Oh, goody, looks like Los Osos will have another Battle Royale coming up, again. Yes, it's the French Fries War Redux, the battle over whether a McDonalds will be allowed to open in the old drive-thru bank building in the Vons/Ace shopping center.
And there's the rub -- the drive thru. For some reason, that's become the sticking point. Anti-McErs object on account of air pollution from all the idling cars, and a jammed up parking lot as hundreds of cars waiting for the drive-thru back up in the lot, creating a humongous mess. And they are also concerned about all those burger-stuffed cars making a traffic mess as they attempt to get out of the Von's lot and onto Los Osos Valley Road or double back through the lot to 10th St.
The whole traffic jam notion is odd to me because I've driven by both McDonalds and Burger King in Morro Bay at various "busy" times and have seen, at most, 5-6 cars lined up, a line that didn't even get backed up into the stores' own parking areas. But I gather from comments I've read that folks presume that half the town will arrive every day at 5:30 to get burgers, which would indeed cause a mess. On the other hand, I've been out and about town at various "food-busy" times and have yet to see any eatery -- fast or not -- jammed up. Indeed, it seems that lack of customers for cooked food -- fast or sit-down slow -- seems to be the problem here, as restaurants come and go with sad regularity.
Now, if an In-and-Out Burger were being proposed . . . . well, that would be another story.)
One interesting take on the drive-thru came from BOS candidate, Muril Clift, who did observe that he could see one benefit to a drive through and that would be for parents with young kids; it's a hassle to unbuckle all the kids out of their safety seats just so they could dash into the place just to get a Coke, so a drive-thru would make that process easier. Of course, my take on that is this: "Hey Mom, keep the kids buckled up. You shouldn't be feeding your children that crap in the first place. Drive on. "
In addition to the pollution of thousands of idling cars and a traffic jam up, another objection seems to be that the joint wants to stay open 24/7, in case any hard-working, pot-smoking Los Ososian gets a case of the fierce munchies at 3 a.m. I'm not sure why this earns such ire. Are folks afraid that all the drunken/stoned saloon denizens will drunk-drive over to McDonalds after the bars close, thereby creating a threat to all the empty streets? Or maybe it's the light pollution, if the proposed design features a gigantic pair of gaudy yellow arches blasting out light all night and blinding the owls?
On the other hand, there have been several letters to the editor urging that the place be allowed because it could create "approximately 30 new entry level jobs . . for college students and retired folks on fixed incomes," wrote Los Ososian Mike Morgan, in a recent letter to the editor. Which caused me to think, "Ah, yes, The Great American Dream has come to this: Our highest aspirations for a new business now is that it offers minimum wage part-time jobs for college kids and a few oldsters supplementing their retirement income."
Well, no matter. Right now, things are at an impasse. The County Planning Commission said Ixnay on the deal, ruling against a drive through and McDonalds said, No Drive Through, No Deal. So now it goes back before the BOS on April 8th for an appeal. Unfortunately, I have to work that day and will miss all the food-fight fun. Not that I have much to say about it all since I figure, traffic issues aside, this is just another Subway or Starbucks. The Corporate take-over/transformation of SLOVille began quite some time ago (as you can see from any visit to downtown SLO) and Los Osos is not exempt from this process. After all, "The People" have already decided, with their pocketbooks, what kind of food they want to eat and what kind of businesses they want to patronize, and with those dollars they're creating the kind of community they want to live in. And near as I can see, CorporateVille is their choice, and since the customer is always right, CorporateVille it shall be.
On the other hand, if the drive-thru is the deal-breaker and the BOS holds the line on this, McDonalds will go bye-bye . . . for a while . . . and thereby the community's health might improve an uptick and everyone can rest up and fuel up for the next battle over something-or other-by driving to Morro Bay for their Big Macs.
Showing posts with label BOS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BOS. Show all posts
Monday, March 17, 2014
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Chinatown, Decoded
The main concern and industry of bureaucrats is not to rectify their mistakes, but to conceal them.
Simon Leys
For one of the best explanations of just how and why the Los Osos Sewer Disaster became the Great Los Osos Sewer Disaster, Ron Crawford has put it all together for you in an easily readable form at http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com Let's hope Colin Rigley from New Times or Karen Velie over at Cal Coast News take a gander. For sheer wasted public money, this puts Paso Robles' recent bungles and pay-outs to shame. And it's a hell of a story, but it has always been a very complicated one, which is why our media and so much of the public has turned away. Well, no longer. Here's the Reader's Digest Condensed version. Simple. Clear.
But ultimately sad. There will be no accountability here. The citizens in the PZ will be left to pay the bill, with 45 of them still branded as criminals and their homes under threat. Read it and weep. Your government at work here in . . . Chinatown.
Simon Leys
For one of the best explanations of just how and why the Los Osos Sewer Disaster became the Great Los Osos Sewer Disaster, Ron Crawford has put it all together for you in an easily readable form at http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com Let's hope Colin Rigley from New Times or Karen Velie over at Cal Coast News take a gander. For sheer wasted public money, this puts Paso Robles' recent bungles and pay-outs to shame. And it's a hell of a story, but it has always been a very complicated one, which is why our media and so much of the public has turned away. Well, no longer. Here's the Reader's Digest Condensed version. Simple. Clear.
But ultimately sad. There will be no accountability here. The citizens in the PZ will be left to pay the bill, with 45 of them still branded as criminals and their homes under threat. Read it and weep. Your government at work here in . . . Chinatown.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Yossarian Lives!
Ron Crawford, over at Sewerwatch ( www.Sewerwatch.blogspot.com ) has completed a hilarious second round of puzzle-solving. This one involving former BOS Katcho Kachadjian, he of the public crocodile tears and private “as little as possible” Chinatown ethos.
Well, who can blame him. Katcho’s punched his Ambition Ticket and moved on up to play with the big boys in Sacramento and you don’t get into that game unless you’re willing to ask no questions, and when asked to request a very simple, highly focused audit to answer a few simple questions on the State Revolving Fund (all fully documented with supporting documentation), your response will be to do “as little as possible,” or, preferably, nothing at all.
If you want to know why The 99% hate “government,” Ron’s posting will show you why. The public, official letters contrasted with the semi-private, wink-nudge casual e-mail exchanges are particularly telling. It’s all a delicious mash-up of Through the Looking Glass and Catch 22. Part III of this funny/tragic story will pick up again on January first, when Ron contacts the new “independent” state auditor and starts his “Waltz me Around Again, Willie” round of inquiries. My bet is the nice lady heading up the new office is already firmly in the Chinatown loop.
As usual, the local media, Tribune, New Times, Cal Coast Chinatown mode. For a politician, doing as little as possible, especially when it’s all about covering one’s ass, is understandable. But for the “ watchdog press?”
Spray Your Troubles Away
I love American snark. No sooner had campus policeman Lt. John Pike sprayed seated, non-violent, non-threatening Occupy Wall Street
The visual symbolism of the real spraying is certainly telling – the absolute contempt, the indifference to the damage about to be done, the pain inflicted -- Mr. Pike as The Exterminator about to poison the bugs at his feet. It was also an image that evoked the 1960’s, with Sheriff Bull Connor blasting civil rights demonstrators with high-powered fire hoses.
As an icon of how the 1% views the 99%, Officer Pike dancing through art history doesn’t get any better than that. Let them eat cake. Pike is also a great reminder that things do not change much. Power does what power does, even in a country whose government professes to derive its power from . . . We the People. You know, those folks on the ground getting pepper sprayed in the face.
Wednesday, October 05, 2011
Well, That Limb Mother Calhoun Went Out On Sure Wasn't A Very Long One, Was It?
Stuck at home while Kirk (Estero Bay Plumbers) was installing a new kitchen sink, at 1:30 pm., as announced, I tuned in the BOS meeting on the radio, curious to hear County Administrator Jim Grant's report on the Paavo Ogren/Maria Kelly Mess.
Why did I tune in at 1:30? Well, said Bob Cuddy's Tribune Sept 30 story, , "It is my intention to report out after closed session, " County Administrator Jim Grant wrote in an email to The Tribune. Closed session takes place after the morning session of the Bord of Supervisors and the report starts the afternoon meeting at 1:30. p.m."
