New Posting Proceedures
Apparently there's one or more witless folks out here in Los Osos who've been attempting to ruin the comment section of this blog by endlessing repeating their various silly battle cries so as to take up all kinds of space thereby discouraging other posters from getting a word in edgewise. It never ceases to amaze me how easily the same people who demand "free speech" for themselves, work so hard to deny it to others. As I said, witless.
At any rate, Greg, the Blog Site Master informs me that I have a few options: 1. turn off the comment section to discourge these immature pests or 2. reconfigured this site so any commentor has to go register and sign on. Shark Inlet and a few other folks have suggest we try that, so for the time being, Greg's set that latter option up.
So, if you want to comment on anything on this site, you'll have to register and log in. Maybe, if you have something worth sharing, you'll go to the trouble to do that. And if you don't, you won't.
Pages
Calhouns Can(n)ons
About the Can(n)ons
Calhoun's Can(n)ons was originally published in 1990 in the (now defunct) Morro Bay, CA, Sun Bulletin, and since 1992 has continued in the various resurrections of the Los Osos, CA. Bay News, Bay Breeze, Bay News, Bay News-Tolosa Press. A few years ago, the Can(n)on was added to the Central Coast NewsMission blogsite. Ann Calhoun lives in Los Osos. You can email her at Churadogs at gmail dot com
To be persuasive, we must be believable. To be believable, we must be credible. To be credible, we must be truthful.
Edward R. Murrow
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; the essential is invisible to the eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
The Little Prince
No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the misfortune is to do it solemnly.
Montaigne
Edward R. Murrow
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; the essential is invisible to the eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
The Little Prince
No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the misfortune is to do it solemnly.
Montaigne
Followers
Posts
Calhouns Can(n)ons
Search Calhoun's Can(n)ons
Adopt a Dog or Cat Today
Local Bloggers and Friends
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(186)
-
▼
June
(15)
- And Now For Something Completely DifferentAlas, so...
- New Posting ProceeduresApparently there's one or m...
- Fundraiser, Pure, Absolute Delight, & PZLDF Presen...
- Calhoun’s Can(n)ons, The Bay News, Morro Bay CAFor...
- An Interesting Wrinkle or TwoWent to the June 20, ...
- A ReminderIt appears from this press release, that...
- Thanks, PaavoPaavo Ogren, the county’s deputy publ...
- Hellooooo, HeeelllloooOOOOO, Los Osos! TAC & Town ...
- So, if Tri-W Is Being Given A "Pass" During The Fi...
- Sewer or DieIn the CDO and CAO documents sent to T...
- Calhoun’s Cannons, The Bay News, Morro Bay CA for ...
- Put Your Hands On The Table And Step Away From the...
- Los Osos Wastewater Draft Report AvailableThe publ...
- TAC Meeting ChangedPress release from the County: ...
- TAC & PZLDF Schedules for JuneAnd check the county...
-
▼
June
(15)
Central Coast News Radio
Central Coast NewsLinks
CCNM Disclaimer: Calhoun's Can(n)on content copyright wholly owned by Ann Calhoun. Central Coast NewsMission site name and branding images, content and customization copyright © 2005 - 2009. Images courtesy page author, Ann Calhoun, and CCNM editor, Greg McClure; sponsors; and public domain. All writers are responsible for their articles. Permission granted to quote articles herein on a fair use basis, please credit the writer.
180 comments:
Hmnnn, I wonder if PG is going to bother, hope so.
Can't say I blame ya, Ann, but you know who I'm going to miss? I'm going to miss the Anon that would constantly use language so foul that it would make me blush, yet s/he always had good, solid takes tucked away in all that foul language... and then s/he would sign every post: "Have a nice day!"
Great stuff.
On the Los Osos Journal blog -- set up, apparently, just to keep the anonymous posts coming in (and, by the way, I find THAT hilarious) -- it reads, "... we believe it's (anonymous posting) the funniest s$#@."
I agree.
Have a nice day!
I agree with Mike. I also hope the anon's with interesting comments to add will take the time to sign up.
This has been an interesting venue to observe and when possible, even participate.
Sincerely,
MK
This is definitely a step up in terms of quality discourse. I'd rather come in here, sit down at the table with people who care to discuss the issues that matter.
Ron, Maria, Mike, Ann, thank you.
As for me, well, my job is to isolate the extremists from the discussion so that uniting the community is more feasible than it was before with all the copy-n'-pastin' and character assassinations.
Conclusion.....
Richard Legros was the drunken asshole, that represents the idiots who support his point of view, that posted the previous idotic repetitive comments on this blog. Doesn't take a Harvard Psychologist or a professional profiler to figure this one out, does it Richard? Or, should I call you Dick? I have no problem with Ann removing the same comment that is repeated 100 times by you and your stupid jackass supporters. By posting the same comment 100 times, you my jackass friend, are acting as the censor by making it very hard to see and find what other people have to say. If the retarded poster that you speak of and support(yourself) had posted their comment once and not 100 times, I'm sure Ann would have had no problem leaving up. Do you get it, Dumbshit? Or, do I need to post this same message 1000 times for you to get it, you stupid fucking asshole. Do you get how fucking retarded your take is, Dick?
Have a nice day!!:)
The only conclusion is that Conclusion is the bomber of the site.
Probably occurred because of an overdose of "smart pills"
Unfortunately the removal of anon comments has produced more anon comments under anon handles. And still we are subjected to foul language produced by people who do not have the skill or intelligence to do otherwise. Of course it is easier to reply to a handle.
Will the idiot that trashed Ann's site stand up and tell us how proud he is of his actions?
> Hmnnn, I wonder if PG is going to bother, hope so.
Thanks Mike. Of course I'm gonna bother. We're having way too much fun on this blog to want to miss any of it.
I also think Ann's response (both yesterday and today) are good & fair responses to the unfortunate recent postings in the open comments. I'm sorry it had to come to this but .... sometimes ya just can't always get what ya want. Not without paying a price. And that price - per the last open comment section - had become too odious. Richard raises some interesting points:
> HOWEVER, regardless of how you are annoyed with such behavior, the poster does have a right to express her/himself in any non-violent manner they choose. Was the poster childish; yes; but that is their right.
On the face of it yes. But in reality no. The world of the internet creates new and interesting forms which can be totally different than other previous forms on which precedent was set. For example, posting is a privilege not an inaliable right. Blogs can define their operating parameters and expectations, announce them and can hold users responsible to them. Ann owns this blog and she can do absolutley anything she wants with it. Ethics, civility and fairness may suggest she do certain things and not do other things. But that is hers to decide. Personal rights have nothing to do with it.
I think many of us are only now beginning to understand that the internet is not quite as free and unfettered as we may have thought. The internet is seriously censored in some parts of the world. Five years ago I didn't even think that possible. Now even Micro$oft and Do-no-harm Google are edging ever closer to censorship software and tools for the internet. Similarly phone calls & phone records, emails, library records, medical records, even genotypes. No, it is the nature of things for freedom always to be bound by censorship.
Richard > But what bothers me more is the fact that Ann REMOVED the Anon’s comment(s) from her comment board. Why does this bother me? ... The comments should be left in place in order to illuminate the nature of the comments and place them into context with the other bloggers.
