Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Move Along

It was a Star Wars moment. Dear Supervisor Meacham. I think he’s genuinely concerned about the cost of the Los Osos sewer project and the terrible impact it’s going to have on the many people of the community.

At the recent BOS update on the project, after many questions from the public, including opposition to taking design-build off the table for the collection system (hence taking the possibility of STEP off the table permanently), and including comments by Dana Ripley, reiterating his testimony before the Coastal Commission that he could build a STEP system that would save about $50 million, Meacham asked rather plaintively, How do we justify not laying different systems on the table for a side by side comparison (via the design build process that was promised to the community originally)?

Paavo Ogren’s Obi-wan-Kenobi’s soothing voice started in on one of his mesmerizing replies, starting with the statement that the $50 million promised claims aren’t $50 million and droned on and on. Dana Ripley stood up and walked over to stand by the wall, in plain sight – ready to reply – but Meacham didn’t look at him or call on him for a question or a response. You don’t need to see Ripley’s papers, Paavo soothed. I don’t need to see Ripley’s papers, Meacham muttered. These aren’t the droid’s you’re looking for, cooed Paavo. These aren’t the droid’s I’m looking for, murmured Meacham. Move along, said Paavo. We can move along, said Meacham.

And so he did, which allowed the STEP beast to be formally killed dead. Off the table. Oh, sure, the design-build concept was suggested as still being possible, maybe, for the design of the treatment facility, but not for the collection system – which is the most costly part of the project and where the maximum amount of money can be saved, providing you had taken a design-build approach from day one, which the County never did.

But there was an additional comic moment when the Board was informed that the $84 million USDA loan did not allow any design-build, thereby implying that somehow design-build was illegal or the Feds won’t allow it, or some such. Turns out that was not quite correct. Design-build is totally allowed by Washington, but the USDA’s administrative department in California is a bit behind the times and hasn’t changed it’s procedures and paperwork to handle design build, so they made it a condition of the loan that it must be the old-fashioned design-BID-build since that’s how their paperwork’s set up and it would take time and some trouble to change, which they’re not about to do.

So, once again, Los Osos will be getting 19th century technology (gravity sewers) and will be forced to deal with old paperwork systems because the CA branch of the USDA is behind the times. No possibilities of savings and innovation for Poor, red-haired step-child, Los Osos. Overpriced second-hand clothes are good enough for her.

Next up was the issue of Rates & Charges. That’s the additional amount, above and beyond the $25,000 capitol assessment costs, that each homeowner must pay. Right now, the capital costs are guestimated at $105 a month. The R&C will add about $80 a month, for a total of about $194. (Plus hook up costs for each homeowner.)

The trick with the R&C is the 218 vote for undeveloped property owners. They have to have a vague “reasonable” expectation of development, which will hinge on water, habitat conservation plans, & etc. before they can be dinged for R&C. And if the undeveloped property owners don’t pay “their fair share,” that amount will land on the shoulders of the developed property owners in the PZ.

Which sets up the interesting issue of “benefits:” As a homeowner, what “benefit” do I get from paying for my neighbor’s empty lot? As the owner of the empty lot, what “benefit” do I get paying for a sewer for property with no toilet on it?

So the County wordsmiths are now at work on that “protest ballot” and there will be workshops here in Los Osos and dare we hope for another glossy brochure, like the ones we got touting the vast benefits and plans the county had for utilizing design-build? Oh, right, that promise, like so many others, is soooo yesterday.

In the meantime, better mark your calendars. The “protest” vote on the R&C ordinance will arrive during the very busy holiday season – End of Oct to Mid Dec – so we can start laying bets: How many Los Ososians will lose or overlook or forget to mail in their “protest” “ballots” in all the Holiday busyness? Which is what makes “protest” ballots so interesting – it takes a 50% plus one to have a successful protest. In a community where one-third of the residents never even bothered to reply to the critically important Infamous Sewer Survey, the possibility of getting that 50% is realistically impossible. So, stay tuned on that one, but if you’re a home owner, better pray the “protest ballots” of all the vacant lot-owners will get lost in the holiday shuffle and so get not returned . Then, of course, on top of this, there’s a couple of legal rulings (one concerning Paso’s Water Woes, another in L.A., also a water woe tax vs. “fee” case) that may have bearing on this R&C ordinance.

