tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post115659943170735556..comments2023-10-28T03:14:44.519-07:00Comments on Calhouns Can(n)ons: NewsstandGreghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04099049885765768069noreply@blogger.comBlogger112125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157171738561974282006-09-01T21:35:00.000-07:002006-09-01T21:35:00.000-07:00The Fines should be removed! What possible good co...The Fines should be removed! What possible good could the fines do? what way will the fines help speed a project now?<BR/> The fines are completly a punishment now.<BR/> Who will be compensated for wrongdoing? If as Ron says it all goes back to us whats the point?<BR/> what fines are for?, to PUNISH the perpatrators!<BR/> WHAT perpitrators?<BR/> Can anyone PROVE that someone in the doomed 45 is directly responsible for the sewer situation?<BR/> No hell No! <BR/> Then why must they be singled out to pay punishment BEFORE anyone else!<BR/> The CDO's MUST BE FOUGHT!<BR/> The fines must be waived!<BR/> (probably happen anyway in he chapter 9 hearings).Mike Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14883036796650379771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157168218327452242006-09-01T20:36:00.000-07:002006-09-01T20:36:00.000-07:00Thanx shark for the hope about the fines. No matte...Thanx shark for the hope about the fines. No matter what side you are on, the fines are unwelcome and a horrible burden to add to the bankruptcy.Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04501351678541088868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157165056816175732006-09-01T19:44:00.000-07:002006-09-01T19:44:00.000-07:00Yes Ron, many of us do pay attention. Rescinding ...Yes Ron, many of us do pay attention. Rescinding the Statement of Overriding Considerations and cancelling the contracts were moves made by the current board to make the TriW site less attractive to the County.<BR/><BR/>This is exactly the same sort of "scorched earth" policy that Ann complained about when the previous board chose to start construction just prior to the recall election. If it was wrong for the previous board to take actions to make moving the sewer less attractive it should be wrong for the current board to do the same thing. However, I've yet to hear a complaint about these recent actions from Ann and other supporters of the current board. It would seem that back a year ago their outrage was founded in the impact of the action on the project location more than on whether the action was right or wrong.<BR/><BR/>About Evoy's comment, it was like Polhemus' comment. Both essentially said that out-of-town was more expensive ... mostly because of the time delay. I don't think that a solid argument could have been made in 2000 was for sure cheaper than out of town ... but comparable plants would be about the same cost in both places with a nod toward TriW because it would take less pipe.<BR/><BR/>About the thing that only you and I remember, Ron ... Dan Blesky's statment (last fall) that the state had told him that they would restart the funding and the contractors would be back to work within a week ... have you learned anything else about that matter? (To me it seemed like he was just trying to distract people from the Trib argument that out-of-town was more expensive than TriW.)<BR/><BR/>Sewertoons ... I would expect that if AB2701 is signed into law, no fines (other than those imposed during the first ACL hearing) would be imposed.Shark Inlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07308339749797881391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157154349309239732006-09-01T16:45:00.000-07:002006-09-01T16:45:00.000-07:00The fines are ongoing at $10,000 per day, BTW, and...The fines are ongoing at $10,000 per day, BTW, and the contractor's are still in court, so let's add something more into the money mix.Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04501351678541088868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157131829713282492006-09-01T10:30:00.000-07:002006-09-01T10:30:00.000-07:00To Anon 10:00 PM, 8/29:Good pull! Nice job finding...To Anon 10:00 PM, 8/29:<BR/><BR/>Good pull! Nice job finding that, and, yes, I do remember that.<BR/><BR/>And my point there was: here's Evoy, saying an out of town site is cheaper. That's important, because we were always officially told that Tri-Dub was selected because it was the cheapest.<BR/><BR/>Well, if that was the case, then why is another official now saying out-of-town sites may indeed be cheaper?<BR/><BR/>As for this:<BR/><BR/><I>"but that is without the addition of RB fines, and many of the external costs associated with a move - and without a discussion of what alternative financing may cost."</I><BR/><BR/>Well, first of all, if you're on the side of Taxpayers Watch, you guys might want to stop bringing up the fines. After all, it was Taxpayers Watch that lobbied -- hard -- for those fines.