I gave that some good thought too. At first I thought similarly to Richard. It is what it is. The posts were made to an open blog so that's what we get. At least until the rules are changed. But along about the third or fourth endless mindless repetitive post I realized that even the performance of the blog was being impaired. I don't have a T1 link. I connect to the net through a slower DSL and my ability to read the comments was degraded to the point of not being able to use the blog. That's not a reason to delete the offending comments - after all some people are probably still connecting to the net thru dial-up. (As I do when I travel.) A blog doesn't neccessarily have to meet performance criteria of the lowest denominator. But it was nice when those long comments were gone. I kinda expected to see a notation of some sort - maybe a garbage can or something - inserted into the comments indicating that a comment had been deleted by the Blog Admin. This is what happens when us commentors delete one of our posts so I was expecting the same to happen when the admin deleted a post. Something like that might help mitigate Richard's concerns about contextual inaccuracy and unknown censorship. Indeed, when I go back and look at some of my posts in response to the now deleted comments they make no sense. Still I consider that a fair price to pay to be able to continue to access the comments.
> By removing a bloggers comments, you are in essence acting as a censor. How can Ann act as a blog-master of a blog that encourages free and open comments from the public yet have the ability to remove comments that she finds offensive. By removing comments, Ann has enjoined that only comments that met some idea of worthiness are allowed on her blog.
Spoken as a true Libertarian! I think Ann's response was considered and appropriate. She quickly noted the problem. Published the issues. And changed the rules. The game was broken. She admitted as much and started a new game about as quickly as a new game could be started. I think Ann's blog has been amazingly free of censorship for an amazingly long time. Up to now the Community has been fairly self-policing. But do you really think we were going to get through this one without changing the rules? Let's see how this new game plays. Its worth a go.
BTW, least anyone be confused. Richard Legros and *pg-13 are most emphatically NOT the same person. Some ugly rumors simply have to be squelched right away! I imagine Richard thinks this rumor even uglier than I.
Crapkiller asks:
"Will the idiot that trashed Ann's site stand up and tell us how proud he is of his actions?"
IT WAS YOU CRAPKILLER!!
IT WAS YOU PUSHING YOUR AGENDA, BUT THIS TIME YOU WENT OFF "EXORCIST" STYLE (SPINNING HEAD) SOMETHING MUST HAVE REALLY TICKED YOU OFF!
FIRST AROUND 8AM FRIDAY YOU MADE THE EXACT SAME COMMENT ON THE TRIBUNE STORY COMMENT SECTION ABOUT CHUCK AS YOU DID ON ANN'S (1,000 TIMES) -- AND YOU ACTUALLY POSTED IT AS CRAPKILLER ON THE TRIB -- DO YOU REALLY THINK WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE THAT WAS JUST A COINCIDENCE??? THE SAME EXACT LINE??? COINCIDENCE??? YOU ARE SICK, AND UNFORTUNATELY, YOU NEVER GO AWAY -- YOU'RE HERE TO RULE ANN'S SITE AND BLOCK ANY OPPOSITION TO TRI-W.
FIRST YOU SELL TRI-W 24/7 THEN YOU SAY YOU DON'T CARE WHERE AND WHAT SEWER WE GET. OH BOY! YOU THINK WE ARE AS STUPID AS THE COUNTY THINKS WE ARE!
You are hideous and hypocritical. You'll deny it, as always, but your own postings under you own name of Crapkiller are almost as bad as your anonymous ones are. Now, trying to blame-shift, you are acting as though you "didn't do it!" (Bart Simpson). Someone else did it! Yeah sure. You're so crazy, I couldn't possibly support anything you support. The best thing you can do for your cause is to get off of this site...or stand up and take credit for your sick behavior.
Someone certainly is sick...
...and it's NOT Crapkiller!!!
Did Crapkiller register as "Mike" now too? She's the only one who thinks she's not sick...
To Richard at 11:29 AM,
So you think vandalism should be protected as speech?
Vandalism isn't violent either and vandalism also involves some sort of "tagging" or repetition of certain words. From what I've seen, while the posters ("bombers") have expressed themselves in a non-violent manner, what they did was they took one statement and duplicated that statement excessively to the point that it obstructed blog viewers and posters from participating.
Additionally, the intent to cause harm; to pollute the blogs was apparent. While it wasn't violent, it was malicious and the Taxpayers Watch took a very long time to dismiss that kind of behavior, leaving me to suspect that this was a rather calculated affair.
Also, here's some interesting trivia: when a computer has low RAM (memory), the computer has a harder time processing repetitious strings of text when you scroll down so if you have a slow computer and you try scrolling down, the computer locks up. Even if you have a broadband connection, this still happens. Not only does this hurt discourse that the blog most certainly offers, but it also obstructs people from seeing the content on the Comments page.
So, the censorship makes sense. I get what you're saying, but on the other hand, censorship may be useful for other reasons besides censorship.
Sincerely,
TheDamnTruth
What silly games you folks want to play.
You are so afraid of a sewer that you cause an entire community to put up with your forms of censorship!
You who walked to the podium to mouth scrips written for you. Endless droneing on about your right to be heard! Over and over you marched to the podium, well, you must have won, you won the recall! So what more do you want?
You created such a public outcry of support for halting a waste water treatment facility, that the State Legistlature bowed down and gave you everything you demanded! Soon the Federal EPA will award you with medals of honor!
...and all for what? So you can have absolute freedom to do whatever you please? So you can censor anyone who you disagree with? So you can spend the property taxpayers funds on lawyers and interium GM with no competitive bids? So you can tell yourselves how the sand in Los Osos is so special that you don't need a sewer?
Well, there are still a few of us who disagree with you and the obstructions you have chosen to pursue. We don't like having to pay double taxes, we don't like paying for incompetent fiscal mismanagement and we sure don't like the very sick and violent words and actions of those who are going beyond decency and civility. Los Osos is not a nation unto it's own, there already are laws which govern our society, there are even laws governing the use of censorship and there are laws governing free speech. If you can say whatever you think, then so can I... I do and always will!
I do support most of what Crapkiller says, everything Shark Inlet and Richard Le Gros says and hardly anything Ron Crawford says. I certainly do think the vile and vulgar postes like keepmhonest are irresponsible at best and anti-society at worst!
I am 100% behind the County and will be voteing yes for each of my properties!
In regards to 4crapkiller,
It's one thing to say that one isolated incident was a coincidence, but when you have several coincidences, it's safe to presume that it's really not a coincidence.
Case in point: Both on SanLuisObispo.com and Calhoun's Cannon, 4crapkiller sent out comments around the same time that this "bomber" struck and when you look at the messages, they were posted right after each other and when I mean right after each other, I'm talking 30 seconds. It doesn't take much time to copy and paste a quote several times. Press Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V, press Enter and repeat. For the kinds of posts that were posted, they don't take more than 30 seconds. You can even copy blocks of type, retain the formatting and paste that, and that takes a shorter amount of time.
The whole "bombing" incident was the inside joke amongst the Taxpayers Watch who attended the last Town Hall meeting: "Did anyone check out Ann's blog recently? Oh the hilarity!" Then I see Taxpayers Watch members and sympathizers scrambling to condemn the bloggers' behavior and even accuse someone else of posing as them throughout the entire ordeal.