By meeting’s end, the BOS voted for all the items listed in the agenda, including spending another $750,000. Frank Meacham voted no on that one.

Like I said, he seems concerned about money and costs, until Obi-Wan’s mind control kicks in. Then, not so much.

Other notes:

-- Once again, in a community in critical water overdraft, the concern was again expressed regarding gravity sewers. They require X # of gallons to operate properly and if everyone’s going low-flow and all conservation-y, when clogs occur (due to lack of the required # of gallons needed to operate properly) the county will be forced to flush the pipes out with scarce water, thereby wasting it, thereby increasing salt-water intrusion, thereby violating various Coastal Commission project requirements that we conserve water & etc.

-- since STEP had just been permanently killed, has a vacuum system been looked at as being compatible with the gravity pipe design already done, so it could be quickly adapted and would not strain water use for flushing gravity pipes. No answer on that one.

-- In a basin already in overdraft, there appears to be no restriction on development outside the PZ, which means those homes are sucking water out of an already over drafted system, so where is the water supposed to come from to allow build out? No answer on that one either. There will be further water reports in the future. Perhaps those will have some clues.

-- Still no answer as to why the USDA grant was “lost”, i.e. reduced from 16 mil to 4 mil. According to Julie Tacker, who reviewed the emails from USDA and county, there was no “blame” assigned in those emails. Supervisor Gibson has publicly “blamed” the loss on folks who appealed the project to the Coastal Commission, which also included a Coastal Commissioner as well. But, according to Ms. Tacker, that “blame” factor information is missing from the official emails. So, that question wasn’t answered either.

-- Los Osos is still waiting for that $35 million “grant” that Ms. Capps has been working on for years. It’s in the pipeline, has been authorized, but hasn’t been funded. So, say your prayers on that one.

-- A suggestion that the County look at the variety of SRF loans available to get a lower cost was met with the reply that one does not ask SRF for anything. One takes what’s offered. No questions asked. A sort of beggers and choosers type deal.

-- Yet another concern regarding the amount of power the gravity system will use, which also adds to the cost. Also another promise to re-submit Ripley’s testimony before the Coastal Commission back to the Coastal Commission for an answer: Why are we spending more money for the approved gravity system when there’s another (STEP) system that can save X $$ and water and energy and so forth. I can guarantee there’ll NOT be an answer on that one.

-- And, of course, a reiteration of the County’s stated core values for this project – i.e. No one should be forced to leave one’s home because of a sewer. And again the plaintive question, Why wasn’t the promised side-by-side, let the best technology determine the system, side-by-side design-build Process followed?

Right. No answer. But, you don’t need any answers. No, I don’t need any answers. And you need to stop asking questions. Yes, I need to stop asking questions. Now move along. Yes, I’ll move along.



The Razor said...

Here's the problem: STEG/STEG wasn't part of the scope of the staff report or the staff recommendations. It's true that it's part of the "bigger picture" when it comes to overall cost savings of the project, but the County has interpreted affordability as merely applying for USDA financing at 3.25%, 40-year terms. As far as other means of pursuing affordability? Their response has been, "We're working on it," or "It's at various stages."

Yesterday, the County only offered anecdotal evidence to why the USDA preferred the design-bid-build process over design-build. "The USDA officials I talked to in Washington and California said it's 'administratively impossible,'" said Diodati, but nowhere does the USDA expressly state in publicly available documents that design-build is obsolete.

County Public Works is negligent in that it lacks the ability to foresee undue community hardship by making promises that are irreconcilably broken. The County continuously promised design-build while they submitted their loan application to the USDA. Did they not review USDA guidelines prior to filing?

More questions than answers.

Mike said...

...ah yess, the uneducated self-appointed legal expert of LO has spoken... let's remember that since aaron owns no property in LO or anywhere in SLO County, he won't be paying for any sewer costs... and he thinks he can speak for our community...???

The Razor said...

Now I understand why Ann hasn't "dumped" you yet, "Mike." You're just too adorable.

Mike said...

I am... and other than being lazy, why haven't you gone after a law degree to back up your pompus postings....????

Spectator said...

I think Mike is spot on!

I think Ann gave us a good report on buck passing and incompetency. You think any of these supervisors care about Los Osos. All they care about is that their constituents do not get saddled with the costs of the sewer fiasco. They simply figure that Los Osos deserves what it gets.