So, naturally, any Los Osos folks interested in this issue would show up in the morning, waaaaay, waaaay before the official 1:30 report-out time, because they would know that the BOS would have arranged to have Mr. Grant report out in the morning, waaaay, waaay before the announced time, thus making sure nobody from Los Osos would be in the audience. Then, in the afternoon, after closed session, oh, along about 1:30 p.m. the folks in the audience who specifically came to hear that issue would ask, "Hey, where's the report," only to be told, "Oh, we gave that report this morning, waaaay, waaaay before any of you guys showed up, so, sorry, you're too late, there will be no report now, so shut up and go away, thank you."
To which several Los Osos folks objected. Linde Owen even politely raised a point of order, in fact, only to be gaveled down by Chairman Hill. Mr. Grant did chime in to say he'd be happy to talk to audience members in the hallway, (away from the microphones and TV), which is how the County clearly wanted to handle this whole mess -- bury it out of sight with a brief 2 page report, declare there was no conflict at all, and above all, allow no questions in public. Which is how the BOS likes to do business when one of their own steps in it.
Declared Chairman Hill after gaveling down the few irate commentors from the audience, "What's a Board of Supervisors meeting without a little bitterness?"
Really? Bitterness? Well, Mr. Hill., let me suggest a reason for the ire. Let's start with declaring that you're preparing an above board, transparent report, that the report will be presented at a time and placed announced, the public will be allowed to review the report and offer public comment, exactly like you handle all other issues, and then you switch the time so there would be no transparency, no public comment, only citizens chatting with your CEO in the hallway. Ya think that might account for some . . . bitterness, eh?
Well, Mother Calhoun is not surprised by any of this in the least, especially not the old switcheroo without notice. Par for the course. And so we all troop off into the happy sunset, all smiley-faced, job well done.
Except for Paavo. This stupid mess made his employers look bad, look foolish, caused them to engage in the ridiculous ruse of shuffling presentation times so as to reduce the possibility that a public hearing would make them look even more foolish. Afraid the public would drag up all kinds of troubling issues they do not want paraded in public. Employers don't like knowing that one of their bright, shining stars' messy private life has exposed them to a public mess, exposed them to embarassing questions in the public mind such as, "Why'd the heck did you hire that guy?" Employers will remember that and consider, behind closed doors, during private employee evaluation reviews, that perhaps their fair-haired boy doesn't have the kind of mature judgement required for promotion up the line. That he's demonstrated that he's a liability to them. That perhaps it's time for him to consider employment somewhere else since his trajectory upwards in this County is over.
Well, now it's all back to business as usual, here in SLO County. It's how we roll. And comes as absolutely no surprise to anyone living in Los Osos.
Why did I tune in at 1:30? Well, said Bob Cuddy's Tribune Sept 30 story, , "It is my intention to report out after closed session, " County Administrator Jim Grant wrote in an email to The Tribune. Closed session takes place after the morning session of the Bord of Supervisors and the report starts the afternoon meeting at 1:30. p.m."
So, naturally, any Los Osos folks interested in this issue would show up in the morning, waaaaay, waaaay before the official 1:30 report-out time, because they would know that the BOS would have arranged to have Mr. Grant report out in the morning, waaaay, waaay before the announced time, thus making sure nobody from Los Osos would be in the audience. Then, in the afternoon, after closed session, oh, along about 1:30 p.m. the folks in the audience who specifically came to hear that issue would ask, "Hey, where's the report," only to be told, "Oh, we gave that report this morning, waaaay, waaaay before any of you guys showed up, so, sorry, you're too late, there will be no report now, so shut up and go away, thank you."
To which several Los Osos folks objected. Linde Owen even politely raised a point of order, in fact, only to be gaveled down by Chairman Hill. Mr. Grant did chime in to say he'd be happy to talk to audience members in the hallway, (away from the microphones and TV), which is how the County clearly wanted to handle this whole mess -- bury it out of sight with a brief 2 page report, declare there was no conflict at all, and above all, allow no questions in public. Which is how the BOS likes to do business when one of their own steps in it.
Declared Chairman Hill after gaveling down the few irate commentors from the audience, "What's a Board of Supervisors meeting without a little bitterness?"
Really? Bitterness? Well, Mr. Hill., let me suggest a reason for the ire. Let's start with declaring that you're preparing an above board, transparent report, that the report will be presented at a time and placed announced, the public will be allowed to review the report and offer public comment, exactly like you handle all other issues, and then you switch the time so there would be no transparency, no public comment, only citizens chatting with your CEO in the hallway. Ya think that might account for some . . . bitterness, eh?
Well, Mother Calhoun is not surprised by any of this in the least, especially not the old switcheroo without notice. Par for the course. And so we all troop off into the happy sunset, all smiley-faced, job well done.
Except for Paavo. This stupid mess made his employers look bad, look foolish, caused them to engage in the ridiculous ruse of shuffling presentation times so as to reduce the possibility that a public hearing would make them look even more foolish. Afraid the public would drag up all kinds of troubling issues they do not want paraded in public. Employers don't like knowing that one of their bright, shining stars' messy private life has exposed them to a public mess, exposed them to embarassing questions in the public mind such as, "Why'd the heck did you hire that guy?" Employers will remember that and consider, behind closed doors, during private employee evaluation reviews, that perhaps their fair-haired boy doesn't have the kind of mature judgement required for promotion up the line. That he's demonstrated that he's a liability to them. That perhaps it's time for him to consider employment somewhere else since his trajectory upwards in this County is over.
Well, now it's all back to business as usual, here in SLO County. It's how we roll. And comes as absolutely no surprise to anyone living in Los Osos.
Saturday, October 01, 2011
Mother Calhoun Goes Out On A Limb
So, I get home from a visit to my sister and there's the Trib's local page headline: "Report set on Public Works head." Ah, yes, the Paavo & Maria story is heading to it's official end when Tuesday afternoon County Administrator Jim Grant issues his official investigative report on the claims that Paavo Ogren and Maria Kelly's private canoodling involved any professional conflict of interests. The report is slated to start at 1:30 p.m. Tuesday,Oct 4.
Based on the Tribune story and from what Mother Calhoun knows of both the Los Osos Sewer Wars and the County's business-as-usual M.O., let me speculate that here's what will Happen Tuesday. 1) Paavo won't be fired. 2) The report will find no conflict of interest, no laws broken. The public will be told that everything is fine, that the complaints were unfounded (You know how those Los Osos Crazies love to file unfounded complaints.) Nothing to see here. Move along.
Of course, the second cat was let out of the bag by the brief Tribune story: "Grant said the alleged conflict factored into Ogren's annual performance evaluation but only in a larger context that also includes work products, leadership abilities, budgeting and feedback from staff, peers and the board, etc. So, yes this issue would be included as part of the annual evaluation," he wrote in an email, " but weighted based upon its overall significance determined by my findings."
Translation: Paavo's career advancement in this County just hit its glass ceiling because his reckless, unprofessional lack of judgement went public and so this couldn't possibly have been swept under the "personnel rug" so everyone could just continue with business as usual. So, after a decent interval, I suspect we may well read about Paavo accepting another well-paid job in another county so he can become their lawsuit-in-waiting problem. In SLOTown, there will be public smiles and congratulations to Paavo about his new job. Followed by lots of private sighs of relief that once again, SLOTown ducked a bullet.
On the entertainment side of this sorry story, if public comment is allowed on Tuesday following the report, there could be lots of raised voices, gavel banging, red faces and threats of adjorning the meeting. Happily, there'll be no hurled chairs, though, since the seats in the BOS room are bolted to the floor.
Based on the Tribune story and from what Mother Calhoun knows of both the Los Osos Sewer Wars and the County's business-as-usual M.O., let me speculate that here's what will Happen Tuesday. 1) Paavo won't be fired. 2) The report will find no conflict of interest, no laws broken. The public will be told that everything is fine, that the complaints were unfounded (You know how those Los Osos Crazies love to file unfounded complaints.) Nothing to see here. Move along.