4crapkiller has posted some extremely vile things on both SanLuisObispo.com and Calhoun's Cannon that are undeniably crude, raunchy, obscene and threatening. Richard LeGros, who is on this blog, has never once attempted to combat this negative image of the Taxpayers Watch that 4crapkiller has manifested and usually friends of friends keep their lips sealed.
Why are you so focused on blaming someone just because you aren't getting your own way?
I know for a fact that Crapkiller did not write "Take every single Dreamer and Taxpayers Watch member on a bus ride to Mexico, dig some shallow graves, and tell them to get on their knees and pray that God will forgive them in the end."
That came from a very sick person who is going to assault someone in the name of a sewer! but it sure wasn't Crapkiller, was it you?
Richard, I get your point, but I have to ask;
When have we ever lived in a time of total freedom of expression?
There are censors we don't acknowledge because we don't have the ability to recognize it.
For example,
Selective beliefs will cause the censorship of opposing viewpoints. this is a form of self censorship,
Sometimes this has unintended, but enormous consequences.
For instance, did you believe delaying the recall vote would have a positive outcome, or were you blinded by your own self censorship of opposing viewpoints?
I know I was influenced by (what ended up being)
misleading campaigning in voting for the recall.
My 20 20 hindsight has improved. (finally)
Thats why I take everything with a huge grain of sodium now, especially political pontification.
The pot and the kettle.
PS, this format seems better
900 pound gorilla, white elephant, you name it.
Just how much will the property owners agree to?
Hi Mike Green,
True, there are censors that we do not reconize; which makes it that more important that we do not intentionally further censor ourselves.
My decision to hold the recall vote when we did was my decision to make. As the campaign for the recall was based upon false promises and misinformation I thoughly expected to win. Your 20/20 hindsight now sees that the recall campaign was all deception. Oh, I believe that the recall folks believed their own spin; but history shows that they have completely failed in all their policies and promises.
Prior to the recall I made many public statements regarding the consequences of stopping the process to build a WWTF. Remember that the process had begun in 2001 with the adoption of the FEIR and solidified by the 2001 218 bond vote.
My decision to proceed with the process was made in order to PROTECT YOU AND THE COMMUNITY OF LOS OSOS from the undesireable and expensive consequences of halting the Tri-W project. The voters had the right to stop the process; but in doing so they have to accept the consequences of their decision; which leaves one to speculate what would have been the outcome of the recall vote if those campaigning against me really understood the damage that would occur due to their actions.
Regards, Richard LeGros
Regarding the recall election, Mr. LeGros said "the voters had the right to stop the process: but in doing so they have to accept the consequences of their decision."
That's pretty much what we are facing with the upcoming Proposition 218 election, isn't it?
Will we learn from the history here, or once again put off making a decision and suffering the consequences?
Hi TCG,
Bingo!
I hope that the property owners in the PZ will support the County and the vote YES in upcoming 218 vote. The consequences of yet again stopping the process will be catastrophic.
Regards, Richard LeGros
"I do support most of what Crapkiller says, everything Shark Inlet and Richard Le Gros says and hardly anything Ron Crawford says."
You know, if you read my stuff carefully, I rarely say anything. All I do, for the most part, is REPORT what other, usually excellent, sources say.
For example, when I reported that Coastal Commission staff member wrote in 1998 (before the election that formed the LOCSD on the back of the Solution Group's alternative):
"Pursuit of the Solution Group alternative also has the potential to result in significant delays to the implementation of a wastewater treatment project for the Los Osos area." [I love that quote, it's so brilliant. He predicted the future. That's why I've nicknamed Steve Monowitz, Steve Nostradamonowitz, after the famous See-er, Nostradamus, because Monowitz can see the future, too... spooky!)]
... that wasn't me saying that. That was me REPORTING that Monowitz wrote that. See the difference? So, Mike (not Green), you really don't have to "support" anything I say, just read, with an open mind, what my sources say. They are always excellent, very smart, and uncannily right.
Like when I reported that in Gary Karner's 2005 rambling manifesto, he writes:
"The County couldn't care less about the Los Osos Community..."
See? Again, that's not me saying that. That's me REPORTING that Gary Karner wrote that. Key difference. [I love that quote too, because these days, the Karners and their supporters are running around saying things like, "Support the county process." ... gotta luv 'em.]
Richard wrote:
"My decision to hold the recall vote when we did was my decision to make."
Indeed it was, that's why I support a change in the election code. Elected officials that are up for recall should not be setting their own recall election date. If that decision would have been County Clerk-Recorder, Julie Rodewald's "decision to make," as it should be, she would have set it at one of the earliest possible dates, as she told me when I asked her that question on the phone (See, Mike? I didn't say Rodewald would have set the recall election date at one of the earliest possible dates, I reported that Rodewald TOLD me that.) And IF Rodewald had set the LOCSD recall election date, instead of LeGros, Gustafson, and Hensley, there wouldn't be a huge, expensive, California-taxpayer-funded ditch in the middle of Los Osos right now, because they wouldn't have had the extra month to begin pounding all of that money into the ground.
I mean it, that part of the election code needs to be changed... BIG TIME! It's horrendous policy.
"Remember that the process had begun in 2001 with the adoption of the FEIR..."
An EIR that had to include a baseless "Statement of Overriding Considerations" in order to get around the entire environmental review process -- a process that pointed to sites out of town -- to keep the project at Tri-W.
By the way, I guess I'm not going to miss "Have a nice day!" after all.
Oh Gawd, here we go again. And I promised myself I wouldn't get drawn into this bottomless quagmire yet another time. Richard, you and I have gone around this one so many times we should both be getting dizzy and falling on the floor. And as I recall, more than once we have finally gotten to a place where we both agree to disagree and leave it at that. That's cool.
But in this particular context it is not so cool. So I can't let it slip by with out uncomment. This specific discussion - of why the pre-recall CSD voted to delay the vote and then pounded huge gobs of good money into the ground just days before the long delayed recall election which would have significantly altered the game and possibly made burying said money unnecessary - is framed in terms of censor.
While discussing censorship Mike Green asked whether your personal beliefs about delaying the vote (and I presume committing the funds and beginning work when you did) may have skewed your thinking so as to censor the alternative path. And you very correctly note that there are censors we do not recognize which makes noting those we do recognize all that much more important.
And then you go on to explain that you scheduled the vote to ensure your re-election. Implicit in this is you also decided to commit funds and begin construction when you did so as to ensure your re-election. Which you thoroughly expected to win. Yep, that sounds about right. Please note, those are exactly your words just restated to remove the self-censorship spin you still continue to spin.
I appreciate that you did what you thought was best. I believe you to be honorable in that. But can you not even see your self-censorship? That in following what you thought to be best - for you, your board and for Los Osos - you dug a hole so deep and made a mess so big we will never be able to extricate ourselves from it? Given how the new CSD was burdened by the results of your winning strategy and the hasty actions of the last few days of your office, to now claim that as proof of their 'false promises and misinformation' is disingenuous in the extreme. The fact is history only shows that the new CSD was hamstrung from the beginning. It would have taken a miracle for them to succeed under those circumstances in addition to the ongoing legal tangles resulting from your actions. That's not say that they didn't error too in believing they could pull off what they said they could. Or that they weren't any better at full & fair disclosure. And that they haven't made some boneheaded decisions. But a good deal of their failure is due to you.