GetRealOsos said...

What did anyone expect when the County TOOK the project away from the CSD?

Did anyone REALLY think they would give us a choice of the best value? Come on.

The County TOOK the project to give us exactly what the recalled board and Pandora planned.

In my opinion though, the City of Bell wasted taxpayers money to line their own pockets, but here the County lines the pockets of their friends ie MWH and their sub-contractors, Wallace, etc.

It's all the same as far as misuse of public funds when the County only considers the most expensive sewer system over the many others that would be better and less expensive. They've wasted millions of dollars on nothing that would benefit PZ homeowners -- $8 million or so now?

By picking gravity, the County has forced us to now import water. What cost will that be?

But an important question I'd like to put out there for anyone who may know, after the sewer is complete or at least 90% complete, there will be no 218 required for further assessments (cost over runs, etc.) Right? Won't that give a true blank check to Paavo and his buddies?

Sewertoons said...

The County didn't "take" the project away from the CSD, the STATE did that.

"By picking gravity, the County has forced us to now import water."

How about ""By picking out-of-town (read: room-to-expand-the-plant), the County has forced us to now import water."

Well, actually - those who stopped the 2005 project led to this outcome, the County didn't force us to do that, we did it to ourselves.

Did anyone hear Paavo yesterday when he spoke about the Step contractors who were vying to be one of the chosen 3 on collection? He said that the County's own estimate as to the costs of Step were cheaper than what the Step contractors proposed!

As for Ripley - diehard salesman that he obviously is - why didn't Ripley bid on his own instead of being part of the Lyles Group when they tried to win a top spot? Because he did not have a group with enough scope for a project this big.

GetRealOsos said...


Why don't you show us any documentation on the state taking away the project. I don't know where you got that from anyway!

It was LAFCO that gave the CSD options and scared them with the fact that the CSD may dissolve.

The County wanted and took the sewer project with LAFCO's help.

Besides Lynette, the recalled CSD had planned to import water with the Tri-W project and I know that you know that for a fact.

Who are you trying to fool?

And Lynette, you see how Prop. 218 is talked about and you know of the letter where Jon Sykes told the State Water board that unless there was a 218 vote (on Tri-W) there was no way to repay the SRF loan!!!!!! If I saw that letter -- YOU SAW THAT LETTER!!!!

By the way, the State Water Board gave out the loan anyway and they knew a 218 was legally required but not followed. Same goes for the BOS, Sam Blakeslee, etc. etc.

Can anyone spell corruption?

Sewertoons said...

"(7) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section and
amending Section 61105 to authorize the County of San Luis Obispo to
design, construct, and operate a wastewater collection and treatment
project that will eliminate these discharges, particularly in the prohibition
zone, to avoid a wasteful duplication of effort and funds, and to
temporarily prohibit the Los Osos Community Services District from
exercising those powers."

Churadogs said...

Razor sez:"Now I understand why Ann hasn't "dumped" you yet, "Mike." You're just too adorable."

Isn't he, though. And he's especially cute when completely misreads something or when he just makes things up then gets mad and shows up with those three exclamation points! Soooo cute.

John Sez"I think Ann gave us a good report on buck passing and incompetency. You think any of these supervisors care about Los Osos. All they care about is that their constituents do not get saddled with the costs of the sewer fiasco. They simply figure that Los Osos deserves what it gets."

You have that EXACTLY right. Plus, I loved the Jedi mind tricking -- you don't need to ask or answer questions, just . . . move along. Perfect.

Watershed Mark said...

LT wrote:
As for Ripley - diehard salesman that he obviously is - why didn't Ripley bid on his own instead of being part of the Lyles Group when they tried to win a top spot? Because he did not have a group with enough scope for a project this big.

As always wrong again LT…Actually; it's because he didn't have Paavo schilling for him and his group, like he does for MWH and all their sub-contractors.

TheOpenEye said...

Based on the famous character from "Seinfeld" and their similar downer, anti-social personalities, wouldn't it be appropriate from now on to refer to Sewertoons as "The Sewer Nazi"?

Her last name is an extra bonus: "The Sewer (Tor)Nazi."

Can we have a bowl of your affordable sewer soup, "Sewer Nazi," no MWH added?

NO!!! Now get the hell outta town!!!

TCG said...