Of course, the second cat was let out of the bag by the brief Tribune story: "Grant said the alleged conflict factored into Ogren's annual performance evaluation but only in a larger context that also includes work products, leadership abilities, budgeting and feedback from staff, peers and the board, etc. So, yes this issue would be included as part of the annual evaluation," he wrote in an email, " but weighted based upon its overall significance determined by my findings."
Translation: Paavo's career advancement in this County just hit its glass ceiling because his reckless, unprofessional lack of judgement went public and so this couldn't possibly have been swept under the "personnel rug" so everyone could just continue with business as usual. So, after a decent interval, I suspect we may well read about Paavo accepting another well-paid job in another county so he can become their lawsuit-in-waiting problem. In SLOTown, there will be public smiles and congratulations to Paavo about his new job. Followed by lots of private sighs of relief that once again, SLOTown ducked a bullet.
On the entertainment side of this sorry story, if public comment is allowed on Tuesday following the report, there could be lots of raised voices, gavel banging, red faces and threats of adjorning the meeting. Happily, there'll be no hurled chairs, though, since the seats in the BOS room are bolted to the floor.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Am I Glowing Yet?
Well, PG&E sure screwed the pooch with their efforts to install their new SmartMeters all over the state. Of course, these are the same folks whose gas lines blew a big hole in San Bruno, so maybe bungles are par for the course. But their efforts to modernize electric service have resulted in outcries followed by back-pedaling and the spending of vast sums of money to go back to ‘splain things better and soothe all the Calamities & Alarums stirred up by fears that we’ll all be irradiated in our beds by a barrage of microwaves from our SmartMeters. Even our County got into play when the Board of Supervisors voted to write a letter to the PUC urging that PG&E give homeowners an option of keeping their old meters if they didn’t want the new ones.
Which PG&E decided to do. . . . for a price: $20 bucks more a month to opt out.
Awww, Gawwwd. It was a textbook case of Bad Ad Campaign 101.
Here’s what you do: First, when you roll out a new product, you need to create a positive buzz, make the product not only cool, but a must have product. Then you reduce the initial creepiness factor (those radio-frequency micro-burst emissions) to a boring familiarity (“It operates like your kid’s cell phone if your kids only talked 45 seconds a day!”). Then you dangle carrots, (“We’re so sure you’ll save money by using your SmartMeter to track and manage your energy use, we’re going to give you 25% off your first year’s electric bill just to try it!”). Then toss in a positive media-blitz campaign showing happy up-to-date cool folks saving pots of money because they (not PG&E) are now in control of their energy use.
Here’s what you do NOT do: Pound on the door, tell the owner you’re here to change out their meters, then clump through the house and hammer it in place and if they say, “Wait, wait, I don’t want that thing because I’m afraid it’ll irradiate me and give me and my kids cancer,” you say, “Look, lady, the questions about the potential health effects associated with RF exposure will take time to resolve, but the FCC wouldn’t do anything to put you in jeopardy. Trust us. We’re PG&E. We blew up San Bruno. So, ya got no say here. Yer gonna get this here meter or ya can git no electricity at all. Or, if ya want I should leave the old one, it’ll cost ya twenny-bucks a month more to start. And you just know we’ll keep jacking that fee up since we don’t want to deal with you old fuddy-duddy Luddites with your analog TVs and land-line phones. So, hurry up, whaddaya want I should do, I’m running late here.”
No, not how you roll out a new product. Especially at a time when the country is already rattled and in full, scared paranoid mode. And at a time when new research is indicating that medical/health-issues from cell phone use, for example, may prove to be more troubling than we were lead to believe. And here we’re adding yet another layer of RFs to our environment only this time, the layer isn’t one of our choosing -- like buying a new flat screen TV or getting another cell phone or installing WiFi in our homes would be. This time, it’s Big Brother telling us we have no choice, no control. That we’re going to be forced to be stuck with scary RF-emitting meters that will irradiate us inside the only place left we feel safe -- inside our homes, while we sleep?
All of which brought PG&E to the SLOTown library last night for another “workshop” with the nice PG&E folks, tables of brochures, the meters themselves, piles of “scientific argle-bargle printouts with charts and formulas proving that radio frequencies used by the SmartMeters are safe, so far as we know.
And, considering the recent brouhaha about the meters, I figured hundreds of people would be there, TV cameras in tow, all making ugly crowd noises. But here’s who showed up: PG&E representatives (who brought pizza and cookies) and maybe 4-5 people. That’s it.
So, where were the outraged folks who besieged the BOS, pleading in a matter of life or death? Where was the rest of the public? Was I to presume that they had all the information they needed about the Smart Meters? (Including the huge pile of dense “scientific” hand-outs and FCC reports on RFs, all of which are wonderfully incomprehensible to the average reader.)
Or is it possible that 99.9% of the public didn’t know and didn’t care. Smart Meter? Sure. Whatever.
Meantime, the installations will continue, with The Gas Company apparently planning on installing their SmartMeters as well. (Here in Los Osos, since we’re in severe overdraft, it would be wonderful to install SmartMeters on our water meters since in the CSD water area, we only get a bill every two months: one little undetected leak and you can not only waste a vast amount of water in two months, you’ll also get hit with a HUGE bill. A SmartMeter would allow you to check often to make sure your water use isn’t getting goofy.)
And as for people seriously concerned with the RFs on the meters, I hope none of those folks own and use a cell phone. According to an RF Q&A, the SmartMeters will communicate in micro bursts lasting from two to 20 milliseconds, with a total of 45 seconds a day. “The RF from an electric SmartMeter is roughly one one-thousandth of that of a typical cell phone. In fact, you’d have to have one of our meters on you home or business for more than 1,000 years to get as much exposure to radio waves as a typical cell phone user gets in just one month.” (Not to mention the FCC “standard for RF-exposure considers not just RF-signal strength and the duration of the signal, but also distance, one needs to consider that any distance between the SmartMeter and the person, and the intervening presence of the house-wall and the back [metal] plate of the meter, will significantly reduce the strength of the RF-signal.”)
So, if anyone is concerned about RFs and SmartMeters, hopefully, they’ll use land line phones to communicate their concerns to the PUC.
And stay out of a Wi-Fi Starbucks.
Addendum: New Times had a news update on the SmartMeters and noted the new proposal for folks who object to the devices: ". . . opt-out customers not enrolled in low-income programs will face one of two fee schedules: an up-front fee of $135 with a fixed monthly chrge of $20, or a one-time fee of $270 and a monthly charge of $14. Low-income assistance program-enrolled customers will receive a 20 percent discount." Which means if you're so poor you need help paying your electric bill, you'll only be dinged $108 or $216 and $16 or $11 a month.
Continues New Times, "Basically, this is extortion," said Sandi Maurer, president and founder of the EMF Safety Network, who has led the campaign against SmartMeter installations. "For PG&E to say that if you don't want this you will have to pay hundreds dollars, that discriminates against the poor."
The day I posted this piece, I opened my PG&E bill and discovered that there was "no payment due" because somebody (not I) sent PG&E a $252.83 payment. I'll call them later, but if this kind of goof has happened with dumb meters and regular billing, I'd advise PG&E customers to hang onto your bills and check numbers for the last few years and well after the SmartMeters are installed since I'm betting there'll be a few bumpy rides before the bugs get shaken out. My sister was SmartMetered and got a huge electric bill. Luckily she had a whole year's worth of receipts and had a nice little chat with the accounting department and things are back to normal again. You have been cautioned.
Which PG&E decided to do. . . . for a price: $20 bucks more a month to opt out.
Awww, Gawwwd. It was a textbook case of Bad Ad Campaign 101.
Here’s what you do: First, when you roll out a new product, you need to create a positive buzz, make the product not only cool, but a must have product. Then you reduce the initial creepiness factor (those radio-frequency micro-burst emissions) to a boring familiarity (“It operates like your kid’s cell phone if your kids only talked 45 seconds a day!”). Then you dangle carrots, (“We’re so sure you’ll save money by using your SmartMeter to track and manage your energy use, we’re going to give you 25% off your first year’s electric bill just to try it!”). Then toss in a positive media-blitz campaign showing happy up-to-date cool folks saving pots of money because they (not PG&E) are now in control of their energy use.