Richard Legros > Prior to the recall I made many public statements regarding the consequences of stopping the process to build a WWTF.
Which you set up perfectly for their perfect failure. I do not believe you are quite as saintly as you want us to believe. That's why I hafta keep knocking your halo whenever you publish this stuff.
Richard Legros > My decision to proceed with the process was made in order to PROTECT YOU AND THE COMMUNITY OF LOS OSOS from the undesireable and expensive consequences of halting the Tri-W project. ...
No, you've already said the many things you did were to ensure your re-election. Which you believed best served the community of Los Osos. And heaven help us if we didn't re-elect you!
Richard Legros > The voters had the right to stop the process; but in doing so they have to accept the consequences of their decision;
But, but, but ..... we did try to stop the process. If the recall vote had been held much earlier - even as late a few weeks earlier before the last actions of your board had committed us to failure - the consequences we would be facing would be much different than those you gave to us. We can easily speculate how things might have been different.
Richard Legros > which leaves one to speculate what would have been the outcome of the recall vote if those campaigning against me really understood the damage that would occur due to their actions.
Again, it comes down to "those campaigning against me" created this mess. I had nothing to do with it. I warned you all! Nyah, nyah, nyah.
< sigh >
Regards, *pg-13
Ron,
I am sorry, but you have not writen anything in your last post that promotes the building of a WWTF for Los Osos. In fact, your take on past events has nothing to do with today's reality.
Today's reality is clear....Los Osos must support the County and the pending 218 vote to fund and build a WWTF prior to 2011 or face catatrophic consequences.
Regards, Richard LeGros
Least you say what I have written doesn't fit the context of these comments .....
I support the County in this. ALways have. Even from the very very first long before any of us knew how to spell CSD. I am concerned about some of the niggly details of the on-going County process though. I would like to have some idea what we are voting for in a 218 vote. Voting against 218 is clearly idiocy. But I would like to have something to vote FOR.
Ron brings up an interesting point. From the reports on the history of this entire situation, the sentiment seems to be that the recall should have been held sooner rather than later. I suspect, based on the energy behind the recall, that the delay was actually to their advantage. In the last several weeks prior, there was enough speculation and doubts raised and belief in $100 a month/out of town, it provided the approximately 100+/- vote edge to pass the recall. It really lies in how we perceived the situation. I think the delay helped the recall.
What concerned me during the recall was the lack of facts behind the charge. What further concerned me was when I attended my first set of meetings post the recall, and the lack of concern for the people who were pleading to the board and asking for cautious decision making and most especially after meeting with Blakeslee and that the SRF funding was more than likely lost if work, on some level, wasn't continued.
Ron, you may be amused by those of us running around but I have never met the Karner's and it doesn't take a group affiliation to be somewhat perplexed by the decisions made by this board and the financial decisions that have been made that have a profoundly and potentially, debilitating effect on this community. There are lots of folks I talk to with no "ties" to TW and they share these thoughts and concerns.
A park at TRIW and the costs in comparison to the costs incurred by fines and bankruptcy don't even come close to balancing out. I firmly believe that we would have, as a community, helped to alleviate the strain of potential fees for services with searching for alternate funding sources. The only funding source there is to offset the costs of the bankruptcy and accumulating debt is the homeowner.
My children could have played in a park. They play baseball in a leach field, I really don't have a problem playing baseball by a WWTF. I still believe we should attempt a park at that location whether or not a WWTF gets built there or not. We can't play baseball or gather in the non existent returns of a bankruptcy/debt. Anyone that thinks that I or anyone else needs TW to point this out to us is not giving credit for free thought and/or free will.
Maybe the CC should have heeded Mr.Monowitz's staff report back in 1998.
The Statement of Overriding Considerations hardly under minded the entire environmental review process - funny thing is the site that was noted as the preferred site isn't even viable and will never be considered further. Funny thing about environmental review - just because some place is identified, doesn't mean it's possible, practical or in the long run preferred. The process is an attempt to be objective, even if at times doesn't appear practical.
From a historical stand point, I agree with the sentiment that the CSD was not capable of providing "the best" project for Los Osos but as it unfurled, the CSD did bring a viable project. Now that we are where we are, I'm relieved that the county is in charge of the process right now. I have little faith in the CSD's ability to bring a WWTF project forward that will be the best for overall water management. I do believe the county has the resources, ie staff and additional contacts to adequately "cover all the bases". Our current CSD doesn't even have a GM or the staffing, or finances, to bring forward everything that would resemble a project that would be a viable part of an overall water management plan. The may be able to try to convince the community one more time but I think it's a gamble I'm personally not willing to take. If we are serious about co-gen, a better shot at reasonable solids handling and all the other issues involved, it lies in a passed 218.
Either way we pay and the price to gamble on a failed 218 doesn't make sense to me.
Phew! This is why I don't blog very much - I to blog the same way I talk (incessantly) It maybe repetitive but at least I use different words!
Have a great day.
Maria, Great post! one thing I feel should happen is if the WWTF goes out of town then TriW should be sold at fair market price with no restrictions and that money used to offset some of the cost of the sewer.
We will need money more than a park, sadly.
Hi PG-13,
Let us have a reality check.
Whatever you or I think about past events has absoluting nothing to do with resolving the current situation.
The past is done and buried. Nothing can be done about it.
What matters now is the reality that Los Osos must build a WWTF as quickly as possible in order to end the pollution of the State's water, bring Los Osos into compliance with the LAW and mitigate (even avoid) State enforcement actions.
So ask yourself...what must we do to resolve this terrible reality that Los Osos faces? I know what I must do. I whole-heartedly support the County process. Meanwhile, I am pursuing ways to undo the damage to Los Osos home owners by finding sources of revenue that does not rely upon district ratepayers.
I pray you do the same.
Regards, Richard LeGros
Chalk it up to procrastination, but I was just looking through Karner's rambling manifesto, for old-times sake, and in it there are some interesting ramblings.
For example:
"Mr. Paul Jagger acting for Roger Briggs of the RWQCB in a letter dated January 23, 1998 inferred that 100% of the septic tanks in Los Osos would have to be replaced in order to use STEP/STEG and credited this recommendation to T. R. Bounds, P. E., Vice President of Orenco Systems, Inc., the STEP/STEG design engineers."
That seems kind of interesting, because, if it's true, my boy, P. Jag., seems to have documented that STEP/STEG is fine with him and the RWQCB, as long as all septic tanks in PZ are replaced, and he's saying that due the recommendation of the Vice President of Orenco Systems, Inc.
and;
"Let's just assume that the recall is successful and the whole LOCSD Board is composed of those who have vowed to stop this project. What does that gain this community?
2) Probable loss of local government through the LOCSD because they will be fined out of existence. Whoever is elected to the LOCSD for replacement during the recall election will have a very short tenure."
That is just off-the-hook excellent.