<BR/><BR/>And, keep in mind, those fines ended up being $6 million. Doesn't that sound a little drop-in-the-buckety to you? Also, according to RWQCB regulations, when they collect fines, those fines can, and should, go right back into the community to help clean the water. Yet I see the, "The got us fined!" argument <I>everywhere.</I><BR/><BR/>Do you realize that as I type it is very possible that it is illegal to build a sewer plant at Tri-Dub because the only document that allowed it there -- the Statement of Overriding Considerations -- was recently rescinded. That document overrode the entire environmental review process for the sewer plant location, and it's completely invalid.<BR/><BR/>However, no one talks about that, including the <I>Trib</I>.<BR/><BR/>Which one do you think has had more of an impact on your wallet? $6 million in fines, that has yet to be collected, and when it is, it will likely go right back into your community, or fabricating a document to override the EIR, and needlessly lock in a more expensive, according to Evoy, sewer plant location that the community doesn't want?<BR/><BR/>An Anon said:<BR/><BR/><I>"Actually, i'm enjoying the hell out of the "anonymous" post garnering all the attention."</I><BR/><BR/>As I said early, buried in all that profanity are some very good takes. Plus I love the "Have a nice day:)" sign-off... funny.Ronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14156410299483542733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157123656809096632006-09-01T08:14:00.000-07:002006-09-01T08:14:00.000-07:00After reading all the "interesting" blogs here, I ...After reading all the "interesting" blogs here, I wonder how many of you who consistantly call the present board "liars", took to note the post by Annon 5:33pm 8/29?...or is it one of those opinions you choose to ignore since it explains the motives of the current BOD kinda clear, like?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157086351066245832006-08-31T21:52:00.000-07:002006-08-31T21:52:00.000-07:00So ... you are willing to pay about $100-$125 for ...So ... you are willing to pay about $100-$125 for an out-of-town plant.<BR/><BR/>So, if that $125/month cannot be achieved but out-of-town costs closer to $300/month (and you've given us no reason to doubt $300/month or more) what are you going to do?<BR/><BR/>A reasoned look at the Ripley numbers and financing costs shows that it will be more than TriW, even if energy costs suffer horrible inflation. Show us where Richard's cost analyses are in error. Show us that the RWQCB will sign off on no denitrification. Show us that the RWQCB will sign off on a plan which assumes that we'll cut our water use by more than 50%. Show us how Ripley's numbers account for inflation during the time until contstruction starts (hint: they don't). Once you show us these things (assumptions behind the Ripley claim of $150/month) we can talk more because reasonable people agree that out-of-town will cost more.Shark Inlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07308339749797881391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157082359351737502006-08-31T20:45:00.000-07:002006-08-31T20:45:00.000-07:00Shark said: "Phrased another way, how much more wo...Shark said: "Phrased another way, how much more would you be willing to pay each and every month to have the plant out of town?<BR/><BR/>Just curious..."<BR/><BR/>To answer your question Shark, I would be willing to and will pay about half as much for an out-of-town project as I would for Tri-W.<BR/><BR/>Unless, of course, you're willing to believe Dick's(R. LeGross) numbers that he crunched while he was in the nut house. I'm not willing to base my decision on the numbers of a disgruntled, corrupt, tossed-out-on-his-ass, X-government official. Sorry. I'll go with the Ripley system that uses about half as much energy and doesn't require sludge trucks hauling your(our) shit out of town everyday......<BR/>by the way, if you haven't heard, the plant in Santa Maria has stated to members of the public that it can not handle and will not accept our sludge. So, I guess these trucks will be on a road to nowhere. But, I'm sure this will all come out before the County decides on the Ripley plan. <BR/><BR/>Have a nice day:)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1157034301986430912006-08-31T07:25:00.000-07:002006-08-31T07:25:00.000-07:00Mike sez"Wow! Ann is 102 comments a record?"Jeeze,...Mike sez"Wow! Ann is 102 comments a record?"<BR/><BR/>Jeeze, I think so. Pretty amazing. See what an anonymous potty mouth can accomplish? Yikes.Churadogshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05362538114791652208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156997711554977392006-08-30T21:15:00.000-07:002006-08-30T21:15:00.000-07:00Wow! Ann is 102 comments a record?Wow! Ann is 102 comments a record?Mike Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14883036796650379771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156989120850437122006-08-30T18:52:00.000-07:002006-08-30T18:52:00.000-07:00OH shit! Beat the assholes senseless? Maybe for pu...OH shit! Beat the assholes senseless? Maybe for public safety disolution is the ONLY solution!