Here’s what you do NOT do: Pound on the door, tell the owner you’re here to change out their meters, then clump through the house and hammer it in place and if they say, “Wait, wait, I don’t want that thing because I’m afraid it’ll irradiate me and give me and my kids cancer,” you say, “Look, lady, the questions about the potential health effects associated with RF exposure will take time to resolve, but the FCC wouldn’t do anything to put you in jeopardy. Trust us. We’re PG&E. We blew up San Bruno. So, ya got no say here. Yer gonna get this here meter or ya can git no electricity at all. Or, if ya want I should leave the old one, it’ll cost ya twenny-bucks a month more to start. And you just know we’ll keep jacking that fee up since we don’t want to deal with you old fuddy-duddy Luddites with your analog TVs and land-line phones. So, hurry up, whaddaya want I should do, I’m running late here.”
No, not how you roll out a new product. Especially at a time when the country is already rattled and in full, scared paranoid mode. And at a time when new research is indicating that medical/health-issues from cell phone use, for example, may prove to be more troubling than we were lead to believe. And here we’re adding yet another layer of RFs to our environment only this time, the layer isn’t one of our choosing -- like buying a new flat screen TV or getting another cell phone or installing WiFi in our homes would be. This time, it’s Big Brother telling us we have no choice, no control. That we’re going to be forced to be stuck with scary RF-emitting meters that will irradiate us inside the only place left we feel safe -- inside our homes, while we sleep?
All of which brought PG&E to the SLOTown library last night for another “workshop” with the nice PG&E folks, tables of brochures, the meters themselves, piles of “scientific argle-bargle printouts with charts and formulas proving that radio frequencies used by the SmartMeters are safe, so far as we know.
And, considering the recent brouhaha about the meters, I figured hundreds of people would be there, TV cameras in tow, all making ugly crowd noises. But here’s who showed up: PG&E representatives (who brought pizza and cookies) and maybe 4-5 people. That’s it.
So, where were the outraged folks who besieged the BOS, pleading in a matter of life or death? Where was the rest of the public? Was I to presume that they had all the information they needed about the Smart Meters? (Including the huge pile of dense “scientific” hand-outs and FCC reports on RFs, all of which are wonderfully incomprehensible to the average reader.)
Or is it possible that 99.9% of the public didn’t know and didn’t care. Smart Meter? Sure. Whatever.
Meantime, the installations will continue, with The Gas Company apparently planning on installing their SmartMeters as well. (Here in Los Osos, since we’re in severe overdraft, it would be wonderful to install SmartMeters on our water meters since in the CSD water area, we only get a bill every two months: one little undetected leak and you can not only waste a vast amount of water in two months, you’ll also get hit with a HUGE bill. A SmartMeter would allow you to check often to make sure your water use isn’t getting goofy.)
And as for people seriously concerned with the RFs on the meters, I hope none of those folks own and use a cell phone. According to an RF Q&A, the SmartMeters will communicate in micro bursts lasting from two to 20 milliseconds, with a total of 45 seconds a day. “The RF from an electric SmartMeter is roughly one one-thousandth of that of a typical cell phone. In fact, you’d have to have one of our meters on you home or business for more than 1,000 years to get as much exposure to radio waves as a typical cell phone user gets in just one month.” (Not to mention the FCC “standard for RF-exposure considers not just RF-signal strength and the duration of the signal, but also distance, one needs to consider that any distance between the SmartMeter and the person, and the intervening presence of the house-wall and the back [metal] plate of the meter, will significantly reduce the strength of the RF-signal.”)
So, if anyone is concerned about RFs and SmartMeters, hopefully, they’ll use land line phones to communicate their concerns to the PUC.
And stay out of a Wi-Fi Starbucks.
Addendum: New Times had a news update on the SmartMeters and noted the new proposal for folks who object to the devices: ". . . opt-out customers not enrolled in low-income programs will face one of two fee schedules: an up-front fee of $135 with a fixed monthly chrge of $20, or a one-time fee of $270 and a monthly charge of $14. Low-income assistance program-enrolled customers will receive a 20 percent discount." Which means if you're so poor you need help paying your electric bill, you'll only be dinged $108 or $216 and $16 or $11 a month.
Continues New Times, "Basically, this is extortion," said Sandi Maurer, president and founder of the EMF Safety Network, who has led the campaign against SmartMeter installations. "For PG&E to say that if you don't want this you will have to pay hundreds dollars, that discriminates against the poor."
The day I posted this piece, I opened my PG&E bill and discovered that there was "no payment due" because somebody (not I) sent PG&E a $252.83 payment. I'll call them later, but if this kind of goof has happened with dumb meters and regular billing, I'd advise PG&E customers to hang onto your bills and check numbers for the last few years and well after the SmartMeters are installed since I'm betting there'll be a few bumpy rides before the bugs get shaken out. My sister was SmartMetered and got a huge electric bill. Luckily she had a whole year's worth of receipts and had a nice little chat with the accounting department and things are back to normal again. You have been cautioned.
Saturday, March 05, 2011
Light US Up?
The following email was sent along by Judy Vick, who's heading up a local campaign to get the BOS to at least send a letter to the PUC to stop the mandatory installation of "smart meters" until some issues can be ironed out. Here's my letter to the Sups:
"Dear Sirs: I would urge you to sign the letter asking the PUC to wait on the mandatory installation of "smart meters" until several troubling issues can be resolved at the state level: aparently these (mandatory) devices have no UL certification? (is that some kind of sick joke?), lack of a hack-proof security system, lack of a hard-wire option , etc.) The LAST thing this county needs is somebody suing you guys if this sytem goes ker-flooey because you were aware of the unresolved issues yet did nothing to protect the citizens from this "mandatory" installation.
The PUC is the unelected body that needs to step up to deal with these (soon to be) statewide issues. Ditto the state legislature. Get them resolved first, then proceed. Right now, it's clear the cart is driving the horse an the horse may well be heading off a cliff. (Awww, Gaaawwwddd, Why is THAT scenario so hauntingly familair?)
Sincerely,"
While some folks are having a snicker over the issue of having a cow over micro-bursts from smart meters while daily getting bombarded with brain-cell-altering cell phones, satellite transmissions, Wi-Fi's all over the place, nonetheless there's likely enough other screwey things left unresolved in this system to give one pause. What I see here is just more horses and carts and I suspect Ralph Nader's right: This is more about corporate bottom lines than about "smart" energy use. And when it comes to corporate bottom lines, the public better pay particular attention to their behinds, because Corporate sure ain't gonna.
So, if you hear wagon wheels screeching and the thunder of hoofbeats and spy a cliff ahead, drop an email to your Sup and let him know what you think about this matter.
Vick's email:
Enough county citizen complaints about smart meters (health, accuracy, loss of privacy, security, risk of fire and damage to in-home electrical appliances) have caused the County Board of Supervisors to consider sending a resolution to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to suspend installation of smartmeters until the CA legislature acts on current legislation AB37. The county will be joining 31 other California governments (counties and cities including Morro Bay) who have sent similar resolutions. Seven have gone as far as outlawing the installations and/or suing PG&E.
BUT ALL SUPERVISORS AREN'T CONVINCED! AND ONLY 4 WILL BE PRESENT (Frank Mecham out for surgery) FOR THE VOTE.
YOUR VOICE IS NEEDED!
Please attend the Board of Supervisors meeting, 9 a.m., Tuesday, March 8, 2011 in the Board Chambers on the corner of Santa Rosa and Monterey (1055 Monterey) in SLO. This is a Consent Item that is near the top of the list. If you want to speak as well as attend, there are speaker slips to fill out at the back of the room that can be handed to the secretary.
Please see attached Agenda, letter, and resolution.
AT THE LEAST: Write your supervisor, or all of them, before next Tuesday, March 8, 2011.
• District 1 Frank Mecham fmeacham@co.slo.ca.us
• District 2 Bruce Gibson http://www.blogger.com/goog_423829226
• District 3 Adam Hill ahill@co.slo.ca.us
• District 4 Paul Teixeira pteixeira@co.slo.ca.us
• District 5 James Patterson jpatterson@co.slo.ca.us
NEED MORE INFORMATION YOURSELF? Read a summary of reasons below and links to more information.
