Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Don't Panic

Greg McClure (Central Coast NewsMission) is working on reconfiguring the heading of the Can(n)ons and this is just a rough draft (unfortunately, can't futz around with the layout with out actually futzing around in "public" with the layout, so to speak, since he's doing this from his bunker deep in the mountains of Lompoc or somewhere, heh-heh.) So, we'll be working on this thereby making things look goofy for a while until we get the header right. Stay calm. Stay tuned.


Aaron said...

That's the problem with Blogger. Any design modifications you make can be seen by the public. You can't turn off your blog, put up an "Under Construction" sign and perform maintenance.

That's why I switched over to Wordpress.

Gadfly said...

Preliminary Legal Evaluation of
Materials Submitted by Lisa Schicker Regarding
Paavo Ogren, Montgomery Watson Harza, and Related Matters

Prepared by Warren R. Jensen, County Counsel, San Luis Obispo County

August 18, 2009

Materials Evaluated.
Ms. Schicker submitted materials to the Board of Supervisors and/or County Counsel beginning on about April 7, 2009. Due to staffing constraints, and an increase in competing demands on our time beginning in early May, County Counsel has not been able to complete review of all of the materials submitted, which are now in excess of 1,300 pages. This evaluation is based on complete review of the materials submitted in April, 2009 and some of the other materials subsequently submitted. As time permits, or as the Board directs, we will complete our review of the remaining materials and announce our conclusions.

General Evaluation of the Materials.
A variety of materials has been submitted by Ms. Schicker. Few of the documents evaluated so far are original source documents and few of the documents come from impartial sources. Many of the pages reviewed were authored by Ms. Schicker or others who have staked out partisan positions that are consistently at odds with County staff. Many of these documents would not be admissible in a civil action because they are inadmissible hearsay, and/or they are lay opinions without foundation, and/or they simply are not probative. Perhaps the materials submitted beginning in May 2009 will prove to be different, but a sampling indicates that they are not significantly different in character.

Preliminary Conclusions.
Based on my review of the materials submitted before May 2009, and a sampling of some of the materials submitted thereafter, my preliminary conclusions are as follows:

1. No Conflict of Interest Proven for Paavo Ogren. Although Ms. Schicker repeatedly asserts her opinion that Mr. Ogren has various conflicts of interest, she does not provide specific identification of those conflicts or reliable evidence of such conflicts. The “evidence” she submitted consists almost exclusively of her personal opinions, without corroborating details or documentation. Such “evidence” would be inadmissible in court and does not seem substantial enough to warrant further consideration.

2. No Illegal Contract Proven Between LOCSD and MWH. Ms. Schicker has not provided all of the relevant original source documents, at least in the materials reviewed to date. If we accept the secondary materials that Ms. Schicker submitted at face value, the most that she has shown about the contract between LOCSD and MWH is that there was a procedural defect in the manner in which it was executed. Ms. Schicker’s materials completely fail to deal with the possibility that any such defect was subsequently cured by ratification of the contract. Such ratification is implicit in the LOCSD Board’s repeated subsequent payment of invoices submitted by MWH, including one invoice that expressly seeks payment for services provided before the September 1, 1999 effective date. In addition, the LOCSD Board repeatedly amended that contract, each time implicitly endorsing the original contract. Moreover, Ms. Schicker’s written materials completely ignore the concept of promissory estoppel, under which a government entity

Gadfly said...

can be required to pay for services that are rendered prior to the execution of a written contract where the entity induced the contractor to provide those services based on unwritten assurances that the work would be covered by a future contract. That appears to be exactly what happened according to the memo prepared by Bruce Buel, and included in the materials submitted by Ms. Schicker.

3. No Negative Inferences Justifiable, based on Pendency of Investigations. Ms. Schicker refers to various pending investigations and seems to draw the conclusion that the mere pendency of these investigations is a reason to avoid dealing with MWH. Logically, this makes no sense because anyone can trigger an investigation and therefore the mere pendency of an investigation means nothing about the validity of the triggering complaint. Only when a neutral investigative body has reached a conclusion is there a reasonable basis for negative inferences.