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156988204197029102006-08-30T18:36:00.000-07:002006-08-30T18:36:00.000-07:00I keep having recurring dreams of goons with baseb...I keep having recurring dreams of goons with baseball bats. <BR/><BR/>Since people can't settle their views with reason, violence may be the only answer. If it is ok for unions, maybe property owners can march. There is a lot of money at stake here.<BR/><BR/>Is there some sort of a religious war going on in Los Osos? Who is the first to die for it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156980612088659062006-08-30T16:30:00.000-07:002006-08-30T16:30:00.000-07:00Actually, i'm enjoying the hell out of the "anonym...Actually, i'm enjoying the hell out of the "anonymous" post garnering all the attention. I think whoever it is, is just verbalizing what many of us feel. I pretty much agree 100% with what is said. In todays world, foul language is the norm being fed to us in every walk of our life. Tv, movies, radio ads. Even business's use play on words tactics like an ad I heard recently on radio about an energy drink called "Wake The F Up". Now what do you suppose they were implying?<BR/>Some of the response's to those posts crack me up. Do you really think people log on to this site to become more informed? When Ann posts other than her opinion stuff is where I get my information. All the comments are nothing more than everyones opinion of what it means.<BR/>For all of you that say you pass over this blogger because of the foul language, you sure seem to be commenting on it alot.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156956215356718012006-08-30T09:43:00.000-07:002006-08-30T09:43:00.000-07:00So Ann, how do you feel about continuing to sue to...So Ann, how do you feel about continuing to sue to uphold Measure B. Was (and IS, as it has been appealed once again) that a wise choice?Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04501351678541088868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156954764420092282006-08-30T09:19:00.000-07:002006-08-30T09:19:00.000-07:00Our foul mouthed anonymous friend wrote that it is...Our foul mouthed anonymous friend wrote that it is okay to swear here but not at a LOCSD meeting. (Hmmmm ... is the swearing ban only on boardmembers or does it apply to members of the audience as well, I wonder what he has in mind.) His arguement is that kids could see the show on TV or have been in the audience and their parents should have the expectation that the meeting has a PG rating at worst but on the internet, on the other hand, parents should expect their kids would see foul language in a sewer discussion website.<BR/><BR/>Come on ... it would seem that your reaction is over the top. Both situations would tend to only have sewer wonks involved. Kids would be unlikely in both situations. I was just trying to take your (silly) argument that Richard's words were horribly wrong but your regular foul language was okay and point out the logical problem.<BR/><BR/>However what I see as an even greater problem is your lack of willingness to discuss any issues.<BR/><BR/>Again I would suggest you actually discuss the issues. That would be helpful. Other discussions, while perhaps interesting for a while, are mostly a waste of time.<BR/><BR/>Oh yeah ... you may have missed this, but I am not a TW person. I was pretty open minded toward the whole "move the sewer" group back when this whole thing started up bigtime ... mostly because a good friend of mine was very much in their camp and he is pretty smart ... but I found that while the previous board had made some mistakes, the "solutions" proposed by CCLO and LOTTF and Julie and Al would seem to make the situation even worse.<BR/><BR/>It sounds like you, along with Ron, believe that the TriW site is so bad for a WWTF that it is worth paying any price to fix it. That is essentially where Ron and I disagree. I don't think it is as bad as he does and even if it wasn't the best choice in 2001, the costs associated with moving the WWTF make the TriW site a clear winner. <BR/><BR/>Let me ask you a (only somewhat hypothetical) question, just so that we have a good sense of where you stand. Would you rather pay $200/month for sewer services but the WWTF is at TriW or would you rather pay $300/month for sewer services but the WWTF is "out of town"? Phrased another way, how much more would you be willing to pay each and every month to have the plant out of town?<BR/><BR/>Just curious...Shark Inlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07308339749797881391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156948980383763722006-08-30T07:43:00.000-07:002006-08-30T07:43:00.000-07:00Hi Ann,The measure ITSELF and its' IMPLIMENTATION ...Hi Ann,<BR/><BR/>The measure ITSELF and its' IMPLIMENTATION has caused the danmage to Los Osos, not fighting it.