Twenty or so people bitching about every detail while the rest of the town just wants a sewer to be built and this travesty to be over.

alabamasue said...

Thank you TCG! Just build the damn thing already; it'll only get more expensive, and most of us would just like to get on with our lives.

Churadogs said...

Alabamasue sez:"Just build the damn thing already"

this is what's so interesting about some of these Tri W cheerleaders. They act like the county ISN'T moving through the process, like they're NOT building the sewer (the county can't "build the sewer" RIGHT THIS MINUTE, 'BammaSue, they have to go through all the steps required by law to GET TO THE POINT THAT THEY CAN "build the damn thing." Why do you suggest that somehow they're not proceeding with all due speed? Jeeze, give 'em a break. There's hoops everybody has to go through and appeals processes and Coastal Commission hearings are just one of those hoops. And be for you start whining about "anti-sewer obstructionists" please remember that several Coastal Commissioners themselves filed an appeal, which indicates that even they saw the need for some closer attention to aspects of this project, aspects taht had nothing to dow ith "anti-" anything. They're trying to get it right. So were the other appellants -- fix the stuff BEFORE you "build the damned sewer," I say. Saves a lot of time and money than waiting for a train wreck after.

Ron said...

Ann writes:

"And be for you start whining about "anti-sewer obstructionists" please remember that several Coastal Commissioners themselves filed an appeal,"

AND, let's not forget there was also an appeal from the "Tri-W cheerleaders"... which focused more attention on just how embarrassing that disaster actually WAS.

Tri-W cheerleaders, you anti-sewer obstructionists.

Cool poem, Ann.

The Razor said...

"Twenty or so people bitching about every detail while the rest of the town just wants a sewer to be built and this travesty to be over."

There's only 20 people? Even if it was only 20 people, that doesn't change the fact that there are fewer people complaining about the complainers -- and they're anonymous.

"Just build the damn thing already."

Acting in haste will only make waste. No good has come out of pushing for projects without due diligence review and analysis.

Mike said...

Acting in haste...???

How many designs, how many studies, how many reviews, how many analysis, how much cost, how many years will be enough...???

...there are 1,000,000 gallons of liquid human shit and urine being leeched into the magic Los Osos sands every single day, but still the handful of obstructionists want more...will let's call a spade a spade... there will NEVER be enough "due diligence review and analysis" for those few vocal cry babies and their cheerleaders in and around LO...

M said...

c'mon Mike 1 million everyday? I can guarantee you that my wife and I are not disposing 200 gallons a day of what you refer to. Of that particular effluent I would be surprised if it was even 25 gallons a day. If you added in laundry, showers, dishwashing, it might add up to 100 gallons a day. You see, this is where you guys lose any credibility when you spout figures like this. I suppose you are say it is all flushing into the bay. Like the trees and landscape don't soak any of it up? A handfull of people can stop a project being steamrolled by the powers that be? They must be some very powerful people. How much of the County's 7or8 million that has been spent on this been to fight these handfull of people? How much of that money has been paid to groups that have been involved in this sewer for the last 10-15 years? Since were going to be stuck with MWH, why don't they just dig out the old plans and lets get going?
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

Then use 100 gpd... in just the PZ of 4800 home... 480,000 gpd... human, not animal, excretment and soaps and other stuff flushed into the septic... multiply by the past 5 years of delay... 365d x 5y x 480,000 gpd = 876,000,000 gallons have been needlessly leeched into the soil so far and you can guess how much has reached the upper aquifier... but according to some, there is no need for a waste water treatment system in LO...

That is why more and more responsible citizens are saying enough of the endless delays, no more searching the world for some perfect sewer, no more analysizing and putting up with the obstructionists... just build the damn sewer and stop the pollution of our drinking water...

The Razor said...

Yes, acting in haste.

To quote Richard LeGros: "You can 'work hard' at doing something quickly for a long time, and have nothing to show for it."

M said...

So what happened to the 1 million gallons everyday you were shouting? How about the seniors with only one or two in the household showering maybe only two or three times a week, probably getting by on 25 gallons a day? So were probably down to 350,000 gallons a day now. Now how about evaporation, landscape absorbing some effluent? How about rainwater diluting what's in the ground? Are you really that concerned about us polluting our water? You just don't strike me as that sensitive of a guy.
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

How about the families with 2 to 4 kids...??? I happen to shower every day, so do most of my friends... You're trying to split hairs... the crap pouring into our drinking water is appalling, but apparently you don't think it's a problem... keep buying cologne...