4. No Negative Inferences Justifiable, based on Cape Coral Situation. Ms. Schicker refers to a controversy involving a wastewater project constructed by MWH in Cape Coral, Florida. She submitted newspaper coverage reporting on allegedly excessive costs incurred and she submitted newspaper coverage of an Attorney General opinion criticizing the City of Cape Coral. No original source documents were included in the materials evaluated. Newspaper articles are not admissible evidence in court and are not substantial enough to warrant further investigation. Perhaps there are original source documents in the materials that have not yet been reviewed. If so, they will be considered. At this point, however, no negative inferences can reasonably be drawn from the materials evaluated.

5. No Negative Inferences Justifiable, based on MWH Filing of Bankruptcy Claims or Other Litigation. Ms. Schicker refers to the fact that MWH has filed a claim against the LOCSD in the Bankruptcy filed by the LOCSD and seems to draw the conclusion that the mere filing of a claim was improper. This is completely illogical. Two other creditors of LOCSD also filed claims against LOCSD. Were their claims improper too? The actual outcome of those claims, after arbitration, was that these two creditors had valid claims for $10 million.

6. No Other Negative Inferences Warranted. Numerous other claims of impropriety are advanced by Ms. Schicker in the materials reviewed. Time does not permit detailed discussion at this point. In the interest of releasing this preliminary evaluation without further delay, suffice it to say that the materials evaluated did not support any other inferences of impropriety in the County’s efforts pursuant to AB 2701.

Respectfully submitted,
County Counsel

Sewertoons said...

Thank you for posting this Gadfly!

Mike said...

The Trib article was well done... and serious notice should be taken of the comments following the article...

The community is fed up with the unsupported "challeges" to the County Process by the same tired LO Sewer Obstructionists who think they have some pseudolegal opinion worth listening to... Apparently they all have their J.D. from Toy's R Us...

Aaron said...

Isn't it a tad hypocritical that only a week and a half ago, the same people here chided me for posting about sewer-related discussions in a non-sewer related article?

Mike, I thought you left this blog.

Mike said...

Grow up Aaron... It's sad watching you trying to act grown up when you don't have a clue; wantabe lawyer or journalistic critic...

I'm not gone, just faded back to watch the obstructionists wringing their hands and making the same unfounded complaints and lies as they have for nearly 10 years...

Aaron said...


Can you stop being a baby for just one day? If you can't, get lost.

Gadfly said...


Conflict-of-interest charge dismissed against county head of Los Osos sewer project

County counsel finds no evidence to support allegations against the public works director

By David Sneed |

County Counsel Warren Jensen has concluded that there is no evidence the county Public Works director has a conflict of interest over the Los Osos sewer project.

Jensen issued his preliminary findings Tuesday after reviewing materials submitted by former Los Osos Community Services District board member Lisa Schicker alleging a variety of improprieties in the sewer project.
Her main allegation is that Public Works Director Paavo Ogren is too cozy with the engineering firm Montgomery Watson Harza, which is on a short list to do work on the sewer project. He has worked with the firm on a number of other projects. Jensen said Schicker did not provide proof of her allegations. The ‘evidence’ she submitted consists almost exclusively of her personal opinions, without corroborating details or documentation,” Jensen wrote.

He also dismissed numerous other complaints Schicker leveled against the engineering firm, including one that a contract it had with the community services district was illegal.
Since April, Schicker has submitted more than 1,300 pages of documents to Jensen. Staffing constraints and controversies in the county administrative office caused Jensen to postpone evaluating the material several times.“I want to know if the process has been fair to assure competitive bidding in a fair and open market,” Schicker said of her complaints.

Gadfly said...