Probable loss of local government? Karner's crew, before the recall election results were even certified, starting swinging their wrecking ball all over Los Osos in an effort to crush said "local government." As many know, his wife, Pandora Nash-Karner, organized a strategy to have the RWQCB fine the LOCSD "out of existence," -- "I hope the CSD gets fined out of existence...", Pandora Nash-Karner, September 28, 2005 -- then Karner's/Hensley's/LeGros's Taxpayers Watch attempted to get the LOCSD dissolved -- an attempt that cost them over 20-grand (that reminds me, did we (SLO County) get our money back yet?).
Probable loss of local government?
GOTTA luv 'em!
PG-13, your 11:13 post is one of the best I've ever read in Ann's comments section. Just excellent. "Not cool," indeed.
Maria, that was a good post, for the most part, but you wrote:
"A park at TRIW and the costs in comparison to the costs incurred by fines and bankruptcy don't even come close to balancing out."
I'm going to be frank, I can tell by that quote that you're not grasping the concept of "bait and switchy." The cost of the park is irrelevant, what is relevant is that the park was the only reason Tri-W was selected in the first place for the LOCSD's second project (the ponding system was the first, as I'm sure (hope?) you know), but the 2001 LOCSD lied to the Coastal Commission about some phantom "strongly held community value" that any sewer plant in LO also double as a "centrally located recreational asset," and that lie locked in Tri-W for the second project. I mean, c'mon, I've been showing that for years and you're rolling out the cost of the park today? That doesn't have anything to do with anything... other than how Special Condition of Approval #17 is going to get funded IF Tri-W is selected, and there's no answer to that question, by the way... just thought you folks at the TAC might want to know that. It smells very "fatal flaw"-ish.
" I really don't have a problem playing baseball by a WWTF."
Would you also use the "picnic area" in the sewer plant?
"Maybe the CC should have heeded Mr.Monowitz's staff report back in 1998."
That's not a "maybe." And the reason why they didn't? Four words: Nash-Karner's behavior based marketing
I got to tell ya, I'm an exceedingly optimistic person, Maria, and I like and appreciate your posts and demeanor, but I'm getting a very bad feeling about the TAC.
Tri-W continues to be "carried through" the screening process (by the way, to answer one of Maria's earlier questions from a previous comments section, THAT'S why some people think that Tri-W is getting a "pass" from the TAC, because in both the Rough and Fine Screening Reports, it says Tri-W is being "carried through" the process. So, you can see why some people think that Tri-W is getting a "pass" from the TAC, right?), and now its members seem to be having a really hard time wrapping their minds around "bait and switchy."
That's not looking so good.
Ron,
As I wrote before, tell it to the County. The County will make the final decision about Tri-W, not you or on this blog.
If your point of view has merit, it will stand. If not, c'est la vie.
Regards, Richard LeGros
Richard, continuing the dialogue .....
Richard Legros > Whatever you or I think about past events has absoluting nothing to do with resolving the current situation.
Yes. On that we agree. Far too often we tend to get trapped in He Said / She Said historical rehashes of past events and trying to analyze just exactly where the train left the tracks on its way over the cliff. As you say, 'The past is done and buried. Nothing can be done about it.'. I agree, the past is done and there is little we can do about it now but I question how deeply it is buried. Or how long it will stay buried when past engineers of the train wreck keep writing revisionist history of the crash.
And we agree on the present reality and priority of attention: Build a WWTF, stop the pollution of the bay, bring Los Osos into compliance, and mitigate/avoid State enforcement actions. Of course, the devil usually hides in the details. Stopping the pollution implies knowing what it is and where its coming from if we are expecting a WWTF to stop it. Be a shame if after all of this we build a Taj Ma Sewer only to discover the pollution continues with little diminishment. And I'm still unclear about how or whether various WWTF's actually comply with the laws. Which Laws, Who's laws? But I totally believe we need a Waste Water Treatment Solution and the sooner the better. Hopefully one that addresses salt water intrusion and sustainable drinking water. And I believe the County is the only player - past, present and future - with the chops to make it happen. So I'm supporting the County as much as I can all the while hoping they deliver something worthy of my faith. It doesn't have to be perfect, just worthy.
Richard Legros > Meanwhile, I am pursuing ways to undo the damage to Los Osos home owners by finding sources of revenue that does not rely upon district ratepayers.
Kudos to you. See, that's why I believe in your best intentions. I wish you very much good fortune in this. I honor that you're still stepping up and helping. Ya gotta expect though that we'll be watching our backs even as we join together in this endeavor.
Mike Green wrote:
"PS, this format seems better"
I guess so, because I'm back, again.
Because something Maria wrote got under my skin:
"... funny thing is the site that was noted as the preferred site isn't even viable and will never be considered further. Funny thing about environmental review - just because some place is identified, doesn't mean it's possible, practical or in the long run preferred."
Funny thing about the TAC process, just because it's there, doesn't mean it's working.
Maria, as the TAC's own documents show, ONE of the sites (plural!) that was environmentally preferred was not viable due to deed restrictions, however another "environmentally preferred" site -- Andre2 -- is currently being considered by the TAC today! As I'm sure (hope?) you know, it made it through the rough screening process, and right now, it's in the fine screening process. Yet, here's a TAC member, that apparently isn't aware that Andre2 exists at all, or that the 2001 LOCSD was required by CEQA and the CZLUO to select it. (You guys at the TAC realize that Tri-W is illegal, right? It's in violation of the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance -- "CZLUO Section 23.08.288d allows public facilities within ESHA only where there is no other feasible location."
See? If Tri-W WASN'T being "carried through" the entire screening process, the TAC would know all of this stuff. It's kind of embarrassing, and a waste of county taxpayers money, I will add, that they don't. Oh well, thank God for blog technology.)
I wrote about Andre2 here and I've linked to that story several times on this blog.
I'm blown away. Why do I know more than the TAC about the Los Osos treatment facility siting options? That can't be good. What's happening at those TAC meetings? What in the hell do they talk about? Certainly not things like CEQA, or the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance, or "bait and switchy," or Andre2. What are we getting for our $2 million? I'm not seeing it.
Look, I'll be happy to give a presentation at one of those meetings, for a handsome consulting fee, of course. It sounds like that would go a long way in getting TAC members up to speed, quickly... could save a lot of money in the long-run. (Think about it Paavo. You have my e-mail address.)
Richard wrote:
"Meanwhile, I am pursuing ways to undo the damage to Los Osos home owners by finding sources of revenue that does not rely upon district ratepayers."
Uh-oh.
I think I speak on behalf of all NON-district rate payers when I say, "I don't like the sound of that."
and;
"'The past is done and buried. Nothing can be done about it."
Ken Lays attorneys should have used THAT argument.
Ron,
Yet again, you ignore details that don't agree with what you're selling just because they are inconvenient...
First, your quote about STEP being fine with the RWQCB forgets that there would be huge cost of replacing 100% of septic tanks in the PZ ... that it is far cheaper to just decommission them as the TriW plan intended to do. Yes, STEP would work, but there is an additional cost of using STEP, the difference in the cost of replacing a septic tank and the cost of decommission. It was that cost difference in large part which torpedoed STEP. By the way, if you are interested in some good fiction, please look into the Ripley report cost of septic replacement ... I am still curious how the Ripley team concluded that a complete tank replacement is less expensive than the decomissioning associated with TriW.