M said...

You started this rant by claiming 1,000,0000 gallons every day of crap and urine(not your exact words) coming out of our septic tanks every day. I am simply throwing a disclaimer in there. There is no way all of that is going into our drinking water. Just like it's not all going into the bay.
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

..whatever... you say it's not 1M, so what if it's only 350,000 per day...that's still 638,750 gals of uncontrolled shit already leeched into the soil since the sewer project was stopped... like to drink the LO water or do you drink imported Perrier...??? Wake up, the sewer is coming whether you like it or not...!!!!!! Just how much longer will the 1M or 350T gals per day pour into our drinking water... At least I am sensitive to the pollution, you apprently are insisitive to the effort to clean it up... Keep cheering and paraqding to the BOS... just very foolish and not accomplishing a thing....

Just build the damn sewer... If you don't like it, move...!!!!

M said...

Whatever. And that's 1,277,500,000 since you and your cohorts stopped the County project. If you don't like all the obstructionist then move out of here. Maybe Pandora can find you a nice place to live where neighbors vilify each other.
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

guess you're right... so let's all stop this silly County effort...

you win, we don't need a sewer, let's wait another 30 or 40 years...keep drinking the LO water...

Mike said...

M.... just when will sweet perfek YOU stop vilifying Pandora...???

She gives her energy to the positive aspects of creating parks for SLO County as well as LO... so what's wrong with that...??? She's not the negative out-of-towner who doesn't think LO needs a park... She may not have been the person you wanted on the CSD, but she sure as hell can't be faulted for her desire to make LO a better place with community parks... at least she didn't leave her husband and family to shack up with a bankrupt developer... As far as I can recall, Pandora's name is not on the CSD Bankruptcy filing... but 5 others names are...!!! Pandora never sued the CSD, the County or the State... Go vilify that...!!!!

...and if you object to the use of the work shit, perhaps you should discuss Ann's use of "BatShit"...!!!!

Alon Perlman said...

Hush M&M
Very little of it is going into the Bay, but hush, apparently there is some money available, if we pretend that it does. It is getting into the groundwater and not only nitrates' some of which can be attributed elsewhere. The Coffee and Carbamazapine have to have passed through leach pit/field a septic tank and a human in reverse order. Trace amounts will make it into the lower aquifer. Some of those septic tank effluent makes it into the bay but overall Dilution and distance traveled decrease the amount. There are monitoring stations samples taken etc... Just go out there. Use your eyes. Nose too.

STEP has been formally dead for at least 18 months (?). Deep Gravity pipes (as in what this project is from that date on), act as underground superhighways for transport of groundwater and stormwater downslope, (Carrying any leakage with them) I mentioned it to Paavo during TAC and or later in the process, He answered that there are engineering solutions, (such as seals impervious shunts etc.. my words). It is not clear how much of that is actually going to be done “M”. The groundwater is compromised but somewhat usable. Unfortunately salt water intrusion finger to the specific production well location means there is less availability of good lower aquifer water to mix with. ( more testing more interruptions in service)
Word verification: Cured

Alon Perlman said...

The Coastal Commission are not the Experts on Los Osos Groundwater, or Los Osos anything. Or more specifically; Sarah Wan isn't -Peter Douglass is.

It is not clear to me if the amount of the waters of the project going into direct recharge of the aquifer decreased as a result of the De-Novo Hearing changes.
Certainly, and without any need for Los Osos input, Douglass was not going for Tonini, or for secondary treated at Broderson. Actually there is no public health danger from secondary versus tertiary as long as the waters pass through an adequate vadose zone and additional distance. But it was a regulatory no go and the county should had known that.
But it was obvious to me and some others that the CCC would not go for it and they didn’t.

Certainly the CCC later responded to the concerns of wetland delineation and pump station footprint mitigation. Did that advance environment at a financial cost? Yes to the cost part. The key elements of CCC oversight may had been managed at the initial hearing.

As far as I am concerned the Loss of significant project flows to actual aquifer recharge is the Baby thrown out with the bathwater here. And by that I mean that graywater will not recharge the aquifer and Conservation may have already taken place to a degree.