Realistic1 wrote on 08/19/2009 02:13:39 PM:
The original CSD DID want a sewer. They just didn't want the one the County was proposing in 1997. They thought they had a better plan. They didn't. Once they realized it, they changed their plan and eventually had a sewer under construction. Fast forward to 2005. New CSD Board, led by Schicker and Tacker. They said they had a better plan to get the prior board recalled and the project under construction stopped. They actually had NO plan - never did. They LIED. The State got fed up with their b.s. and took the project away from the CSD. Now it's back in the hands of the County, where it should have been all along. And now property owners are stuck paying for the stopped project ($21 million in assessments + jilted contractor legal claims to the tune of millions) AND the new project...whatever that ends up costing. Nicely done, Lisa!

bosko wrote on 08/19/2009 01:49:42 PM:
It's a growth issue Cynthia, plain and simple. No sewer = no growth. Unfortunately it also means no sidewalks, no local jobs, very few local services...

Cynthia wrote on 08/19/2009 01:27:39 PM:
Does anyone know why the original CSD didn't want a sewer? I can't imagine why they wouldn't take advantage of the low interest loans that were provided at the time. Eventually sewers have to replace septic tanks. It's just inevitable and it's the right thing to do, isn't it? So what in the world is this all about? Was it the money, the contractors, what caused all this?

Clairevoy wrote on 08/19/2009 12:06:18 PM:
"...fair to assure competitive bidding in a fair and open market,":
Hmm, the county actually developed and RFQ and the Lisa board hired the following professionals without even an RFP: Burke Williams and Sorenson(attorney), WRA(hired to help the attorney), Wildan and Associates, McClendon(attorney) and none of those professionals could evaluate the claim regarding Montgomery Watson and Harza? This appears to be open harassment of anyone with any affiliation at moving this process forward. This bevvy of attorneys never came up with anything even when they had access to every single document known to the CSD and not written by Lisa? I would like to see the documents that were submitted and see if any of them actually still belong to the CSD and have an "original" stamp on them. Way back when, it was discussed that Shicker helped remove documents from the CSD offices so are they now in Jensen's hands? Doesn't really matter, chain of custody and all...hiding the evidence?

catriley wrote on 08/19/2009 09:11:46 AM:
What is wrong with those people??? How freakin' hard it is to build a sewer??? Other cities have done this.. other counties have done this.. I'm beginning to think that it has to do with the extraordinary amount of excrement in Los Osos that is complicating things... I mean, it's hip-deep in some places (especially the meetings.)

SadToSay wrote on 08/19/2009 11:42:58 AM:
Real, I'm sure he's on their radar screen. Not to worry though, as you know, they have lost EVERY dog fight. And like ALL the ones before, they'll go down in flames should they try and villify him.
The Fecal Four are no more...

Solomon wrote on 08/19/2009 11:12:27 AM:
"Hell has no fury like a woman scorned", rejected, etc,. Good grief, only millions of dollars in bankruptcy while she was head of the LOCSD, and the performances. Send in the clowns, they were already here with Lisa at the head.

Realistic1 wrote on 08/19/2009 10:56:04 AM:
How long do you think it will take before someone accuses Warren Jensen of a conflict of interest or being corrupt? That's this crowd's m.o. Smear everyone that disagrees with them.

JK wrote on 08/19/2009 09:41:28 AM:
This nonsense was all about Schicker and her group desperatly trying anything to stop the slow but sure progress of the project that the County has made on behalf of all the property owners in Los Osos who just want this to be over.


Gadfly said...


