come from is difficult. LO has a minor contribution to the bay. There are 11 entities contributing bacteria and nitrates and eliminating the LO septic tanks will not have an appreciable affect on the estuary. Kitts is he scientific study that proves the bacterial LO contribution is insignificant but the study itself does say negative things so the waterboard used those during CDO hearings. Dr. Kitts was interviewed by me during public speaking on 7/7/05 after a couple more speakers John Fouche (soon to become a csd director sinceretired) asked Kitts to repeat what he told me and the 1/10 of one percent was clearly stated then. at Moro bay during their nitrate crisis I was involved (also members of Moro bay ocean outfall) but the city engineer did not wish to acknowledge the Nitrates as sewer system leaks, rather claiming agricultural effects. The 2005 2008 locsd ordered extensive tests on groundwater wells (looking for substances that they were not required to look for) and found pharmaceuticals at all testing locations. the expert could not interpret some of the results but I can, Sulfamethoxazole is also used in vetrinary medicine etc...
in any case that proved conclusively that there is a groundwater septage pits connection (not to say that a septic management program and some runoff control would not had resolved that). It really doesn't help keeping the regulatory agencies noses in the real science when people (including people involved with Environmental organizations)show up and "testify" to wishfull thinking.

Shark Inlet said...

I have to say that this blog comment section is far more interesting because Richard has participated. Between Richard and Aaron and Alon we have three voices which definitely not just duplicates of Ann and all three are definitely worth reading carefully even if you don't agree with them...

Watershed Mark said...

“You can’t write this, it’s not public information,” Ghezzi said. “If I find out who told you, I’m going after them.”

County Culture or County Culture Shock?

Watershed Mark said...

Looks to me the fun may just be beginning.
State Investigators need job security too.

M said...

Ron, thanks for collecting some of Mike's most precious quotes. It was fun reading them in a condensed fashion like that. Sorta like a Readers Digest condensed fashion.
Uh, I do have them, but I really don't feel the need the shout it out.
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

....Dear M... Are we to assume you also have the much longer collection of the taunts, threats and lies hurled at the courageous pre-recall Directors...???? They will not be forgotten as long as those same individuals continue their style of eco-terrorism...

Just consider me to be one of the not-so-silent-any-longer, tax paying members of this community... We DO remember...!!!!!! We had a fully permitted and underconstruction sewer...not some holistic pipe dream... How come YOU weren't able to construct whatever, where ever sewer that YOU said you had some mystical PLAN to build....??? WHERE IS YOUR PLANNED, PERMITTED and CONSTRUCTED waste water treatment system....????? Wasn't the whole recall just your super-emotional way to DELAY and create the most expensive sewer in the USA....???? That really was your PLAN, wasn't it....?????

So, don't get your panties in a knot or have a stroke, but there really are a large number in this community who don't like YOU or any of you SEWER OBSTRUCTIONISTS... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Q&F....
:-)

Watershed Mark said...

Take it easy, pull that cork and keep living in the past, Gags, bit and business, Quack and Fib MIKE.

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

You are incredible.

The Tri-W was wrong and had to be stopped. It would spill into the bay per the engineer of the project.

Too many homes around that site. A very bad idea.

But, there are many bitter Dreamers like you. You wanted to make your money faster. You have been waiting too long for your pay day. You're so angry.

I'm one who thinks Tri-W was the worst idea ever and shouldn't have been considered for one moment. It was stupid.

If the PZ has to pay for the darn thing, they should be allowed to build something they can afford. There is absolutely NO health risk, all that was a lie created by you and your friends so you could kick half the town out and get rich by turning over all the property. My God.

The nitrate levels were never from septics and aren't polluting the bay either. We got the facts and you don't.

The only fact you or Lynette or Richard for that matter use is the amount of water going into the ground, yeh, all those millions of gallons a day.

Well, guess what, this sewer will take away all those millions of gallons of water. How can you mitigate that?

The PZ never had any special benefit.