Just wait till misinterpretations of how the stormwater flows become part of the “solution”, before you all start assessing how really screwed Los Osos is about to become.

Mike said...

hahaha... you are correct Alon, the storm water drainage is a variable that wil be twisted and spun by the uneducated and the emotional hand wringers seeking to halt any sewer collection within LO...

BTW, doesn't the storm water dilute all the septic discharge..??? Dilution being the solution to pollution...??? Especially with our magic sands...

Alon Perlman said...

I've seen Graywater misunderstood and I have heard a lot of wrong assumptions about the stormwater flows. Hence my comments. There are plenty of correct assumptions by various people mixed in. I don't know how many people actually want to stop the Sewer versus want to Improve on it. I do know that in the outcome there may not be much difference.
Due to the prevalence of septic pits and the short distance to the perched aquifer below, the sands can't do their magic, as they could have done with septic fields that would had taken up much of the surface area of the small lots, or with raised septic fields. With the perched aquifer about to become a PARCHED aquifer, that distance to groundwater would increase. That may be good for outside the PZ flows, (Lowering of high groundwater levels) since out of PZ septic contributions will continue. There is dilution by rainwater or by partly processed groundwater (traveling from the southeast discharge points and being “Processed underground” mostly to pass and dilute the discharge points closer to the bay.) that is why the bay discharges are insignificant and why the groundwater is “almost good enough”, and is actually used in a small proportion (mixed). But it is now polluted (past or close to a variety of thresholds). If the soils in Los Osos were typical California clays, the pollution would had been much worse by now. (Carrying capacity?) Of course the extra building didn't help, but that has always been a moot point.
This does not get into the lack of a specific discharge point to pollution proof and those legalities.

Sewertoons said...

Ann says:

"And be for you start whining about "anti-sewer obstructionists" please remember that several Coastal Commissioners themselves filed an appeal…"

Now were those appeals filed before or after the commissioners had been lobbied by the appellants?

Churadogs said...

Toonces, from day one of ALL the variants of the sewer project(s), (including the formation of the CSD, The Ponds of Avalon, Tri W, today) the CC has been lobbied by people from all sides of the issue. If I read Alon's comments (above)correctly, it sounds like Peter Douglas wasn't satisfied with what the County was proposing even before the plans got to his front door, let alone any "appeals" by anybody.

Sewertoons said...

Isn't Peter Douglas in charge of the staff? Why then did the staff report state "no substantial issues?"

As for Douglas and Tonini, the SLO Planning Commission here put a stop to that. The County would have no leg to stand on nixing Tri-W if it didn't also, for the same reasons, nix Giacomazzi. We are just lucky that the Clark Valley Road people did not sue. Or unlucky if you don't want a sewer.

Churadogs said...

Toonces sez:"Isn't Peter Douglas in charge of the staff? Why then did the staff report state "no substantial issues?""

That's a question for Peter.

Sewertoons said...

Or maybe you just don't like the fact that he did not change the staff report or disallow it? No, you ask him, I'm satisfied that as head of staff, he allowed that report to be issued, and clearly you are not.

Which brings me back to the point that substantial lobbying by certain, not all, appellants led to the delay by raising a scattershot of possible, but not truly significant substantial issues - none of which raised and accepted were the desired outcome of a full, De Novo hearing to allow Step back in.

Look at the ex-parte chats with the commissioners that the appellants thought they could persuade. The answers as to why this was delayed are right there.

Churadogs said...

toonces, you clearly misunderstand the process. Ex parte chats, appeals, etc. are all part of the process. You sound like you think they're some unusual, bad thing. They aren't. They're built in from day one. And they're important because if you don't allow all the dance steps to be completed as intended you can end up in court with a real "delay." So, if you want this sewer plan to proceed with all due speed, don't whine about "delays" when what you're actually refering to is simply part of the total process. And don't make assumptions about things you "think" I'm thinking. you're invariably wrong. If you want to know WHY Douglas filed an appeal on issues that differed from "his" staff report, you'll have to ask him. Unlike you, I do not claim to be a mind reader.

Mike said...

After reading and considering your last post Ann, I really do not understand why you host this blog other than to see your thoughts in print...!!!! You certainly are the epitome of curt vindictiveness...