SadToSay wrote on 08/19/2009 09:21:54 AM:
Lisa, you said..."I want to know if the process has been fair to assure competitive bidding in a fair and open market,”
When you were president of the CSD was the process fair when you said under oath that you had a plan, when in fact you never had a plan?
Was the process fair when you stopped an approved, funded, permitted sewer project? Was the process fair when you spent State Water Board funds to defend youself and the board when you were sued? Was the process fair when you ignored the Regional Water Quality Control Board's warning of stopping the project resulting in enforcement actions against the home owners of Los Osos?
Was the porocess fair when you defaulted on the State Water Board low interest loan funds of multi- millions?
Was the process fair when you declared bankruptcy on behalf of the CSD?
And finally, was the process fair when you continued to pollute the Morro Bay Estuary by prolonging the sewer project?
I think not!

Insider wrote on 08/19/2009 09:14:39 AM:
Schicker is an idiot who simply will not stop. Her and her cohort Tacker will leave a legacy of causing financial genocide in Los Osos. Considering the costs have more than tripled since the original CSD Board was elected to get this thing done but the Shicker/Tacker coalition successfully stalled it for nearly a decade, I want to bop her in the head everytime I see her walking her dog in my neighborhood. But I wouldn't want the dog to see that.

At least Tacker and her shady developer boyfriend Jeff Edwards have lost that property they were building on at the entrance to Montana de Oro. Couldn't happen to nicer folk. Yes, I'm a little irritated at the thought of $200+/mth sewer service charges...

sewerlass wrote on 08/19/2009 08:17:32 AM:
Yeah, Cynthia. It's not a great business practice but it is also not illegal. Read Jensen's report. Schicker didn't have her ducks in a row -- again. I think she should pay for Jensen's time. At least she isn't going to ruin our chances of getting a sewer this time!

SadToSay wrote on 08/19/2009 08:12:52 AM:
And yet ANOTHER failure on behalf of the anti-sewerite's who will stop at nothing to prevent a sewer from being built in Los Osos.
Have they no self respect? They have been dismissed by the Governor, the State Assembly, Lois Capps, the County of San Luis, the State Water Board, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, USFWS, Cal Fish and Game, the California Coastal Commission and most importantly...the Citizens of Los Osos.
Give it up losers, the sewer train has left the station, and there is no stopping it!

Cynthia wrote on 08/19/2009 07:27:16 AM:
Isn't there something about the contract being backdated to almost a tear prior and then signed as of that "false" dating?

oldtimer wrote on 08/19/2009 06:42:57 AM:
Shicker and her sidekick Tacker should spend the rest of their lives writing individual letters of apology to each and every citizen of this county for the misery, financial hardship and waste of time that they have caused. There is no hole in hell deep enough to repay them.

JanW wrote on 08/19/2009 06:12:10 AM:
Ugh. Every time a sewer nut like Shicker gets attention, a puppy dies. How much is she costing us by turning in all this hogwash and making county counsel evaluate it? Wasn't bankrupting the CSD enough?
I think the poor woman has gone crazy.

Mike said...

You just can't accept still being just a little boy, can you Aaron... Your childish responses in some silly attempt to divert honest folks questioning the obstructionism certainly show how immature you are... Richard certainly pegged you correctly...!!!

I'll probably be paying my property taxes and the high sewer bill and the cost of that bankruptcy, long after you've moved on...

Aaron said...


No matter what you say, it just doesn't cut it. You're Anonymous. You devalued your own comments by personally attacking behind the veil. I've finally accepted what Ann has said about the Anonymous.

Good luck trying to be relevant. Unless you have the chutzpah to challenge me publicly in a offline public forum like the CSD or a BOS meeting, then I have nothing further to say to you.

Mike said...

I have no need to challenge your lack of maturity or community knowledge... You were never a worthy opponent, just a little boy trying to be the school yard bully....

Just keep on avoiding the truth about how the obstructionists have screwed this community with their "Plan"...

Alon Perlman said...

Gadfly; Don't be so one sided-You left out
"OchsNation wrote on 08/19/2009 02:56:37 PM:
I think it's a bit short-sighted to get emotionally charged over a preliminary report that states very clearly that the analysis is inconclusive. I think that people have been riding the, "I hate Lisa Schicker!" gravy train so long that they won't read the fine print or they'll accept County responses like the word of the Gospel.