No, Mike, you're just a screamer, with no education or class. Just an angry screamer who hasn't been able to cash in fast enough -- and you're mad. Too bad Gordon.

Mike said...

...and you think I'm a "dreamer"...??? I do appreciate your SWAG... sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not Gordon...

Go take another of your heart pills and a hit on your bong, but you are certifiably crazy...

Do not pass GO, but proceed directly to Jerry Brown and demand he disband the RWQCB as they are obviously the bad guys... Why aren't you already camped on his doorstep...

...and I sure won't miss you when blow out your light... Q&F you crazy old coot, Q&F...!!!

Mike said...

....and let's hear it for those vacuum pipes that will never leak..........

Sewer repairs progress in Provincetown

By Mary Ann Bragg
mbragg@capecodonline.com
July 08, 2009

PROVINCETOWN — Town workers completed the disinfection of downtown streets and stormwater drains yesterday after a chaotic July 4th weekend of sewer overflows. But more work was needed last night to stabilize the whole wastewater collection system along the waterfront, according to Provincetown Public Works Director David Guertin.

Workers began the disinfection effort at 4 a.m., using a street sweeper to clear away debris, followed by spraying of the roadway with a bleach solution, Guertin said. Stormwater drains were pumped dry then disinfected, he said.

Also early yesterday, workers finished repairing a puncture and cleared out debris from an underground wastewater pipeline in the East End, a primary source of the sewer spills, town officials said.

By early yesterday afternoon, sewer workers had restored the wastewater collection system for at least a mile along the central portion of Commercial Street, Guertin said. Replacing valves and restoring the system in the East and West ends of town was expected to be completed by last night.

The sewer problems began Saturday morning, one of the busiest days of the summer for the town. At about 9:30 a.m., an alarm alerted sewer workers to a drop in the pressure necessary to keep the system working properly. But the crowds, estimated at more than 50,000, and a noontime parade stymied efforts to find the break, sewer workers said.

By early evening, the break still hadn't been found, and sewage spills began to appear on streets and in homes and businesses, officials said. Town workers found the puncture at Dyer Street in the East End Monday evening.

A foreign object put into the underground pipes — such as a cell phone accidentally flushed down a toilet — could have caused the puncture because waste moves at high speed in the vacuum-pressure system, according to sewer engineer Rob Adams.

The town's wastewater system serves about 560 properties along a three-mile stretch of Commercial Street.


......hmmm, don't we have a "few" more homes in Los Osos.... doesn't that mean the statistical chances of a ruptured pipe might be somewhat greater and the consequences a little greater....???? But we have been assured over and over that vacuum pipes couldn't possibly leak...unless a "cell phone" or a diaper or one of GRO's Depends gets accidently flushed...

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

The Feds are looking at the State and County -- don't you worry about Gerry Brown. His father created the water boards. And we know that this RWQCB knows nothing about science.

Heck, they wanted to pump the septics every couple of months!

Nope, not a bit of science from them. Only abuse of power and fraud.

You angry old dreamer you!

Mike said...

...say GRO, didn't some Judge on the 9th Circuit Court make a ruling that renders your opinions moot...???

....but do go to "Gerry" Brown and get that bad old RWQCB disbanded...

...remember... Q&F... :-)

GetRealOsos said...

Oh Mike,

You make my case to stay on site and/or have cluster, decentralized or step!

Who needs leaky pipes?

Who needs the most expensive sewer on the planet?

Who needs MWH who doubles and triples their price. That's the way they do business.

But then you wouldn't get your payday and Pandora wouldn't get hers.

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

Jerry Brown, sorry for spelling error. But, who cares about him when the Feds will find the truth. The State Water Board made some big errors and more will come out. Wait until they ask for their SRF loan back...

Mike said...

...we would have an operational sewer today if not for the extreme mismanagement by the CSD5...