Capitola- During a meeting last week in which they joined six other local governments* who have passed laws criminalizing the installation of wireless ‘smart’ meters, the Capitola City Council discovered that the wireless ‘smart’ meters that CA utilities are trying to install are in fact not certified by Underwriters Laboratory, a certification that is required under the state electrical code for all electrical appliances and equipment within the home.
The lack of certification was confirmed by Karl Moeller, a senior engineer with UL earlier today:
Product certifications can be verified by going to www.UL.com then scroll down to the bottom and click on “on-line certifications directory”. You can search for active certifications at the On-line Certifications Directory.
In summary, I am unable to confirm these devices as being UL certified.
Not just CA--unqualified installers reported in Atlanta, Georgia (CNN-TV, March 1, 2011) and Victoria, Australia, challenging safety.
Public Citizen (Ralph Nader’s consumer advocate organization) leads a national coalition raising alarms about smart meters. “Smart meter installations have thus far prioritized utility budget efficiency – not household budget efficiency. Poring through utility dockets, utilities make it clear that the vast majority of projected savings from smart meters is from laying off utility workers – and not from consumers’ lowering their energy use and bills. Utilities highlight savings from remote disconnection--mainly for nonpayment. This raises serious consumer safety and health issues.”
http://www.citizen.org/documents/EnergyInvestmentForumPres.pdf
Public Citizen, AARP, Consumers Union, National Consumer Law Center and the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates released a sweeping overview of needed improvements for smart meters to better serve the needs of working families (August 2010). www.nclc.org/images/pdf/energy_utility_telecom/additi
The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), an independent consumer advocacy division of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and the California Small Business Association (CSBA), a non-profit small business advocacy group, have requested that the CPUC revisit its decision to direct Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to place 500,000 small business customers on a dynamic pricing program beginning in November 2011. That program will likely lead to disruption and higher costs to small businesses. http://yubanet.com/california/DRA-and-CSBA-Request-Relief-from-New-Electric-Pricing-Scheme-That-Will-Cause-Disruption-to-500-000-PG-E-Small-Business-Customers.php
Bloomberg Business Week states, "Duke Energy's proposal to install 800,000 (such meters) in Indiana was rejected by regulators because the cost of the project would outweigh potential benefits to consumers." http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_39/b4196044842103.htm
The Government Accountability Office (the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress) warns that smart-grid systems are being deployed without built-in security features. Certain smart meters have not been designed with a strong security architecture and lack important security features like event logging and forensics capabilities used to detect and analyze cyberattacks, while smart-grid home area networks that manage electricity usage of appliances also lack adequate built-in security. "Without securely designed smart-grid systems, utilities will be at risk of not having the capacity to detect and analyze attacks, which increases the risk that attacks will succeed and utilities will be unable to prevent them from recurring," said the report. The report also took aim at the self-regulatory nature of the industry, saying utilities are focusing on complying with minimum regulatory requirements rather than having adequate security to prevent cyberattacks. http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2011/01/smartmeter-security-is-a-growing-concern.html
29 California local governments have formally demanded a halt or a moratorium on smart meters. Seven have gone further and legislated against installation, enacting ordinances, the strongest action a local government can take.
San Francisco Chapter of the Sierra Club voted unanimously (2/15/11) to call for an immediate ordinance to ban smart meters in the city http://stopsmartmeters.org/
Assembly Bill 37, introduced by Assemblymember Huffman, directs the California Public Utilities Commission to determine alternatives for customers who do not wish to have a smart meter installed. The legislation also directs utilities to disclose important information about the smart meters to consumers, including the timing, magnitude, frequency and duration of radio frequency emissions so that individual consumers can make informed decisions.Assemblymember Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) represents the 6th Assembly District which encompasses southern Sonoma County and all of Marin County.
For more information: emfsafetynetwork.org stopsmartmeters.org turn.org
Nina Beety, Monterey County, spent $4100 on a newspaper ad to protest Smart Meters.
http://www.ksbw.com/video/26880746/detail.html
A motion detector light is activated - goes on and off - when you put a smart meter with RF bursts near it. It malfunctions.The nervous system is activated - by bursts of RF - all day and all night - just like the light bulb. Your nervous system malfunctions. The body 'sees' EMF as 'light-at-night; interfering with the melatonin cycle, and interfering with sleep. Whether you are trying to sleep near a power line with high EMF levels, or a constantly transmitting RF device, it interrupts normal neurological functioning.
Melatonin production is high at night, and low during the day. Interfere with that cycle, which is one ofthe drivers for your circadian rhythms, and you have interfered with one of the most potent free-radical scavengers in the body (a cancer surveillance and mop-up system), you have interfered with sleep (essential to memory, learning and health maintenance). Someone reported recently that PG&E had 'replaced' a smart meter that caused a resident's motion detector light to go on and off continuously. Wonder when they'll figure out how to replace a malfunctioning human nervous system. And what it will cost you.
Cindy Sage
Environmental Consultant
Sage Associates
Co-Editor, BioInitiative Report
Research Fellow, Department of Oncology, Orebro University Hospital, Orebro, Sweden
Sage EMF Design is owned by Cindy Sage. Mrs Sage has been involved in EMF issues as an environmental consultant and public policy researcher since 1982. She has provided professional consulting services to cities, counties, various states and a national EMF policy group on the issue of EMF policy and prudent avoidance.
http://www.sageassociates.net/cindysage.html
http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/
"Dear Sirs: I would urge you to sign the letter asking the PUC to wait on the mandatory installation of "smart meters" until several troubling issues can be resolved at the state level: aparently these (mandatory) devices have no UL certification? (is that some kind of sick joke?), lack of a hack-proof security system, lack of a hard-wire option , etc.) The LAST thing this county needs is somebody suing you guys if this sytem goes ker-flooey because you were aware of the unresolved issues yet did nothing to protect the citizens from this "mandatory" installation.
The PUC is the unelected body that needs to step up to deal with these (soon to be) statewide issues. Ditto the state legislature. Get them resolved first, then proceed. Right now, it's clear the cart is driving the horse an the horse may well be heading off a cliff. (Awww, Gaaawwwddd, Why is THAT scenario so hauntingly familair?)
Sincerely,"
While some folks are having a snicker over the issue of having a cow over micro-bursts from smart meters while daily getting bombarded with brain-cell-altering cell phones, satellite transmissions, Wi-Fi's all over the place, nonetheless there's likely enough other screwey things left unresolved in this system to give one pause. What I see here is just more horses and carts and I suspect Ralph Nader's right: This is more about corporate bottom lines than about "smart" energy use. And when it comes to corporate bottom lines, the public better pay particular attention to their behinds, because Corporate sure ain't gonna.
So, if you hear wagon wheels screeching and the thunder of hoofbeats and spy a cliff ahead, drop an email to your Sup and let him know what you think about this matter.
Vick's email:
Enough county citizen complaints about smart meters (health, accuracy, loss of privacy, security, risk of fire and damage to in-home electrical appliances) have caused the County Board of Supervisors to consider sending a resolution to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to suspend installation of smartmeters until the CA legislature acts on current legislation AB37. The county will be joining 31 other California governments (counties and cities including Morro Bay) who have sent similar resolutions. Seven have gone as far as outlawing the installations and/or suing PG&E.
BUT ALL SUPERVISORS AREN'T CONVINCED! AND ONLY 4 WILL BE PRESENT (Frank Mecham out for surgery) FOR THE VOTE.
YOUR VOICE IS NEEDED!
Please attend the Board of Supervisors meeting, 9 a.m., Tuesday, March 8, 2011 in the Board Chambers on the corner of Santa Rosa and Monterey (1055 Monterey) in SLO. This is a Consent Item that is near the top of the list. If you want to speak as well as attend, there are speaker slips to fill out at the back of the room that can be handed to the secretary.
Please see attached Agenda, letter, and resolution.
AT THE LEAST: Write your supervisor, or all of them, before next Tuesday, March 8, 2011.
• District 1 Frank Mecham fmeacham@co.slo.ca.us
• District 2 Bruce Gibson http://www.blogger.com/goog_423829226
• District 3 Adam Hill ahill@co.slo.ca.us
• District 4 Paul Teixeira pteixeira@co.slo.ca.us
• District 5 James Patterson jpatterson@co.slo.ca.us
NEED MORE INFORMATION YOURSELF? Read a summary of reasons below and links to more information.