Let's cut the rhetoric out of the conversation, put our objective thinking caps on and study everything."

Sewertoons said...

"Study Everything" has been the secret phrase of the "No Sewers" to throw up more road blocks. Enough.

The time for study is the past, the time to build is the present.

Mike said...

...and to balance that out Alon:

SadToSay wrote:

Excellent synopsis Real. These folks aren't "emotionally charged" over a preliminary report Ochs, they are outraged over the way the Schicker/Tacker CSD handled the sewer project. This isn't rhetoric, this is reality. Like I said, the County Sewer Train has left the station, and not even you are going to stop it, no matter how hard you try.

....but of course, this silly blog never has been about reality, only a platform for the obstructionists "opinions"... Too bad they can't look at the train wreck they created...

Hopefully today's Tribune comments hit Lisa right between her eyes... She has fallen on her face yet again...!!!!! How much longer does this community have to put up with the Lisa style of diversion... Let's just get completly behind the County and get this damn sewer built....!!!!

Gadfly said...


Please look at the time I posted last... which was today at 2:39 PM

Please notice that Ochsnation's post was posted today at 2:56 PM....or 17 minutes AFTER I posted on this blog. As Ochsnation posted after I did, his comments could not be included in my post as Ochsnation's comments did not yet exist.

My post has nothing to do with being 'one sided' as you assert.

I posted the Tribune website as it then existed en toto (prior to 2:39 PM)

In fact, I did not comment on either side of the issue at all.

....But I forgive you anyway regarding your minor error of perception and your major error of jumping to conclusions. :-)

Aaron said...

And "No Sewers" has been the secret phrase of people who think only in black and white.

For years I've heard, "People who oppose the County plan don't want a sewer in town," and I laugh at that. It's fallacious to argue as such because you're attributing intent to people's beliefs.

They believe a certain way because we have the clairvoyance to determine that they intend to produce a completely different outcome.

That line of thinking is wrong. It will always be wrong.

It's like saying, "That person is lying!" Do you actually know they're lying or are they providing information that is simply inaccurate?

When I said, "Study everything," I meant that people need to read the document for what it is, see why Jensen arrived at those statements and look at it objectively.

It's really simple.

Gadfly said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
M said...

So the way I read this is, everything the water boards, state boards, County, contractors, supervisors, etc. have all been above board. Nothing to see here. Just move along now. I guess I can just be thankful that I live in the least corrupted town in America. To think, a hand full of detractors have held off all these rightous entities for nearly thirty years. When you start adding to the hand though, pretty soon you need a wheel barrow to hold all of the names directly responsible for where were at today. And yet you all think Lisa is the one that should be in an orange jump suit.
All the clamour about Lisa should have to pay for all the time the County has spent on her allegations, how about the 7million dollars the County spent for a study for a foregone conclusion?
Would someone care to answer why 1100 more septic tanks were permitted after 1983?
Sincerely, M

Sewertoons said...

When a person doesn't want a sewer, it means they don't want one, period. Not that they want one "somewhere else." They will use the line - "somewhere else" to not stick out, so that they can continue to subvert quietly. Their real intent is simply "no sewer" but that can no longer be considered a politically correct stance in the current, fashionable, "green environment," and understanding the data from the aquifer testing. Aaron, if you think these people don't exist, then you are not looking closely enough.

The phrase "out of town" sometimes means just that. Depends on who is using it.

Without reading all of the documents it is a little hard to see why Jensen arrived at the conclusions he did. We get a thumbnail of those reasonings, but as I trust Jensen, I am satisfied.

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

Lisa keeps sticking her neck out.

If Bud Laurent were public and in the Los Osos news these days I'm sure we'd have a few things to say to him too.

No one says adding 1300 more tanks was a good idea. Name the people on the Planning Commission and the Supes who approved them and we'll write some words about that too, I am sure.