...I'm still trying to figure out how you think I might personally benefit from constructing a sewer for Los Osos... I have no connection with any of the engineers, lawyers or contractors, although I'll admit I did hire Monterey Mechanical for some west coast projects I ran some years ago... No, I am sure not Jeff Edwards either in case you are still guessing...

So GRO, you go have another day of fouling the air and water with your waste... Q&F.... Q&F....

GetRealOsos said...

Mike,

You think old fashion, traditional sewers are so great -- check out:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/232640/july-01-2009/nicholas-kristof

Watershed Mark said...

Quack and Fib MIKE,

Vacuum pipes don't leak bell and spigot pipes do.
When a vacuum pipe breaks it is repaired.

When a con-gravity pipe leaks or breaks it "may" be repaired if and only if it is found.
Think Morro Bay sewerage when you think of leaking, not the P'Town vacuum system. Perhaps you don’t understand how a low pressure vacuum system won’t work if it has a leak…

A simple concrete encasement would have helped prevent damage to the low pressure elbow that broke in P'Town.

Perhaps you can explain how the leaking in the bell and spigot is monitored, detected and repaired. We have talked about this before, but no one ever wants to address this con-gravity “disadvantage”.
Should erosion from the cutting of the clay lenses intrusion/disruption caused by the installation of a 20+ foot deep pipe or and earthquake break a con-gravity pipe when is it detected, how is it repaired? How much does it cost, MIKE?

Shark Inlet said...

GetReal and Mike have shown us in the last 10 (or so) comments why we've had a stalemate in Los Osos. GetReal is saying that TriW was so bad that it would be worth paying $1000 per month for sewer services just to avoid TriW and Mike is saying that TriW was better than the alternatives which won't happen anytime soon and won't cost much less than $1000 per month.

Alon Perlman said...

Ve should be so lucky as to have a leak in a vacume pipe while 50,000 visitors are supporting our local busineses. provincetown, Ametyville, whatever
The Issue is
1. Alarm went off as asoon s pressure dropped
2. The leak would had been narrowed down in a few hrs but for the crowds.
3. Osos- A hybrid system is IN THE LOWWP for the low lying areas

The nitrate levels were never from septics and aren't polluting the bay either. We got the facts"
GRO do you mind telling me who the panel of scientists are who hold those "Facts"? aLbARROW?, cite a scientific publication once in a while, it won't kill ya
Yes there are backround levels of nitrates in absence of current human population. But the waterboard cares about "exceedence".
WMark- Murphey heading your way alert. good comments today why not moRe often? (QUALITY NOT QUANTITY)

Watershed Mark said...

Alon,
Can one have too much of a necessary thing?

Your conclusions about vacuum are correct and when one "honestly" compares the cost, speed and acuracy of keeping a vacuum system leak free against a deeply buried con-gravity bell and spigot system, vacuum will come out on top, which may be one reason why it wasn't studied.

I heard Murphy left California a couple of weeks ago.

Shark Inlet said...

Optimism and Conservatism abound.

It is simply too easy to point fingers at the worst case scenario in technology you don't prefer and suggest that such outcomes are typical and it is simply too easy to blow off those very same types of criticisms when it is your own favorite because, after all, that was an unusual outcome.

The questions about vacuum and gravity and the like are subtle and saying something like TriW would spill into the bay while saying but that town in somewheresville was just bad luck and it would never happen here is intellectually dishonest without supporting information which justifies each statement ... because otherwise it looks like a huge bias.

GetRealOsos said...

Steve Rein:

You're spinning yet again. You say, "... GetReal is saying that TriW was so bad that it would be worth paying $1000 per month for sewer services just to avoid TriW..."

Wow, Steve, did I really say that???

And, Shark, it was Rob Miller who said he never understood the Tri-W plan that would have put polluted water in the bay. But, Shark, you and Lynette know more than the experts and engineers because you'll promote Tri-W no matter how bad of a project it was!!!! That's your job, we all know that.