It is very obvious that you disagree with sewertoons and everyone who thinks the delays to a sewer construction are way beyond the "process"... You relish in nit-picking and apparently strive to bring about any argument to delay the sewer selection...!!!! You complain that the process is not thorough enough and then cry that you are not against a sewer... horse feathers, you have cheered on every effort to halt any sewer, anywhere in Los Osos... I guess that is the only honesty pounded out of your keyboard, YOU personally don't want any sewer and you disagree with anyone who wants a sewer...

I'm thankful, as is most of this community, that the County is proceeding inspite of your efforts... You may not be a mind reader, but like to tell those of us you disagree with what we're supposedly thinking... The sewer is coming Ann, get used to it, no matter what your good intentions might have been, the community and the County disagree with you and your endless questioning of the need, the selection, those responsible for making the real decisions and the legal process...!!!

...and just so you won't have to hurt yourself trying to read my mind, I post this, not in anger, but in disagreement with the words you choose to answer those you disagree with... Have a nice day...!!!!

The Razor said...

To lobby is to advocate with the intention of influencing a decision made by government officials. Excusing one group for lobbying (County Public Works) and chastising another (the "obstructionists") is a double standard. The intent or purpose to lobby does not eliminate or justify the double standard.

LOWWP delays have resulted from litigation, inaction and a breach of fiduciary duty; the elements described do not pertain to only one group or belief system. To state that only one "side" is responsible for delays appeals to only opinion, not facts.

Sewertoons said...

Delays due to stopping the last project has and will continue to degraded our aquifers. Let's just put it that way. We would have had a treatment plant that would recharge the lower aquifer and clean up the upper one (so we could use it to blend or for well-head clean-up) done by 2008. We will now wait until 2014 or 2015 to get this present project done. Do the math on the feet of salt water that we are sucking in yearly. Tell me stopping the project was a good idea based on this.

Sewertoons said...

OK Ann. Ex-Parte chats. Who did them and why?

I guess if Step had been the collection system chosen, there would have been little need for the other folderol ex-partes used as window dressing to nudge Step back into the project. And if they were used to stand on their own as objections, it was done as ego stroking, or an absolute misunderstanding of the dire straits of our basin-- Or perhaps, a total disregard of or blindness to the difference between $4 million or $16 million to ease the cost of the project. That was the result of these ex-partes, and I hope that their authors realized the additional cost from that - along with the additional cost that their suggestions have demanded the project to bear.

Step was over - many posters on this blog here stated that from day one of the County taking over the project. But it certainly was over by the time the SLO Planning Commission was done. And it was over, like it or not, by the preference of the survey responses. The Coastal Commission does not force a community to use one particular collection system over another, and the fact that the project's peer review stated that either system was equivalent wasn't by any means enough push to force the CC to step out of its purview to demand Step be put back in. It was absurd to bring that back as an objection to waste the time and money of so many.

Ex-partes ARE part of the process. It was simply poor judgement to pick the topics picked on which to have those ex-partes, and easy to see the politics of those bringing the objections. They are well-known to be against the County project.

Churadogs said...

Mikeee sez:"YOU personally don't want any sewer and you disagree with anyone who wants a sewer..."

True to form, Mike, you're making stuff up again. Like clockwork, you are. Clockwork.

Toonces sez:"Step was over - many posters on this blog here stated that from day one of the County taking over the project."

Indeed, true, from Noel King's day one. So why did the county go through the dog and pony show of The Process and the TAC and the Best Technology rising to the top and all the other time-wasting folderol? And Gibson babbles on about "transparency." bwahahahah.

Mike said...

Well Ann... instead of explaining what you think I "make up", you simply hide behind your narrow uncompromising view...

So what have I 'made up"...??? My name isn't on any lawsuit, yours is...!!! and that lawsuit lost along with the others filed against the lawsuit... and was I making it up that Julie left her family to shack up with Jeff Edwards...??? I'm fully behind the County's efforts to complete the sewer that was taken from the LOCSD. You on the other hand, seem to be looking under every grain of sand (both real and imaginary) to find fault in the County process... Your views seem quite counter to solving the very on-going pollution of our drinking water, but seem to be just a never-ending crusade to (pick your own term) delay/obstruct/stall/halt any waste treatment for the community... Intead of childishly wasting your time saying I'm making things up, why don't you correct me...??? You know you can't... trying looking in a mirror sometime when you look for someone who needs correcting...!!!!

Spectator said...