As for Karner's comment on a possible loss of local government should the recall measures pass ... um ... that is exactly what did happen. Please note that the LOCSD is no longer in charge of the project due to the actions of the LOCSD board. Perhaps had they made different choices right after being elected, we would still have local control, but even though you mean to be critical of Karner it is clear that he was right and your choice to criticize him reveals your distorted perspective.
On your comments to Maria ... it is clear that you didn't read and understand the nature of her comments. You keep bringing up "bait-n-switchy" as if it were the only thing that matters. For those of us who get to pay the bill, the relevant question is the cost versus location. Please remember that if the County wants to remove the park from the County project, they are not bound to a LOCSD document ... they can write their own SOC to justify the choice of location. Your claim that TriW is in violation of CZLUO section bumblesnark is patently false. You are choosing to define the word feasible in a very strict sense and ignoring a similar ordinance that says agricultural land cannot be used where another feasible site exists...
On the matter of whether the CCC was snowed by Pandora in 1998 ... it would seem that your argument should be with them for not doing their job. Here's a question ... how much have you written that is critical of the CCC staff and board members at that time?
On your last real point ... where you say that you don't want folks outside the LOCSD to have to pay anything for the LOCSD sewer and treatment plant ... I am greatly troubled that you feel comfortable advocating we spend more and more and more but you don't feel it is your place to help us out.
On your last point ... I would ask how you suggest we go back in time and vote against the formation of the CSD or against the recall now that we know better on both counts?
Ron, Got to hand it to you, you are right about TriW being a questionable goat in the sheep herd but honestly I'm glad its going to be there at the 218 vote, needles to say LO needs the support of people that have the TriW religion, and believe me there are some folks that have their egos so tied up in that place that they are blinded by their personal censors.
Don't forget, there is going to be a survey later and alternatives will be presented.
And also don't forget, the people making that last call owe LO very little or nothing, won't be any sweat off their noses if the bill goes up another fifty a month or so. IMHO their constituents would probably applaud them for sticking us with a higher bill.
If TriW goes down in flames its going to be a political, not legal, decision that lights the match.
Too bad too, don't know if I can afford freelance journalism after that.
Just kidding I'm saving up my bottles and cans;-)
There has never been any reason for 4crapkiller to post as an anon. 4crapkiller is proud of what she posts. She does not need to act like an idiot to counteract idiotic thought. If she has something to say, she does so, signs her handle, and accepts replies. She first started on Ann's blog in January?
Yes, 4crapkiller can be nasty in that she has been quick to identify posters who have been identified as taking out multiple names on the Tribune blogs and holding conversations with themselves in that he could not get anyone to agree with their pompous and egotistical positions, totally based upon speculation.
Joey Racano comes to mind. He even posted under one of these names and signed his name.(not bright). He was caught many times, by his own writing, style, and accusations of corruption by former board members without any proof. Activist hero, spirit pen come to mind. Probably seven or eight handles. No doubt he is bitter. He was destroyed by the simple identification of "JJJJJOOOOEY"
If Ann had not erased the repetitious trashing of this blog, the accusation that 4crapkiller could do this would be proven false by time line. 4crapkiller is on many threads on the Tribune blogs. She even comments on Tribune stories. She does not devote herself to Los Osos exclusively, but is also interested in Atascadero, county, state, and Federal politics.
There is a big difference between honorable people and those who would wish to foster false information and totally unfounded speculation and conspiracy theories on these blogs for absolutely sometimes a totally unknown purpose except for character assassination. They seem to feel that if they assassinate the character of an individual, it makes the individual's IDEAS suspect. Ideas have to stand on their own.
To thedamntruth:
"As for me, well, my job is to isolate the extremists from the discussion so that uniting the community is more feasible than it was before with all the copy-n'-pastin' and character assassinations."
I support your efforts.
You can start with keepemhonest and yourself.
Otherwise, you will be quickly found out to be a very obvious fraud.
For the information of ALL:
4crapkiller will NOT go away.
Bravo CK, nor should you go away!
I would like your take on the pay for the interium GM and more than a discussion of whether the hourly price is too high/low, how about your thoughts on the "sole source" contract that apparently was used in procureing the service.
Have a great evening!
Good evening guys,
I'm going to make this post short because all of the posts above this one are incredibly long-winded, acidic, and issue-challenged. I would like to go over each and every one of them, but I don't want to go to Rite Aid to buy another bucket of aspirin.
I'm going to sit down with you, Crap, one-on-one because the following is directed to you:
You are the Wastewater Antichrist. I see your posts as a constant reminder as to why the community is so divided right now. This is what you created. This is all a game to you. You vandalize the blogs with overwhelmingly bigoted comments about people, ideas and the way people live.
You call people names, guess at people's identities, make slanderous comments and believe me, if people knew the face behind this 4crapkiller, they would sue you and more. And for what? For what? You tell me, I'd love to know and I'm sure everyone else would love to know as well.
Behind this character we know as "4crapkiller," there is a woman who has gone to several LOCSD meetings, insulted everyone who disagreed with her and created a firestorm of disarray. Endorsed by Stan, Gordon and Richard, you threw that apple of discord into the room for the sheer thrill of watching others suffer.
You are no different than Joseph McCarthy, going on a witch-hunt for communists. Today, we have this sociopath who rages on these blogs (because her words won't be accepted in any other medium), thinking that everyone who disagrees with her is Joey because they are Joey or because they're [insert activist here], their points are moot.
I know this 4crapkiller is used by different people so I'm referring to all of you. Each and every one of you should be held accountable for your actions and the time for accountability is now.
TO ALL TRI-W SUPPORTERS (INCLUDING MARIA, RICHARD, PANDORA, SHARKINLET, ETC. ETC.)
None of you have any class.
You want a sewer in the heart of Los Osos on the main street. You want an ugly conventional treatment plant that has enormous health risks to humans and the enviornment.
There are very wealthy people here that want Los Osos to be like Laguna Beach - but it can never be that with a sewer in town, especially one like MWH designed.
Absolutely no class whatsoever.
I became extremely excited when I heard that Patricia Johanson had come to Los Osos because I know people with money like three things: travel, to eat well, and enjoy art.
Patricia Johanson turns wastewater projects into art, and that WOULD help turn Los Osos into a Laguna Beach or something similar. The kind of project Patricia Johanson could create would increase home values tremendously and draw tourists and wealthy home buyers. Los Osos could be well on the way to fine restaurants, day spas, and maybe soon some culture.
BUT, NO, we've got people with no culture, no class, no taste, no brains wanting to put in a hidious sewer with a park in the middle of town. Unbelievable!
P.S.
Maria wants her kids to play at a park next to a WWTP KNOWING the health risks?...chemicals...air bourne pathogens...real nice...!
On and by the way, see that comment that was deleted at 7:20? Well, I caught a glimpse of that comment. It was from "mike" and it read:
"For the information of ALL: 4crapkiller will NOT go away."
Gee, that comment rings a bell. Scroll up and you see that "4crapkiller" wrote the same thing. Gotcha.
What's even more ironic is her post regarding multiple accounts:
"Yes, 4crapkiller can be nasty in that she has been quick to identify posters who have been identified as taking out multiple names on the Tribune blogs and holding conversations with themselves in that he could not get anyone to agree with their pompous and egotistical positions, totally based upon speculation."
Gotcha.