Capitola- During a meeting last week in which they joined six other local governments* who have passed laws criminalizing the installation of wireless ‘smart’ meters, the Capitola City Council discovered that the wireless ‘smart’ meters that CA utilities are trying to install are in fact not certified by Underwriters Laboratory, a certification that is required under the state electrical code for all electrical appliances and equipment within the home.
The lack of certification was confirmed by Karl Moeller, a senior engineer with UL earlier today:
Product certifications can be verified by going to www.UL.com then scroll down to the bottom and click on “on-line certifications directory”. You can search for active certifications at the On-line Certifications Directory.
In summary, I am unable to confirm these devices as being UL certified.
Not just CA--unqualified installers reported in Atlanta, Georgia (CNN-TV, March 1, 2011) and Victoria, Australia, challenging safety.
Public Citizen (Ralph Nader’s consumer advocate organization) leads a national coalition raising alarms about smart meters. “Smart meter installations have thus far prioritized utility budget efficiency – not household budget efficiency. Poring through utility dockets, utilities make it clear that the vast majority of projected savings from smart meters is from laying off utility workers – and not from consumers’ lowering their energy use and bills. Utilities highlight savings from remote disconnection--mainly for nonpayment. This raises serious consumer safety and health issues.”
http://www.citizen.org/documents/EnergyInvestmentForumPres.pdf
Public Citizen, AARP, Consumers Union, National Consumer Law Center and the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates released a sweeping overview of needed improvements for smart meters to better serve the needs of working families (August 2010). www.nclc.org/images/pdf/energy_utility_telecom/additi
The Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA), an independent consumer advocacy division of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and the California Small Business Association (CSBA), a non-profit small business advocacy group, have requested that the CPUC revisit its decision to direct Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to place 500,000 small business customers on a dynamic pricing program beginning in November 2011. That program will likely lead to disruption and higher costs to small businesses. http://yubanet.com/california/DRA-and-CSBA-Request-Relief-from-New-Electric-Pricing-Scheme-That-Will-Cause-Disruption-to-500-000-PG-E-Small-Business-Customers.php
Bloomberg Business Week states, "Duke Energy's proposal to install 800,000 (such meters) in Indiana was rejected by regulators because the cost of the project would outweigh potential benefits to consumers." http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_39/b4196044842103.htm
The Government Accountability Office (the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress) warns that smart-grid systems are being deployed without built-in security features. Certain smart meters have not been designed with a strong security architecture and lack important security features like event logging and forensics capabilities used to detect and analyze cyberattacks, while smart-grid home area networks that manage electricity usage of appliances also lack adequate built-in security. "Without securely designed smart-grid systems, utilities will be at risk of not having the capacity to detect and analyze attacks, which increases the risk that attacks will succeed and utilities will be unable to prevent them from recurring," said the report. The report also took aim at the self-regulatory nature of the industry, saying utilities are focusing on complying with minimum regulatory requirements rather than having adequate security to prevent cyberattacks. http://ncwatch.typepad.com/media/2011/01/smartmeter-security-is-a-growing-concern.html
29 California local governments have formally demanded a halt or a moratorium on smart meters. Seven have gone further and legislated against installation, enacting ordinances, the strongest action a local government can take.
San Francisco Chapter of the Sierra Club voted unanimously (2/15/11) to call for an immediate ordinance to ban smart meters in the city http://stopsmartmeters.org/
Assembly Bill 37, introduced by Assemblymember Huffman, directs the California Public Utilities Commission to determine alternatives for customers who do not wish to have a smart meter installed. The legislation also directs utilities to disclose important information about the smart meters to consumers, including the timing, magnitude, frequency and duration of radio frequency emissions so that individual consumers can make informed decisions.Assemblymember Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) represents the 6th Assembly District which encompasses southern Sonoma County and all of Marin County.
For more information: emfsafetynetwork.org stopsmartmeters.org turn.org
Nina Beety, Monterey County, spent $4100 on a newspaper ad to protest Smart Meters.
http://www.ksbw.com/video/26880746/detail.html
A motion detector light is activated - goes on and off - when you put a smart meter with RF bursts near it. It malfunctions.The nervous system is activated - by bursts of RF - all day and all night - just like the light bulb. Your nervous system malfunctions. The body 'sees' EMF as 'light-at-night; interfering with the melatonin cycle, and interfering with sleep. Whether you are trying to sleep near a power line with high EMF levels, or a constantly transmitting RF device, it interrupts normal neurological functioning.
Melatonin production is high at night, and low during the day. Interfere with that cycle, which is one ofthe drivers for your circadian rhythms, and you have interfered with one of the most potent free-radical scavengers in the body (a cancer surveillance and mop-up system), you have interfered with sleep (essential to memory, learning and health maintenance). Someone reported recently that PG&E had 'replaced' a smart meter that caused a resident's motion detector light to go on and off continuously. Wonder when they'll figure out how to replace a malfunctioning human nervous system. And what it will cost you.
Cindy Sage
Environmental Consultant
Sage Associates
Co-Editor, BioInitiative Report
Research Fellow, Department of Oncology, Orebro University Hospital, Orebro, Sweden
Sage EMF Design is owned by Cindy Sage. Mrs Sage has been involved in EMF issues as an environmental consultant and public policy researcher since 1982. She has provided professional consulting services to cities, counties, various states and a national EMF policy group on the issue of EMF policy and prudent avoidance.
http://www.sageassociates.net/cindysage.html
http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Yup, You Can Say That Again
For another take on the recent BOS meeting on the Rates & Charges protest “vote,” here’s Rock of the Coast.
SEWER BILLS FOREVER!
Supervisor Bruce Gibson had previously declared that “Prohibition Zone” homeowners would pay for San Luis Obispo County’s $200 million Los Osos Wastewater Project one way or another, and on December 14 he delivered on that promise – sticking them with the most expensive per capita sewer project – and now sewer bill – in U.S. history, to be built in an officially-declared “disadvantaged community” in the middle of the “Great Recession.”
» Read Article
http://www.rockofthecoast.com/news/local/876-sewer-bills-forever
SEWER BILLS FOREVER!
Supervisor Bruce Gibson had previously declared that “Prohibition Zone” homeowners would pay for San Luis Obispo County’s $200 million Los Osos Wastewater Project one way or another, and on December 14 he delivered on that promise – sticking them with the most expensive per capita sewer project – and now sewer bill – in U.S. history, to be built in an officially-declared “disadvantaged community” in the middle of the “Great Recession.”
» Read Article
http://www.rockofthecoast.com/news/local/876-sewer-bills-forever
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Mark Your Calendars
Thursday, Dec 2 (Hanukkah) at the Los Osos Middle School. Doors open at 6 p.m. so people can speak with various staff members and at 7 p.m. the (likely) last Dog & Pony Sewer Show will commence on the Rates and Charges ordinance that will be showing up in your mailbox soon, along with a nifty brochure ‘splaining it all.
That’s one brochure I’m looking forward to since there’s a “protest vote” connected with this all and if you’re familiar with “protest votes,” you’ll know they’re impossible to “win,” which makes them handy vehicles when you’re stuck with a tricky situation but still want to claim you offered people a chance to “vote” in the matter. Much slicker than an actual, “real” up-or-down vote, which can be pretty unpredictable.
At any rate, the rates and charges are costs needed to fill in the shortfall needed to build a sewer system designed for build-out when build-out may not be possible, certainly not in the reasonable short-term. Since you can’t assess somebody for a benefit they don’t receive (no sewage being collected from a vacant lot), but you need the full amount of money to build a system designed to include their vacant lot in the future, what can you do but stick the needed money into the rates and charges and hope homeowners won’t notice that they’re going to be paying for a place holder for somebody’s vacant lot.
And if you’re a homeowner and are anxious for this sewer to get built, you’ll be praying that vacant lot owners don’t say, “Hey, why in hell am I being dinged a bunch of money for something I may never get any benefit from since nobody can guaranteed there’s gonna be enough water so I can ever build my dream house on this vacant lot?” Then mount a successful 50% plus 1 “protest vote” campaign. Or hope a lot of people with developed properties don’t say, “Hey, I assessed myself $25,000 for a sewer, so why am I being forced to pay for my neighbor’s vacant lot,” and file a successful “protest vote,” after which the whole thing implodes and we’re stuck back at ground zero.