Ann: so what are you willing to pay a month for sewer?

Alon: good report!

Mike: correct as usual.

Sewertoons: Good defense to faulty reasoning.

Me, Jon: I don't think this sewer will ever be built. California is broke, The U.S. is upside down, and everybody will have to save money to save their families! Sewer water is not bad to drink if there is nothing else, just add chlorine.

Sewertoons said...

Ann, the Step proponents made the County go through the paces to evaluate Step. The County hoped that they could show that it wouldn't work, and in fact they did do that. The problem was and is, you and the others refuse to understand these things. I think we all get that you don't like the results of Step not winning. Well, 49 point something percent of us didn't agree with Measure B, but we had to accept those results. Now it is your turn to accept these results. We are getting a gravity collection system - and you are getting it out of town. We all will get delayed help for the aquifers. Time to move forward as best we can.

Churadogs said...

Mikee sez: "So what have I 'made up"...???"

O.K. Mike, here's something you just made up.Mikeee sez: "YOU personally don't want any sewer and you disagree with anyone who wants a sewer..."

See? Made up out of whole cloth.

and this one "Your views seem quite counter to solving the very on-going pollution of our drinking water, but seem to be just a never-ending crusade to (pick your own term) delay/obstruct/stall/halt any waste treatment for the community.."

Au contraire, Mikee, from day one I have asked for a CLEAN process (aka as the Chinese Menue and aka The County "Process") A clean process way back would have been much, much faster than the train wreck that ensued. A clean process as promised by the county (hahahah) would also have been much faster and more transparent and wouldn't have involved the Planning Commission having to step in and spend loads of time changing everything -- that would have been resolved earlier using Paavo's "best technology" scenario (which was dumped. Ah, so many thumbs on the scale)

So, Mikee, my views are NOT counter to solving our drinking water problems. Indeed, I still fully support the Sustainibility Plan to start retrofit/conservation TODAY, not years down the line.That program should also have been part of the "best technology" efforts of a clean process.

So, I will ask my question again: did the County (Paavo, Bruce) keep their promises to this community?

Toonces, there is a difference between "can" and "may." STEP can be done. But it was decided from day one that it "may not" be done in Los Osos. Even the BOS had to -- heh-heh-- admit that the community survey was spun, and, lacking real numbers, the voters were picking a system on best guestimates. Do the majority of homeowners here care that the county's promises weren't really kept? No, they do not.

Do I care? Yes and no. My main criticism has been to the promises the county made to this community. (And to the sad fact that by focusing on "waste" and not "water" they really screwed up big time (see above re the sustainibility program & etc.) As for the results, I've long noted here that the voters wanted three things: (1)affordable sewer,(2) plant out of town, (3)a "vote" on the type of system, with real costs. They got #2 and a fudged #3. #1 was impossible from day one, but it's possible that they may end up with a sorta #1 at least as compared with Tri-W.

As for "Time to move forward as best we can." I hear that here all the time. What makes you think we're not? Comments and criticism on a blog do not equal delayed projects.

Sewertoons said...

Ann, maybe you can explain why the peer review stated that Step or gravity were functionally equivalent. Step was not called out to be "the best technology" was it? (Those were the SALESMEN telling you that).

You may now say - "Oh, the peer review was faulty," as I have heard others claim - so if you do, keep in mind that will paint the one in 2006 as faulty too.

You and a small number of individuals feel that "thumbs were on the scale." Most of us who followed the project do not feel that way. And homeowner apathy follows every decision making process; deciding this sewer is not a special sort of apathy.

Ann, who is going to pay for starting the project early?

If we don't get the bridge loan - by passing the 2nd 218, we won't have the money to do anything at all, so please keep in mind that campaigning to stop that 218 will only bring Los Osos less water conservation. The CSD has only $30,000 a year to spend on this. That is what I mean about moving forward - passing that 2nd rates and charges 218. Please don't campaign against it.

Churadogs said...

Toonces sez:" Please don't campaign against it."

Who are you speaking to here?

Sewertoons said...

The readers. You have supporters among the people who held up the banner at the Supes meeting protesting against the second 218. Without it, our aquifers will wait again for any meaningful remedy to the problems.

Just curious Ann, the LOSG wanted $5 million of project money spent up front on conservation measures. Where did Keith think that this money was going to come from - we the voters?