Crapkiller - you are the new "Mike" because nobody spells like you. It looks to me like you are the one who messed up Ann's discussion board. I read what you wrote in the Tribune.
To keepmhonest:
1. I was not on the Tribune blogs anywhere near 1:20 PM, 3:30 PM, and 3:44 PM on 6/22/2007. I was busy painting doors and doing productive work, not easy for an old lady. I was on the blogs mid morning and then much later than the time of the trashing.
Please direct me to the comment on Chuck Cesena. While I know he is a complete fool through 20/20 hindsight (insolvency as proof) and his voting record, wish him to have his day in court for the rape of Los Osos, I do not remember taking him individually to task.
My record of posts on the Tribune Blogs can be easily accessed by anyone by doing a search for MY postings for the date of 6/22/2007.
You are a fraud and a bomber involved in character assassination and do not help your cause (whatever that may be, and for what purpose).
By false accusations without documentation you make yourself look very ignorant, and it is clear for any rational person to see.
I WAS the worlds worst speller. I use a spell checker and a dictionary to correct my deficiency. I continuously learn.
May you do the same. Nobody listens to fools except fools, and they have to be even more foolish!
Have a BAD day, you deserve it! (Every day is a bad day for a fool). One pays a terrible price for ignorance. Worry about paying your bills!
And so, thedamntruth, write the truth based upon research, or are you a fellow conspirator and fraud against the truth also?
I am proud of what I just wrote. I was actually kind.
Interesting take on what I said keepmhonest. It has a similar ring of Ron's interpretation of 9 acres vs. 32 acres and identified treatment options that may not fit on 9 acres.
Do I believe that the chemicals and pathogens are any more virulent than any that I protect them from everyday are more present and volatile at a WWTF engineered to be in the proximity of residences and other activities of daily living? The answer is no.
I don't believe in the perfect project. I tend to not believe in "the perfect" anything. What I do believe is that there are multiple solutions for any problem or situation and how we get to resolution takes time and discussion.
There is little room left in this community for the ongoing destruction caused by innuendo. It would be great to let it go but to only hope for that would "Pollyanna" to the ultimate degree. I am accused of many things and I really don't want to be accused of being her!
I am entitled to my concerns on this issue and if there are members of my community, maybe even neighbors who feel the need to devalue my opinion to further their own - that isn't a new strategy and I expect it to be used - so be it.
The only way this situation will become a "win-win" is when anyone holding a position that is inflexible will ease up a bit and look either from the other side of the box or outside it. The only thing I can identify as a reason to hold on so tightly are ideas and emotions rooted in fear. How deep the fear goes, I don't know, how big the impact - HUGE.
What my realistic hope is - more people to become a part of the discussion.
Sleep well-
MK
4crapkiller,
For being an old woman and such, you have a lot of growing up to do.
Before I get some shut-eye, I have a few choice words for Maria Kelly:
Do I believe that the chemicals and pathogens are any more virulent than any that I protect them from everyday are more present and volatile at a WWTF engineered to be in the proximity of residences and other activities of daily living? The answer is no.
You do know that, unlike the kind of airborne bacteria that we're familiar with, bacteria that is incubated in gravity collection facilities (that you openly support) is actually immune to treatment. They're called pathogens and because these pathogens can be incubated in facilities like the formerly proposed WWTF, wastewater engineers from the United States and around the world agree that this technology is obsolete.
And if that is truly your belief, then quite frankly, you should stop talking about it and start talking about the things you actually know about. You haven't been in Osos for a while. Leave your ego at the door.
To thedamntruth:
Why do you not discuss a negative pressure site with odors and pathogens scrubbed by filters to remove them?
And what happens in an open ponding system with birds coming and going and then crapping anywhere. However the effluent can be disinfected, but can be reinfected. It can be covered. If the effluent is continuously disinfected, bacteria will not work. Obviously this is not a rational system except far removed from habitation. If close, the system will have to be covered.
But who cares, the county will decide, or we will pay discharge permits and the state will come in and do what THEY want.
The county will decide. However you make a powerful statement which deserves documentation:
"You do know that, unlike the kind of airborne bacteria that we're familiar with, bacteria that is incubated in gravity collection facilities (that you openly support) is actually immune to treatment. They're called pathogens and because these pathogens can be incubated in facilities like the formerly proposed WWTF, wastewater engineers from the United States and around the world agree that this technology is obsolete."
Please document. This is very scary stuff. However humans have an immune system, have been subjected to pathogens since the beginning of time, but certainly do not need any new types. Does bleach (chlorine) or ultraviolet light, or ozone work? How about silver filters?
Everyone in LA, SF, Sac, Fresno is at risk.
To thedamntruth:
The post was not from Mike. I have no idea who Mike is, nor you. It was a duplication of the above post from me. You are so full of unfounded speculation that you stinketh. Worse than that, you "believe" your own totally unfounded speculations. Of course you did not notice that the time of post was exactly the same time of the one above it. You miss a lot. Can't read or comprehend. Sorry!
Keep em coming! Fool! Or contribute something of value.
To our friend keepmhonest ...
It seems that perhaps you've misread what I've written.
To call me a TriW supporter is simply unfair. It is far more expensive than what I would like to and can reasonably pay. It is also located in a place where I would like a park to be without a WWTF. However, until you tell us how we can expect to save money by putting the WWTF somewhere else, I'll have to support TriW.
I also think that your choice of calling it ugly and conventional was unfair. The design documents show that by-n-large, the WWTF would not have been visible (hence not ugly). Furthermore, conventional is not bad ... conventional things are commonly done and probably because they work. If you are arguing that you want a piece of art which is also a cutting-edge experimental WWTF, I would support you ... as long as your desired plant will save me money.
I rather doubt that a Johanson project would raise our property values ... and even if it would ... oddly enough ... I would rather that not happen. I don't want Laguna or Carmel ... I like Miners.
If you want to call me someone with no class for opposing an even more expensive sewer, go ahead. I believe that in fact it is far classier to fight for those in our society who need a helping hand than it is to have fancy public art projects which double as sewers.
I really enjoyed what I thought was a very enlightening discussion at the PZLDF meeting last evening. The presentation by Mr. Lombardo was very interesting, and the follow-up discussion with Paavo Ogren was VERY enlightening. It became quite clear for those in attendance why the County is taking the approach of having the funding election first, then continuing to refine the final project options.
Anyone who continues to debate this does not understand the nature of this unique project and what an incredibly challanging undertaking it is. The more that I hear, the more I am becoming satisfied that this is our best chance for this debacle to come to a satisfactory resolution.
To: the county girl
The RWQCB wants a community wastewater project. How can Pio fly? His system is about $40,000 per home.
And why now? He was here on the original RFP.
To Sharkinlet:
I hardly think that anything that Patricia Johanson does is experimental. She is only a consultant. In Petaluma she worked with the same company that the county hired and paid over $700,000.00 to. Ask them about Patricia Johanson.
Having her work here would draw people to Los Osos. Los Osos would be known for a great project rather than a place full-of-fools.
Whether you want Los Osos to stay the same or not, the new money that's come to town wants to turn Los Osos around to an upscale community (with no shanty town) and that will happen.