Which is exactly why I’m looking forward to reading the glossy brochure that will be coming with the “ballot.” Spinning this puppy is gonna take a master. Although, realistically, protest votes, unlike “real” votes, are nearly impossible to pull off. Which makes them handy when government needs to do things quietly that likely would cause an uproar if done in the usual fashion – i.e. a straight-forward assessment vote.
To date, the monthly sewer bills will be about $105 for the original capital costs on the $25,000 assessment, plus about $95 (more or less) for the Rates and Charges. The ordinance would use a flat amount for the fixed capital costs associated with the “missing” portion of the system that covers proposed build-out. That amount would diminish as the principal gets paid off. And if water becomes available and lots get developed, that amount would be retired sooner and either credits or rebates given to the ratepayers.
The variable part of the R&C would be based on actual (water meter readings) of water usage during January-February, with 12 units being the minimum. This should reflect your indoor water use since most people don’t heavily irrigate during winter, thereby giving a pretty accurate number of gallons going down the drain to the treatment plant. In either case, the 12 units of water will be used as the base, unless you can prove you’re really water thrifty and use much less than that. Greywater systems will also be considered in lowering your rate. And if you can prove that your higher consumption isn’t all indoor use (you’re an urban farmer growing rutabagas and use X gallons year round outside the home) you can appeal those charges as well.
Further notes:
--Water meters will be required when people connect to the system (for folks who don’t have water meters now)
--Rules and Regulations in the form of another ordinance will be written later and will cover what will be legal and illegal as to what you can stuff down your toilet and drain.
--The present ordinance, as written, caused some confusion over the requirement that homeowners have 90 days to hook up – an impossibility for all 4,500+ homes. So that language was modified to clarify that the hook ups will be phased-in and the 90 day window can be extended to 180 in case of unforeseen problems, i.e. bad weather, equipment shortages and delays & etc.
--The protest vote is one vote per parcel. If there are two owners, each can file a protest vote but it will only be counted as 1 vote.
--The R&C charges can be collected yearly on the tax rolls or can be sent to homeowners like a bill. It’s not known yet if the County will set up a system like the CSD has now that will red-flag non-payment by renters, for example, thereby alerting property-owner-landlords early-on so they can fix that issue before gazillions of dollars pile up unbeknownst to them, which happened here in Los Osos a few years ago with renter-paid trash and water bills.
And, being Los Osos, there were some interesting wrinkles brought up during public comment.
-- Steve Paige raised an interesting question: Right now, our septic tanks are fully permitted and legal, so neither the RWQCB nor the county can force us to abandon our tanks. Our DISCHARGE is forbidden, but not our tanks. County counsel Warren Jensen declared he knew nothing about any of that, no, no, never hear of any such thing. In a sane world, folks would re-read 83-13 wherein they’d see the word “discharge,” and scratch their heads and say, Hmmm, well then, I know an affordable fix to this: sealed pipe step system hooked up to in-place septic tanks (replacement of failed tanks only), done and done for a genuinely affordable price and no dug up back-yards. But that’s in a sane world, not our Alice in Wonderland Sewerland.
-- Eric Greening wanted to make sure the phase-in of the hook up would allow time to do it all in one fell swoop – pump tank, decommission tank, lay hook up trench, hook up all at once, versus having to dig up things then come back and dig them up again. Happily, if properly phased in, that will happen.
--Once again, there was the question about the numbers. Water usage numbers seem to be a fungible item, which causes concern since it’s all GIGO. Get your basic numbers wrong and you end up building the wrong sized system at the wrong price. Unless that was your intention in the first place.
--Which raised the usual question: In a basin now in serious overdraft, with no limits to growth for homes being built outside the PZ, all of whom are all allowed to access the water basin (while those inside the PZ are not) just how realistic is it that undeveloped properties in the PZ will EVER get to develop? And if they can’t, the sewer system as designed for build out is scaled too big and too costly, yet that entire cost is being stuck on the present homeowners. And, for undeveloped property owners, they’ll be stuck paying for a future they’ll realistically never see. The answer to that is, as usual, a shrug. Or Supervisor Bruce Gibson using the word “hopeful” a great many times. Then it’s time to . . . Move along.
-- The Dec 2 Town Hall meeting isn’t a “workshop.” It’s informational only. There will be no feed-back and no changes to the ordinance. It’s take-it-or-leave-it. So you’ll likely be able to submit written questions at the event, but don’t expect any changes. There will be 12 days between the Town Hall meeting and the vote count/Ordinance Hearing on Dec 14 at the BOS. (Check agenda for the time). So try not to lose the paperwork in all the holiday bustle. Not that it matters since this is a done deal.
Proposed ordinance with modifications, passed 5-0.
Next meeting on the issue, December 14 for official ballot results and adoption of the Rates & Charges ordinance. (Don’t forget the Dec 2 Town Hall)
While there was some table pounding by Chairman Mecham to shush up some back-of-the-room hollerers, no chairs were hurled. Though a GINORMOUS law officer type suddenly materialized in the back of the room.
Magic? Naw, Los Osos.
That’s one brochure I’m looking forward to since there’s a “protest vote” connected with this all and if you’re familiar with “protest votes,” you’ll know they’re impossible to “win,” which makes them handy vehicles when you’re stuck with a tricky situation but still want to claim you offered people a chance to “vote” in the matter. Much slicker than an actual, “real” up-or-down vote, which can be pretty unpredictable.
At any rate, the rates and charges are costs needed to fill in the shortfall needed to build a sewer system designed for build-out when build-out may not be possible, certainly not in the reasonable short-term. Since you can’t assess somebody for a benefit they don’t receive (no sewage being collected from a vacant lot), but you need the full amount of money to build a system designed to include their vacant lot in the future, what can you do but stick the needed money into the rates and charges and hope homeowners won’t notice that they’re going to be paying for a place holder for somebody’s vacant lot.
And if you’re a homeowner and are anxious for this sewer to get built, you’ll be praying that vacant lot owners don’t say, “Hey, why in hell am I being dinged a bunch of money for something I may never get any benefit from since nobody can guaranteed there’s gonna be enough water so I can ever build my dream house on this vacant lot?” Then mount a successful 50% plus 1 “protest vote” campaign. Or hope a lot of people with developed properties don’t say, “Hey, I assessed myself $25,000 for a sewer, so why am I being forced to pay for my neighbor’s vacant lot,” and file a successful “protest vote,” after which the whole thing implodes and we’re stuck back at ground zero.
Which is exactly why I’m looking forward to reading the glossy brochure that will be coming with the “ballot.” Spinning this puppy is gonna take a master. Although, realistically, protest votes, unlike “real” votes, are nearly impossible to pull off. Which makes them handy when government needs to do things quietly that likely would cause an uproar if done in the usual fashion – i.e. a straight-forward assessment vote.
To date, the monthly sewer bills will be about $105 for the original capital costs on the $25,000 assessment, plus about $95 (more or less) for the Rates and Charges. The ordinance would use a flat amount for the fixed capital costs associated with the “missing” portion of the system that covers proposed build-out. That amount would diminish as the principal gets paid off. And if water becomes available and lots get developed, that amount would be retired sooner and either credits or rebates given to the ratepayers.
The variable part of the R&C would be based on actual (water meter readings) of water usage during January-February, with 12 units being the minimum. This should reflect your indoor water use since most people don’t heavily irrigate during winter, thereby giving a pretty accurate number of gallons going down the drain to the treatment plant. In either case, the 12 units of water will be used as the base, unless you can prove you’re really water thrifty and use much less than that. Greywater systems will also be considered in lowering your rate. And if you can prove that your higher consumption isn’t all indoor use (you’re an urban farmer growing rutabagas and use X gallons year round outside the home) you can appeal those charges as well.
Further notes:
--Water meters will be required when people connect to the system (for folks who don’t have water meters now)
--Rules and Regulations in the form of another ordinance will be written later and will cover what will be legal and illegal as to what you can stuff down your toilet and drain.