<BR/><BR/>Again, you blog only speculation and opinion about the affects of opposing Measure B. No facts, just spin. <BR/><BR/>Regards, Richard LeGrosAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156940746249259482006-08-30T05:25:00.000-07:002006-08-30T05:25:00.000-07:00Inlet sez:"You are right that Richard's explanatio...Inlet sez:"You are right that Richard's explanation for why they voted to sue to stop Measure B sounds pretty weak. However, when you recall that Measure B was ruled illegal in every way and that it has caused no end of trouble for our community, I have to say that that whatever the LOCSD board's reasons were for suing to block Measure B, the decision was the right one. Are you seriously asking us to believe that the board shouldn't have opposed Measure B? Are you seriously asking us to believe that the LOCSD should have taken no action to prevent a travesty?"<BR/><BR/>Travesty or not, Measure B ended up on the ballot, as I knew it would, given the history of initiatives getting on the ballot in this State, no matter how cockamamie, and so ran its course anyway. My point was that suing to STOP it from getting on the ballot was the very, very costly mistake that helped trigger the rockfall that triggered other rockfalls, etc, that finally ended in bankruptcy down the hill. In short, suing to stop Measure B didn't work AND cost the community dearly -- so far as I can see it was a complete lose/lose decision.Worse, it sent an awful message to the community that helped the recall, not hindered it. So, that's three to zero. Ummmm, not good.Churadogshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05362538114791652208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156924651651286022006-08-30T00:57:00.000-07:002006-08-30T00:57:00.000-07:00You've got to be kidding me, right Shark?Shark say...You've got to be kidding me, right Shark?<BR/><BR/>Shark says:"You are right about the use of the "'F' bomb". On the other hand, the tone of at least one poster here so far (you, I believe, I have little patience trying to figure out which anonymous is which) surpasses a mild "'F' bomb" it would be sort of funny to have the foul language user here complain about Richard's one slip in public. <B><I>Frankly, this is a public forum in the same fashion.</B></I>"<BR/><BR/>Did you really think I'd let this one go? Do you really think the people of Los Osos are this stupid?<BR/>Are you actually compairing a public blog where anybody can say anything to a Municipal Government Meeting? Are you actually saying that there is no difference between someone who posts in a blog using foul language and an Elected Representative of the Community using foul language at a Municipal Government Meeting? Are you on the crack pipe again?<BR/>I'll say it again incase you missed it the first time......<BR/>"there is a difference between using "colorful" language in a blog and dropping the "F" bomb as an elected Representative of your Community at a Municipal Government Meeting. A very, very BIG difference.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Shark goes onto say: "There is no restriction that would prevent children from reading your comments (something that could easily happen in a friend of mine's home ... he reads this blog and he's been known to leave the comment section open in the past ... before he noticed your postings)."<BR/><BR/>You and your Taxpayers Waste buddies have really lost it. Let me get this straight.......let me relax and take a deep breath......<BR/>If your Taxpayers Waste "friend" visits a public blog that might have some foul language and your "friend" <B><I>leaves it on the screen for his kids to see</B></I> this is somehow my fault? What you're saying is that your friend's negligence as a parent is <I>my fault</I>? This would be like dad downloading a bunch of porno then walking away from his computer for his kids to see and then blaming it on the porno website cause his kids saw it. This is exactly like sewertoons saying "if someone tells you a lie it's your fault for believing the lie. I'm sorry Shark. If your friend wants to leave a bunch of foul language on his computer screen for his kids to see, it's his fault not mine. If you want to give me his name and number, I'd be glad to report him to social services.<BR/>I guess it has to do with expectations. If I'm surfing the net where you can find all kinds of sick and twisted and foul stuff and I'm just talking about the regular news sites and blogs. (look at the news stories just from the last few weeks)...if I'm surfing the net even if it's just the everyday news sites, I'm not going to do it with a kid on my lap or even in the same room . If I'm at a site that has adult content, pg-13 or "R" or "X" rated and there are kids around. It's MY responsibility to close the site before I get up from the computer. This is something that <B>"I"</B> have control over. <BR/>But, If I am a parent at home watching a Municipal Government Meeting(something that I have no control over) I, as a parent, should NOT have to worry about my kids hearing one of my elected Representative say;<B>"I HAVE FUCKING BALLS"</B><BR/><BR/>Finally Sharks Sparks says" It was suggested that I have some association with Taxpayers Watch. <BR/>This would not be true in any way."