Alon:

Over the years experts from Wade Brim, Dr. Alexander, Dr. Wickham, Dr. Reuhr (the first and only real study on nitrates) showed that nitrates are from other sources. They showed that the project was the wrong answer for the wrong problem, and a very expensive solution that wouldn't help. Pages and pages of documentation collected over the years. In fact, the RWQCB in '84 said they knew the County knew about the pollution from surface runoff but would say it was from septics. That started the fraud and it continues to this day.

Besides, Golden State Water can remove nitrates and we're paying for that process anyway.

There is no health risk.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve, Why is it no one wants to address "WHY" vacuum wasn't studied?

For $7,000,000.00 worth of study on "alternatives" where is the report that discusses "leakage"???

When/WHY did asking a question become: "point(ing) fingers at the worst case scenario in technology"???

Shark Inlet said...

GetReal,

I was not spinning anything you said but I was using hyperbole to make a point.

So that I can be accurate and precise in what I say about your opinion, please tell me how much you would be willing to pay each and every month for sewer services to avoid TriW at $200 per month. At what cost for "not TriW" would you be just as happy (er ... unhappy) with TriW at $200 and something other than TriW?

Surely there is a number .... what is it?


Surface runoff would not cause the nitrate levels to be highest under Baywood. Let's not kid ourselves by a convenient theory which allows us to avoid our obligations.


As for removing the nitrates, that might not actually be legal unless the source of the pollution, as determined by the RWQCB, is eliminated.

Watershed Mark said...

A water provider cannot deliver water that is in excess levels of nitrate, so it 'Legally" has to be removed.
Welcome, to the world of water.

Watershed Mark said...

I remember "r" trying to make that point about the "removing the source" arguement.
Problem is that there isn't any science proving the source.

More Tea???

Watershed Mark said...

County vs. Bear.

Aaron said...

I've noticed some irony.

Lynette Tornatzky and Mike have been dancing around the story regarding a problematic vacuum system in Cape Cod. Without attempting to spin a single thing in the article, I can tell you that (1) all systems leak, but some leak less than others and (2) not all vacuum systems fail to that degree if they're properly maintained.

When people posted articles about conventional gravity system leaks on SanLuisObispo.com Discussion Boards, they were harangued for "implying" that all or most gravity systems had similar flaws. The very same people who criticized those individuals for posting those articles are now posting articles and using the exact same logic they were critical of before.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

The "source", in a legal sense, is whatever the RWQCB says it is.

Even so, their understanding of what the lion's share of the source of the nitrates matches up with every bit of data we have and every other situation in the US with too many septics per acre. I suspect that if someone has conclusive data that another source is providing a substantial fraction of the nitrates they could broaden their scope of who they will fine and charge for cleaning up the problem, but as of yet there have only been theories proposed and those theories don't match the data very well.


One person's presumption is another person's proof and still another person's proof of bias. I somehow suspect that if Mike and GetReal were reading the same newspaper account of nitrates they would have different opinions of what the article said.

Watershed Mark said...

County vs. By the time city crews were able to halt the overflow about 90 minutes later, roughly 14,850 gallons of sewage had drained into the San Diego River, DEH spokesman Mark McPherson said..

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

Can you show us the law that provides for the basis of your statement:"The "source", in a legal sense, is whatever the RWQCB says it is." ???

Circumstantial evidence doesn't cut it. Proof or at least some evidence really is needed, according to my knowledge.

If there was a prohibition zone established in 1983 why were another 1,000 or so homes allowed to be built?

Who is actually responsible, the permit maker or permit buyer? Let the lawyers sue…

Watershed Mark said...

County v. Bear

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry for the repost of County v. Bear...

Sewertoons said...

A flushed cell phone or other damaging flushable object is beyond the scope of "proper maintenance."

Note - the gravity system failures cited in blogs resulted in flows going into streams or bodies of water.

"The vacuum failure resulted in raw sewage backing up into people’s basements, showers and sinks."

"It took three days of searching to find the puncture."