--The present ordinance, as written, caused some confusion over the requirement that homeowners have 90 days to hook up – an impossibility for all 4,500+ homes. So that language was modified to clarify that the hook ups will be phased-in and the 90 day window can be extended to 180 in case of unforeseen problems, i.e. bad weather, equipment shortages and delays & etc.
--The protest vote is one vote per parcel. If there are two owners, each can file a protest vote but it will only be counted as 1 vote.
--The R&C charges can be collected yearly on the tax rolls or can be sent to homeowners like a bill. It’s not known yet if the County will set up a system like the CSD has now that will red-flag non-payment by renters, for example, thereby alerting property-owner-landlords early-on so they can fix that issue before gazillions of dollars pile up unbeknownst to them, which happened here in Los Osos a few years ago with renter-paid trash and water bills.
And, being Los Osos, there were some interesting wrinkles brought up during public comment.
-- Steve Paige raised an interesting question: Right now, our septic tanks are fully permitted and legal, so neither the RWQCB nor the county can force us to abandon our tanks. Our DISCHARGE is forbidden, but not our tanks. County counsel Warren Jensen declared he knew nothing about any of that, no, no, never hear of any such thing. In a sane world, folks would re-read 83-13 wherein they’d see the word “discharge,” and scratch their heads and say, Hmmm, well then, I know an affordable fix to this: sealed pipe step system hooked up to in-place septic tanks (replacement of failed tanks only), done and done for a genuinely affordable price and no dug up back-yards. But that’s in a sane world, not our Alice in Wonderland Sewerland.
-- Eric Greening wanted to make sure the phase-in of the hook up would allow time to do it all in one fell swoop – pump tank, decommission tank, lay hook up trench, hook up all at once, versus having to dig up things then come back and dig them up again. Happily, if properly phased in, that will happen.
--Once again, there was the question about the numbers. Water usage numbers seem to be a fungible item, which causes concern since it’s all GIGO. Get your basic numbers wrong and you end up building the wrong sized system at the wrong price. Unless that was your intention in the first place.
--Which raised the usual question: In a basin now in serious overdraft, with no limits to growth for homes being built outside the PZ, all of whom are all allowed to access the water basin (while those inside the PZ are not) just how realistic is it that undeveloped properties in the PZ will EVER get to develop? And if they can’t, the sewer system as designed for build out is scaled too big and too costly, yet that entire cost is being stuck on the present homeowners. And, for undeveloped property owners, they’ll be stuck paying for a future they’ll realistically never see. The answer to that is, as usual, a shrug. Or Supervisor Bruce Gibson using the word “hopeful” a great many times. Then it’s time to . . . Move along.
-- The Dec 2 Town Hall meeting isn’t a “workshop.” It’s informational only. There will be no feed-back and no changes to the ordinance. It’s take-it-or-leave-it. So you’ll likely be able to submit written questions at the event, but don’t expect any changes. There will be 12 days between the Town Hall meeting and the vote count/Ordinance Hearing on Dec 14 at the BOS. (Check agenda for the time). So try not to lose the paperwork in all the holiday bustle. Not that it matters since this is a done deal.
Proposed ordinance with modifications, passed 5-0.
Next meeting on the issue, December 14 for official ballot results and adoption of the Rates & Charges ordinance. (Don’t forget the Dec 2 Town Hall)
While there was some table pounding by Chairman Mecham to shush up some back-of-the-room hollerers, no chairs were hurled. Though a GINORMOUS law officer type suddenly materialized in the back of the room.
Magic? Naw, Los Osos.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Yeee HAW!
Hold onto your hats, folks. It's time for the Final World Class Bait & Switchy to commence, tomorrow, Tuesday, Oct 26, at the Board of Supervisors starting at 9 a.m.
Yes, it's the old "Rates and Charges" "ballot," which will be mailed to property owners once the BOS votes, which they will. The "ballot" is one of those wierd "reverse" ballots -- if you object to it, you return it; if you don't or if you don't know or care or think it's junque mail and toss it, that'll count as a "yes." And you need 50% plus 1 to put the kabosh on the whole thing, an IMPOSSIBLE task.
What makes this soooooo wonderful is that if you went around ringing doorbells and asked 1,000 people here in Sewerville, "When you passed the Prop 218 ballot agreeing to assess yourself $25,000 for the sewer for your property, did you know that the county was planning to add on to your bill the cost for undeveloped properties, in case the undevelpoed property owners balked at paying for a "service/benefit" when they're sitting on an empty lot and getting no service or benefit?"
I bet you wouldn't find one person who would say, "Oh, yeah, I knew all about that. I'm happy to pay the cost for undeveloped lots. And if those lots never get developed, (and so repay the charges owed when they do develop) because there isn't any water, well, that's O.K. with me."
My bet is that people would say, "Huh? What do you mean I've got to pay MORE than the assessed $25,000? Huh?"
And here's my other bet. That the Rates and Charges Bait & Switchy "ballot" will easily pass because 1) 1/3 of the community won't bother responding. Like the preference survey the county sent out for the sewer, 1/3 of those surveys simply disappeared into the Black Hole of Sewerville, and 2) a whole lot of people will get this Rates & Charges " ballot" and they'll think, "Hey, look, the sewer's only going to cost about $80 a month. That's GREAT!" not realzing that that's merely the "add on" to the original $25,000, an add-on about which they are clueless. But it won't matter, because of that 50% plus 1. Done deal.
Plus, there's always the added threat from the County (watch for it in the Tribune, in the letters to the editor, in the carefully worded "information" packet from the county). It'll translate as: "Pass this "ballot" and pay for those vacant lots, or we'll drop the project altogether and walk away. Bwa-hahahah"
Yes, Hobson's Choice. It's great!
So, that's my bet.
What's yours?
On the bright side, the Rates and Charges discussed at the last BOS, did set a fixed cost, then tied the balance to individual water use, thereby adding a carrot and stick to the whole deal that might encourage more thrifty water use. Which is the really important issue here. Water. Out of which, we are running.
Yes, it's the old "Rates and Charges" "ballot," which will be mailed to property owners once the BOS votes, which they will. The "ballot" is one of those wierd "reverse" ballots -- if you object to it, you return it; if you don't or if you don't know or care or think it's junque mail and toss it, that'll count as a "yes." And you need 50% plus 1 to put the kabosh on the whole thing, an IMPOSSIBLE task.
What makes this soooooo wonderful is that if you went around ringing doorbells and asked 1,000 people here in Sewerville, "When you passed the Prop 218 ballot agreeing to assess yourself $25,000 for the sewer for your property, did you know that the county was planning to add on to your bill the cost for undeveloped properties, in case the undevelpoed property owners balked at paying for a "service/benefit" when they're sitting on an empty lot and getting no service or benefit?"
I bet you wouldn't find one person who would say, "Oh, yeah, I knew all about that. I'm happy to pay the cost for undeveloped lots. And if those lots never get developed, (and so repay the charges owed when they do develop) because there isn't any water, well, that's O.K. with me."
My bet is that people would say, "Huh? What do you mean I've got to pay MORE than the assessed $25,000? Huh?"
And here's my other bet. That the Rates and Charges Bait & Switchy "ballot" will easily pass because 1) 1/3 of the community won't bother responding. Like the preference survey the county sent out for the sewer, 1/3 of those surveys simply disappeared into the Black Hole of Sewerville, and 2) a whole lot of people will get this Rates & Charges " ballot" and they'll think, "Hey, look, the sewer's only going to cost about $80 a month. That's GREAT!" not realzing that that's merely the "add on" to the original $25,000, an add-on about which they are clueless. But it won't matter, because of that 50% plus 1. Done deal.
Plus, there's always the added threat from the County (watch for it in the Tribune, in the letters to the editor, in the carefully worded "information" packet from the county). It'll translate as: "Pass this "ballot" and pay for those vacant lots, or we'll drop the project altogether and walk away. Bwa-hahahah"
Yes, Hobson's Choice. It's great!
So, that's my bet.
What's yours?
On the bright side, the Rates and Charges discussed at the last BOS, did set a fixed cost, then tied the balance to individual water use, thereby adding a carrot and stick to the whole deal that might encourage more thrifty water use. Which is the really important issue here. Water. Out of which, we are running.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