Gadfly said...


SadToSay wrote on 08/19/2009 05:47:20 PM:
No Ochs, reality is very clear here, they have yet again tried to stall the sewer, and yet again, they have been shot down.
Their history speaks for itself. Your revisionist approach is rather sophomoric. Consider finishing law school. It will help with your view of reality. Then again it may not.

Realistic1 wrote on 08/19/2009 05:43:58 PM:
Ed, there is nothing emotionally charged about anything I said earlier. The situation is what it is. There is absolutely no doubt that the formation of the CSD was a disaster for this community. Period. We will all be paying for it for years to come. All I want is for the community to get the damn thing built so we can all move on with our lives.

OchsNation wrote on 08/19/2009 05:34:11 PM:
You're talking about the reality behind Jensen dismissing Schicker? I got that part. I believe that one cannot truly determine what reality is when this issue is so deep and full of holes that it's taken years for people to decipher what it all means. I can accept Jensen's statements, but I'm not going to take what was said at face value -- when the analysis is incomplete -- and make definitive conclusions about it.

Common sense.

SadToSay wrote on 08/19/2009 05:16:06 PM:
And you will hear it again and again, because it's reality! Just what is the issue in your mind Ochs? The fact of the matter is, the Schicker/Tacker CSD made a mockery of local governance. The highlights of their tenure include: Perjury, bankruptcy, default of loans, loss of federal grants, loss of state loans, destruction of CSD credit, etc., etc. Need I continue?

Watershed Mark said...

M wrote: " about the 7million dollars the County spent for a study for a foregone conclusion?
Would someone care to answer why 1100 more septic tanks were permitted after 1983?"

You are exhibiting too much common sense for those who are again so very concerned by the actions of a single citizen, M. BRAVO!!

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE little mouse, you are as big a liar as sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette.

Looks like Lisa has gotten under your skin, again. Funny how Gadflea feels the need to bring the Tribune's trivial attempted whitewash to Ann's Land.

Only when Warren submits his final response to Lisa's complaint will we actually have something to chew on.
Just because some of you the love incomplete and unfinished work SLOCO continues to do, doesn't mean the rest of of should.

Any bets about whether Warren retires before he finishes his "treatment?"

$7MM is too much money for what SLOCO excreted...wait and see.

Sewertoons said...

Update Provincetown:

Gee, I wonder how much extra all that surveillance will cost? They still don't know how it happened.

Alon Perlman said...

Oh Gadfly,
You had me at "Please look at the time I posted last... "
A simple "Thank you" would had sufficed...

On second thought, don't thank me, I would'nt have to see "Gadfly and Alon sitting in a tree... " published by a half-twit

Churadogs said...

Aaron sez:"Mike, I thought you left this blog."

I thought he left in a huff as well. Or maybe he left in a high dudgeon? A miff? I guess the concept of "leaving" doesn't mean what it used to mean.

Gosh, Gadfly, I'm flattered. You cut and paste TRIBUNE comments from THEIR Blogsite and pasted them all in MY blog comment section????. You must think I have more readers than the Tribune so you felt you had to "share" with them?? Or that my readers are too stupid to know how to go to the Tribune's blogsite? Or did you want to make sure that a whole bunch of uninformed, vacuous "anonymous" Tribune posters got a wider readership? Lord, I've got enough of those here, don't need any more.

Well, don't do that again == anybody, are you listening? -- or I'll start hitting the little garbage can dump icon. The Tribune's posters belong on the Tribune website not on mine, thank you. If you want to post a link and let people click over and read whatever you'd like them to read, that's fine, but c'mon. This is silly.

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,

$7,000,000.00 for a study that studied no new technology and you asked how much? I ask- why do you lie.