<BR/><BR/>RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT. Ok. We believe you. Wink, wink.<BR/><BR/>Haven't we gone over this? I think we have.........<BR/><BR/>oh yes......remember this.......<BR/><I>this is the problem shark. i've been following this blog for about a year. i know and ann knows and everybody that knows, knows.............you out-of-context miss quote people and flat out make stuff up ad nauseum, ad infinitum. hell, i remember when you use to start off your posts by saying you were unbiased, impartial, and undecided and then would write three paragraphs about how tri-w was the only answer and how the new CSD sucked. i mean, don't get me wrong shark, you seem like a pretty smart guy but when you spin out of control like this it kills your creditability. i guess you must have dropped out of the karl rove "get anybody to believe anything(better, cheaper, faster) let me bend you over so i can fuck you up the ass" school of spin. anybody that knows what's going on really does know how full of shit you are. sorry. i guess your hope is that people who don't totally know what is going on will drop in and believe what you write is true. i guess i can't knock you for trying as long as you can sleep with the full knowledge that you're a mutha fucking liar. oops sorry, that just slipped out. what i meant to say was.....i guess i can't knock you for trying as long as you can sleep with the full knowledge that you're a mammy ramming, mongrel, sphincter....</I><BR/><BR/>have a nice day:)<BR/><BR/>p.s. it's your fault if your kids see this. not mine. neener, neener, neenerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156918277487945782006-08-29T23:11:00.000-07:002006-08-29T23:11:00.000-07:00Also, I believe a bit of clarification is in order...Also, I believe a bit of clarification is in order. It was suggested that I have some association with Taxpayers Watch. <BR/><BR/>This would not be true in any way.<BR/><BR/>While I tend to think they make more sense than the current board or Keith or Gail, I am also mistrustful of anyone who jumps too quickly to "we have to dissolve the CSD". TW did a good thing when the challenged Measure B in the courts, but I am not yet convinced that dissolution is best.Shark Inlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07308339749797881391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156917908881897492006-08-29T23:05:00.000-07:002006-08-29T23:05:00.000-07:00You are right about the use of the "'F' bomb". On...You are right about the use of the "'F' bomb". On the other hand, the tone of at least one poster here so far (you, I believe, I have little patience trying to figure out which anonymous is which) surpasses a mild "'F' bomb" it would be sort of funny to have the foul language user here complain about Richard's one slip in public. Frankly, this is a public forum in the same fashion. There is no restriction that would prevent children from reading your comments (something that could easily happen in a friend of mine's home ... he reads this blog and he's been known to leave the comment section open in the past ... before he noticed your postings).<BR/><BR/>In any case, the issue here isn't who has the foulest mouth or who has the most flowerly language. The question is what is best for our community.<BR/><BR/>To that end I believe that you insulted Richard when addressing his cost estimates for each of the possible WWTF sites rather than addressing any problems with his cost estimates. If you would like to help our community you could get with the program and point out why Richard's conclusions about whether Ripley or TriW are accurate or not. You could point toward the best choice for our CSD board or you could explain why dissolution is good or bad for us at this point in time. You could discuss why AB2701 is good or bad. You could actually address the issues we face next rather than simply vent.Shark Inlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07308339749797881391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156914203225819422006-08-29T22:03:00.000-07:002006-08-29T22:03:00.000-07:00you guys are really, really cracking me up and you...you guys are really, really cracking me up and you illustrate the hypocrisy of all the liars at Taxpayers Waste.......<BR/><BR/>shark says;"If you're going to try to lock horns with Richard you shouldn't get all fussy about his decorum when your own manners are even worse. Double standards show sloppy thinking."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Well Shark.......<BR/>First, there is a difference between using "colorful" language in a blog and dropping the <B>"F" bomb</B> as an elected Representative of your Community at a public meeting in a public forum that is telecast into family homes where it could be heard within the earshot of children..........