"Sewer workers will now need to find and replace any underground pump mechanisms that may have become stuck as a result of the system's flooding."

I just wanted to show that not just gravity systems fail - to be fair.

Aaron said...

Is flushing a cell phone down the toilet the problem with vacuum itself or a problem with the piping that the vacuum system, in this case, used?

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I forgat his last name Lynette,

To be fair:
- shouldn't vacuum collection be studied?

- shouldn't leakage be reported in the study?

- shouldn't sealed gravity pipe have been priced out?

- shouldn't sealed vs. unsealed been discussed?

Is it fair to say that when a con-gravity lift station or pocket pump fails there will be back up's and flooding?

I guess you have been released from your treatment program.
Welcome back, Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette, how do you feel.

Watershed Mark said...

P'Town officials believe it was a rock that entered the system from a recent hook-up not a cell phone.

Alon has it correct, when an alarm sounds a vacuum system leak would be quickly found and repaired in Los Osos because there are no parades and 50,000 visitors. Anyone who has been to P'Town would understand the chain of events that took place on that holiday weekend.

Gravity sewers fail on a much more regular basis and leaks are accepted from the day of installation. 500 gallons, per diameter inch of pipe/per mile/per day per SLOCO PIS (Public Improvement Standard)

So to be fair and by the county's own standard bell and spigot sewerage pipes "leak" and by design vacuum pipes do not.

Watershed Mark said...

I should qualify leak for a vacuum system verses con-gravity.

A drop in vacuum indicates that air is leaking into the system

A pipe rupture/break would cause an immediate and complete loss of pressure that would alert operators who would then find and repair the damage.

A leak from a con-gravity can occur immediately upon installation and once buried is rarely if ever repaired.

Same goes for a rupture or break, as in Morro Bay pipes could bleed human waste for decades.

Watershed Mark said...

-----Original Message-----
From: Waterguy [mailto:waterguy@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 12:46 PM
To: Onsite/decentralized wastewater management issues
Subject: [decentralized] It's all so clear now ;-)

I have opined several times on the list that our funding institutions, such
as RUS, seem to be asleep at the switch, allowing projects to proceed
without there having been a bona-fide review and analysis of the full range
of options available. I expected that a large part of that problem is that
the people in those agencies are simply not as astute about all this as they
perhaps should be. Here now is an interesting tidbit that seems to indicate
that they don't even have command of the very basics of what they are
overseeing the funding for. First, here is a comment sent by an interested
party about one project (in a state that shall remain nameless), for which
the commenter felt that a stream discharge had been "inappropriately" chosen
over a soil dispersal option, for the reason he notes:

"With the recent concerns of toxic pollutants, Bisphenol A, endocrine
disrupters, personal care products and thousands of other man-made chemicals
being found in our streams and drinking water, direct stream discharges
should be avoided at all costs."

The RUS response:

"You expressed a concern of personal care products and man-made chemicals
being found in the streams and drinking water. You further mention direct
stream discharges. There will be no direct discharges as all collected
wastewater will undergo treatment such as; pH control, settling,
disinfection, as well as aeration."

Uh, TOTALLY missed (or misrepresented) the point, twisting "direct
discharge" to imply discharge of raw wastewater. Either RUS is that stupid
or that devious. In either case, it would appear that RUS very much WANTED
to discard this concern without dealing with it substantively. The reason
why RUS and similar funding agencies are just passing through all these
ill-thought-out facility plans, and authorizing funding of them with our
money, is a lot clearer now, isn't it? ;-)

David Venhuizen, P.E.
Planning and Engineering as if Water and Environmental Values Matter
www.venhuizen-ww.com

Your old road is rapidly agin'
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend a hand
For the times they are a-changin'
-- Bob Dylan


Gotta love Bob Dylan-

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Richard has posted here the legal reference you requested. Look it up yourself.