To report a sewer spill or bad sewer odor, immediately call

The potential for millions of dollars in extra fines may be enough to pressure the city to settle the lawsuit, lawyers for the plaintiffs hope. Lawyers for the groups that brought the suit want the city to adopt an enforceable schedule of reducing spills by a certain percentage each year, Hagekhalil said. If the schedule isn't met, the city would face penalties and automatic increases in required cleaning, upgrades and maintenance.
The city is asking for more flexibility, he said, without arbitrary standards. "The city has invested over $1 billion in the last 10 years to renew and upgrade its sewer system. We have committed $2 billion over the next 10 years."
Such investment may not be enough to keep pace with aging infrastructure -- a problem faced by many other cities, officials said. The EPA has brought similar suits against Atlanta, Miami, New Orleans and Baltimore. San Diego, under an administrative order from the EPA, recently increased residential sewer fees to pay for upgrades to reduce a pattern of spills similar to those in Los Angeles.
"Sewage spills are a major source of pollution and a significant threat to human health," said Wayne Nastri, the EPA's regional administrator in San Francisco. "Making sure municipalities manage their sewage properly moves us toward the EPA's goal of purer water ... and better protection of public health."
Parts of the system seem to be straining under current capacity. Residents of Baldwin Hills, the Crenshaw district and Leimert Park have spent decades complaining about a foul "rotten egg" odor from sewer gases from the system around Rodeo Road and La Cienega Boulevard.
"It comes and it goes, but when it comes it's bad," said Calvin Hill, who lives nearby. "It permeates the house and the neighbor's house. It gets into the clothes and it stays." Opal Young of the Baldwin Hills-Crenshaw Homeowners Coalition said residents have been getting the runaround for years when they tried to find a responsible agency to take action. "It's been going on for 30 years," she said. "You are driving down the road and it hits you. It's like rotten eggs and body parts. People cannot barbecue outdoors."

Watershed Mark said...

This is in fact why the EPA Clean Water Act was passed in 1972 because of Systemic Sewer failure was causing water pollution. In 1975 congress approved the EPA 201 grant program which from 1975 to 1990 gave $90 billion with a B…to public utilities to fix their sewers. But most of the money went toward program that only increased the problem and was eaten up by contractors.

Because of the WMD’ Engineers actions in the 70’s and 80’s the residents of Denver have had to spend tens of millions of dollars on auxiliary programs designed to just contain water pollution levels within acceptable limits….. Millions of dollars more have been spent on replacements of the sewer taps connections…. as well as countless millions of additional water treatment costs. Now WMD engineers propose to give tens of millions of dollars more of our money to their contractors to create “bio-filters” in order to naturally cleanse stormwater to correct the mistake they made 20 years ago.

Paavo’s shallow angle/leaky bell and spigot design will be very difficult to keep clean once flow is reduced by water conservation. The odor and vacuum truck trips will make even you wish the county actually studied vacuum collection. When the troublesome area manholes start stinking, I hope you will think back to the days when you lied in an effort to get that leaky stinky pipe planted in on your street. LOL

Putting 1,000 plus more septic tanks in a “prohibition zone” is something that will forever plague the county as it studies whether to take the project under AB 2701 or bow out…
It really is important to find out why vacuum collection was never studied and why you lie.

Don’t forget SPOKANE.

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry, I forgot his last name Lynette,

Please re-read the link you posted back in July:

One misconception is that public sewer systems are environmentally friendly - NOT TRUE. Septic systems are preferred by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health and Natural Resources. They overwhelming support septic tank systems, especially managed septic systems, over sewer systems.

Please keep the air up on the vacuum collection issue.
You are assisting me greatly and it is much appreciated!

Why do you lie?

Watershed Mark said...

Ooops, I actually posted the link from the "partial" statement you cut and pasted.
We need to keep the record straight.

Sewertoons said...

Sorry Ann. My 3 sentences has gotten wsm started on more lengthy copy-n-paste postings.

I wonder why he isn't annoying to you as Gadfly has been?

Watershed Mark said...

I wonder why you lie.