<BR/>I would say........a very, very BIG difference.<BR/><BR/>Second, I've already locked horns with Richard LeGros. I locked horns with him last fall and we tossed his foul mouth ASS(I'm sorry, that just slipped out) we tossed his hind parts out of the corral. <BR/>Are you guys sure it's not the facts of my post that expose all your bullshit lies and spin and the history of all the mass distruction that has been caused in our Community by the Solutions Group aka Taxpayers Waste?<BR/><BR/>to anon8:54......<BR/>I assume your post refers to your Taxpayers Waste buddy anon7:35...<BR/>But, since you'd rather talk about vile epithets and gutter talk, your buddy Richard is the potty mouth King of Los Osos. Like I said, it's no secret why Dick LeGross was the biggest LOSER in the recall election. His broadcast declaration to the whole Community that he has, in Richards words(not mine).....<B>FUCKING BALLS</B> this pretty much locked up the crown title for him has BIGGEST LOSER IN LOS OSOS. I agree with you Shark and Anon 8:54.....why would anybody listen to anything this idiot has to say?<BR/><BR/>I was honestly very glad to hear Richard say "<B>I HAVE FUCKING BALLS</B>"(Richards words, not mine). Based on his mean spirited nastiness and anger that he always displayed at the meetings, I always pegged him to be a neuter.<BR/><BR/>But, since you're obviously Taxpayers Waste anon8:54, I'm sure you have Richard's email address. Could you give it to me? I'd love to forward him your post. <BR/>I'm sure he could use the advise.<BR/><BR/>Have a nice day:)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156914001031490602006-08-29T22:00:00.000-07:002006-08-29T22:00:00.000-07:00Ron says (1:49 PM, January 08, 2006):'It appears t...Ron says (1:49 PM, January 08, 2006):<BR/><BR/>'It appears that moving the site out of town may indeed be cheaper.'<BR/>-- State Water Board Chief of Financial Assistance, Barbara Evoy, October 24, 2005."<BR/><BR/>Another poster quotes the entire sentence:<BR/><BR/>>>> Barabara Evoy 10/24/05 5:52 PM<BR/>"They ran through different scenarios and penciled them out. Tomorrow they will add detail. It appears that moving the site out of town may indeed be cheaper, but that is without the addition of RB fines, and many of the external costs associated with a move - and without a discussion of what alternative financing may cost."<BR/><BR/>Ron says (11:12 AM, August 29,2006):<BR/><BR/>"An Anon said:<BR/><BR/>(Ron, you remember the Sorrel Marks quote you manipulated from a water board hearing?)"<BR/><BR/>No... but I'm curious. What was the quote, do you remember?"<BR/><BR/>My bad! It was Barbara Envoy's comment, not Sorrel Marks that you distorted. I apologize profusely!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156910062436597962006-08-29T20:54:00.000-07:002006-08-29T20:54:00.000-07:00To any and all who have displayed such foul langua...To any and all who have displayed such foul language as to make a longshoreman blush:<BR/><BR/>Anyone who has to resort to school ground insults shows just how juvenile they are.<BR/><BR/>If you cannot disagree with another person and express your words in terms other than vile epithets, then perhaps you need to purchase a dictionary, so you can learn all the wonderful nuances of the English language.<BR/><BR/>Your gutter talk is making any thinking person skip over your blog and onto one that displays a little forethought, not just a grade school display of everything nasty you have ever heard.<BR/><BR/>I for one, would not give your comment a second glance, the first minute I saw your gutter utterances.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156908550802729692006-08-29T20:29:00.000-07:002006-08-29T20:29:00.000-07:00To our anonymous friend...I am not sure that you w...To our anonymous friend...<BR/><BR/>I am not sure that you want to be so snotty toward Richard when your only comeback to him on the TriW versus Riply cost analyses is an insult.<BR/><BR/>If you're going to try to lock horns with Richard you shouldn't get all fussy about his decorum when your own manners are even worse. Double standards show sloppy thinking.<BR/><BR/>Note: I don't actually care too much if you're going to use foul language, but please realize that some people (I am one of those) tend to ignore the postings of those who are "overly flowery" in the way they write.Shark Inlethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07308339749797881391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13758431.post-1156907594383087812006-08-29T20:13:00.000-07:002006-08-29T20:13:00.000-07:00Nice comeback. Is that all you've got?Like Dick Le...Nice comeback. <BR/>Is that all you've got?<BR/>Like Dick Le Gross, you can't dispute the facts so all you can do is take cheap shots?<BR/><BR/>Well, im sure your mother has had sex with everyone in town including you. Sorry, unlike your momma, that's not the way I roll.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com