As for letting the lawyers sue ... I certainly cannot prevent it, but considering these issues have already been litigated it would seem a waste of funds and certainly MY CSD should not be paying 25% of the total bill of the party who is obligated to pay 75% of the bill doesn't actually follow through on their commitment.

Also on the issue of litigating ... when one cavalierly advocates lawsuits which will delay the sewer and thus increase our costs ... I get a bit angry. If, for example, a lawsuit has only a 10% chance of success (and what is the definition of success, I wonder) but delays a project for a year, at a 10% inflation rate, that lawsuit has a $15M cost. Unless you are willing to pay the bill, Mark, you shouldn't advocate increasing my costs.

Alon Perlman said...

California Coastal Commission
Piper Riely did well today explaining her position
Her commentry comes after the break.
Protecting Cultural resources
Chumash Nation
Gwen Taylor just nails the water purveyor mishmosh
At this posting LO sust group Keith Weimer Then Linde Owens, Frank Asario are up

Alon Perlman said...

Coastal Commission Staff Concurs with Ag land being wrong
with out of the basin wrong
with secondary Tx being wrong
and Keith weimer is engaging commission with SW Intrusion Graph
the blue field on the map was misinterpreted as ocean but they got thru it.
Word verification: dukingst

Alon Perlman said...

Frank Asario:
very relevant history of water use and sea water emergance as issue with '92 being year of engineering assesment of overdraft.

Word verification: fibrused.
Katcho, better offline

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
You like to assign motives to people’s comments, I get that. Although it may be fun for you it doesn’t really add anything to the discussion and it is childish.
Likewise “r” didn’t quote law regarding drinking water, he quoted Porter Cologne, look it up…pup.

When you wrote: “Also on the issue of litigating ... when one cavalierly advocates lawsuits which will delay the sewer and thus increase our costs ...”
I trust that you are not suggesting folks should give up their legal rights to due process.

Remember above all, I work to decrease the costs of collection and treatment of water…Something that doesn’t really seem to resonate with you, MIKE, “r”,- sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette, Supervisor Gibson, Paavo “if there is a technology that is significantly less expensive then that technology becomes the new standard and all others fall away” Ogren, his handpicked/no bid/sole source consulting engineer and his favorite contractor MWH.

A well founded investigation or lawsuit may be just the kind of “things” that will lead to a cost effective solution.
There has been way too much bait and switch in Los Osos since 1983…

I you think I am being cavalier, you are being foolish.

Watershed Mark said...

If
you think I am being cavalier, you are being foolish.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

All I know is that Richard did cite the code, and that I've been promised by others that fighting the RWQCB would be a good idea and every time Los Osos goes along with someone who says we should "do do it right" we end up paying more.

You have not convinced me that following your advice will lower my costs. No sale.

Mike said...

Hi Shark... If there are alternative technologies, they haven't been approved for Los Osos by the various permitting agencies...

"IF" there is something better, cheaper, faster, then why haven't the systems/products marketing forces been able to make their case to those with the the actual responsibility to issue permits...???

Isn't this a case of some sales grunt with no credibility trying too hard to build a federal case on a gossip blog... Why hasn't the actual manufacturer been working directly with those agencies...??? Sounds like it's too big for a lone sales grunt...??? Where is the manufacturer...??? This isn't like buying a car...there is way too much at stake here...

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry Boys,

You guys just can't/don't/won't "get it".

Not my problem, it's yours.

Watershed Mark said...

It’s all political…

Watershed Mark said...

Has anyone seen Warren Jensen's "opinion" regarding Lisa's complaint yet?

I knew he couldn't just whip one out in a couple of weeks like he said he could.

Sewertoons said...

http://www.filedropper.com/gravitylowestcostconn

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,

It appears you still aren’t being fair and forthright:
Next: Chapter 2 -- The Sewer Facilities Planning Effort (mid-July, 2009) Mansfield is still a work in progress. There is a link built on the Town's website but no study info available, so it would be difficult to comment without knowing who and how the problem was studied.

The previous studies from 1985 and 1992 indicate there has been a long standing issue. I’ll look this over and may get back with you if it seems relevant.

Do you have anything else you care to “throw out?”

Watershed Mark said...

According to Table 5-2 and 5-3 Alternatives the total construction cost of a sewer for 27,000 people is between $5,100,000.00 and $5,400,000 in Mansfield Conn. sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette.

Why is it more than 20 ties more expensive in LO/BP? MIKE, “r”, R1 anyone???

Perhaps you should forward the report to your Supervisor, sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette…
I appreciate your pointing out just what kind of job can be done and what kind of job is being done in SLOCO. Thanks!!

Watershed Mark said...

Why is it more than 20 TIMES more expensive in LO/BP? MIKE, “r”, R1 anyone???

Watershed Mark said...

An installed sewerfor less than the cost of the SLOCO study.
It would be fubby if it were not so tragic.

Thanks again Tunes, feel free to strut your stuff anytime.
With a little help from my friends

Watershed Mark said...

It would be funny if it weren't so damned tragic...

Watershed Mark said...

…and the truth is plain to see

Watershed Mark said...

If it weren’t so damned unnecessary and TRADGIC…

Have a great weekend everybody!

Mike said...

We've seen lots of words from a sales person on this blog, but never once has it pointed out why he is beating this dead horse...

This blog is simply the wrong venue for selling his wares... There is no government approval or disapproval for any thing sewerish on this or any other blog... He has been repeatedly asked why he spends all his effort on a meaningless gossip blog...why hasn't he, or more to the point, why hasn't the company he purports to represent been in front of the State Water Board and/or Federal EPA...????

I've simply will not respond to him... he has become a boreing waste of time... If he really wanted to get some product or service in front of Los Osos, then he should have gone to his managers and asked that they go directly to the EPA or Water Board or even the BOS and OBTAIN approvals of their products and to have been allowed to compete... They did not... ever wonder why...???

Aaron said...

If you mean "selling wares" as in posting links of YouTube videos, which Mark has done... wait, never mind.

Aaron said...

I think Mark has done a good job in making you upset, "Mike," but if you don't want to respond to him, don't.

Keep digging.

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
Don’t work yourself up about me MIKE I am getting more out of Ann’s Blog than I am putting in.
Where else can one go to flush out facts from committed current supporters of leak con-gravity sewerage?

As I have written several times before I am “marketing” and raising awareness, which in your case might not be possible.
Your attention span seems too short and you don’t follow through. Think “Florida Research” and “What city you AZ friends and relatves actually live in”, here.

The fact you do not understand how a wastewater project is actually developed doesn’t help either.
Hang in there MIKE, I understand Ron is writing a book which should help you get that grip on “that” which continues to elude you.

Are you calling the County a Dead Horse???
Quack and Fib all you want, it helps the other mice feel good about there "stuff". Isn't that correct- sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette?

Ever play the board game "Battleship?"
Bwahahahaha!!!

Watershed Mark said...

Although Lake Havasu City’s sewer expansion program won overwhelming voter approval, community support has been mixed since the program was implemented, due to its cost and how it is financed. In addition to improved groundwater quality, positive outcomes of the program include reduced residential water consumption and an expanded water source: effluent for irrigation. But base sewer charges increase annually to keep pace with loan repayment, and since the overall sewer charge per customer is based on water consumption averaged over three winter months, many residents pay more than the base charge. Monthly sewer charges over $100 are not uncommon and will continue to rise if no federal funding materializes.

Some great Mitrate discussion beginning on page 20 of this link.

Watershed Mark said...

“N”itrate…

Meanwhile, sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,

The town's sewer system has been functioning well since final repairs on malfunctioning underground pits were completed Wednesday afternoon.
While out osight and out of mind, con-gravity sewers continue to leak.

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,

Out of sight but not out o mind.
Here’s one you may have missed:

South Hill couple out of luck over sewage geyser

Gold Price