The cost for the traditional Tri-W/gravity is looking to run about $60,000.00 per home for starters. For that kind of money, we could have something much better to enhance the community and environment.
Whether the plant you support is hidden or not, there would still be sludge hauling, odors and possible accidents. That "no cap" project just doesn't work for me.
Maria implies that we can't have a perfect system, and I can't agree with her at all. Of course we can. This is 2007 and we get to start from scratch. That's a great opportunity.
Where were you people born and raised? The sticks? Because it sure seems like it. I'd rather have shops, restaurants, movie theater, etc. on the main street - not a sewer. Get real....let's improve the quality of life here rather than destroy it.
Sharkinlet, please listen to what the experts say (like Dr. "T") when they know that gravity is not the way to go for Los Osos. Expert after expert say the same. Step/Steg is better. And it doesn't have to be as expensive as the county shows. Their numbers are pumped up...I wonder why...
Dear d-truth,
There is enough of a concern regarding pathogens that there is ongoing research in regards to their effect on employees and exposure risks. I'm not the expert on pathogens but since treatment systems are designed to reduce their overall impact on society at large, I have to believe that this issue is substantially addressed each time a system is put into place. Interesting research more specifically at the University of Washington.
I have been looking at constructed wetlands and the Petaluma project. What an amazing feat! There are many questions that I have in regards to implementing that type of project for Los Osos. One major issue is the land intensive aspect of it. First question is: Is it feasible and does it make sense? Would we need to reclaim that water later? Do we have the reuse needs that would make that part of a comprehensive water management plan? Once established, would we be required to maintain them ad infinitum? In theory, it's a great idea but is it practical for Los Osos?
One of the very clear statements on that analysis of that project is: This won't work everywhere, we are fortunate it works for us.....
I appreciate the passion for the innovation and get excited about the possibilities.
http://www.carollo.com/419/section.aspx/466
Unfortunately, my ego is poorly underdeveloped and suffers separation anxiety so leaving it behind isn't going to have too much of an impact on my desire to learn and speak up.
Another great day in LO.
Saw the CSD out delivering our Water Quality reports - enjoy.
MK
To our friend keepmhonest ...
I agree that things are going to be expensive ... but if out of town will be cheaper than TriW ("as is"), I don't think anyone is going to want to pay any extra to get an artistic WWTF. But if the advantage TriW has is time-to-construction, redoing the existing design to make it more artistic will only make it more expensive.
I really don't see how an attractive park associated with TriW would be considered "bad" but a Johanson designed WWTF site would be deemed a benefit. Sure, her designs are nice, but in my opinion, not worth additional delay and cost. You say that we're going to be paying some $60k each ... why should I want to delay, get additional pollution put into my aquifer, additional saltwater intrusion and additional costs, pushing thing up to $75k or more?
As for your claim that STEP will be less expensive than what the County is telling us ... if you show it to us and to the County, there is a good chance that we'll switch over to a largely STEP-based system (presumably Monarch Grove couldn't then tie in as easily).
Yes, we can have a perfect system ... but few of us can afford that. You seem to be asking us all to buy a Mercedes S class sedan when most of us can barely afford our minivans and nissan sedans.
Just trot out the numbers and we can discuss more...
I'm no longer going to comment to 4Crapkiller since it's been proven to be a waste of time, talking to an old beat-up Victrola.
Maria,
Unfortunately, you've missed the boat. Gravity collection systems are antiquated compared to today's modern, more affordable solutions and how the "permitted project" is designed, the technology used isn't that great. Not all systems are upgraded for today's standards.
I'm still concerned about this statement:
"Do I believe that the chemicals and pathogens are any more virulent than any that I protect them from everyday are more present and volatile at a WWTF engineered to be in the proximity of residences and other activities of daily living? The answer is no."
That comment came from someone who didn't do their research. That's just good ol' fashioned ignorance coming from someone who has some aggressive political ambitions. Well, Maria, in politics, you gotta know when to keep your mouth shut, especially when you don't know anything about the subject.
The wisest people, throughout the history in civilization, are the ones who say, "I don't know."
Dear d-truth,
Your comments piqued my interest, I did a little research, it was far beyond anything that I could comprehend in the short time between my statement and response.
In regards to my children and parks, I'm standing by my statement that I mitigate the environmental damage done every day to my children. If the assertion is made that WWTF are more volatile than the clean water they produce, I'm curious! Children in countries that are unable to provide clean water die at an alarming rate. It wasn't so long ago that the United States water supply was the haven for polio. If I balance those issues out in my mind, then my question is, where is the research that shows that WWTF are more dangerous than process for the water they produce or the water left untreated.
I am assuming you were pointing to technology and if that's the case, let's carry the discussion that direction. To make it personal, again, and then challenge me on my ability to ask questions (because my mouth is shut) really shies away from the focus on resolution. It's obvious you are looking not at the topic but at discrediting me and making it personal. This is a game that is plaguing Los Osos and creates the assumption that we aren't looking for a solution, we are just really great at the delay tactics. You are just as important as I am in getting through this and I hope you do not feel as though I have in anyway discredited you or your position. As long as there is an amicable discussion, it's all good but if people want to go down the road of making it personal, we all lose and there will be a failure in this endeavor.
You are right, I don't have the history but to me, this seems like an asset because I don't have the residue of hostility that blankets these blogs and community conversations. Everyday I learn a little bit more about where it lies and I still maintain, it's a tragedy.
MK
Maria,
I wish you would become more educated. I wish you would reach out to learn from some real experts .
On pathogens, the CDC has been working with some doctors here in California. I believe the Tribune ran a story recently on this.
Dr. Alexander knows about water, pathogens, and if you really wanted to become educated, you would speak with him. When a country offers Dr. Alexander $1 billion dollars to come help with their water problems you would think that you and the county would listen and hear what he has to say, he lives just miles away and will talk and help free of charge.
If you were sincere you would go meet with him (same goes for the county) maybe that would show it wasn't all about money, land and development. Your teachers are Gordon and Richard and that's clear, and not a pretty picture.
As far as Patricia Johanson, she looks at projects that are appropriate for the particular area, and she consultants. I don't recall anyone saying the Los Osos project had to be like Petaluma. She works with the top engineers and does many different kinds of projects around the world. You are not open to any of this, and you have showed your bias.
What kind of pathogens do you think we get in the air when out septics are emptied - as they will be about every five years - if we go Step? At 4600 homes total, is that about 93 homes per day emitting pathogens into the air? Emptying just one septic stinks up the whole block when it happens on my street.
keepmhonest, Dr. Alexander is a sweet man, but he was almost inarticulate due to age, the last time I heard him speak.
Please let us know which country offered him one billion dollars, so maybe we can learn something from the past.
thedamntruth wrote:
"I'm no longer going to comment to 4Crapkiller since it's been proven to be a waste of time, talking to an old beat-up Victrola."
Do I make you look foolish? Sorry! I do not care if you do not reply to me. (Mostly because you lack the ability, knowledge, or your premise was false).
If you spout undocumented assertions, or personal attacks, I will be all over you like your dirty clothes and underwear that stinketh of what you throw. Clean up and wash your hands.
I await truth and intelligence, which so far has not been forthcoming. You have laid yourself naked on this blog, and all we have seen is your shortcomings.
In the meantime the sewer project is in the hands of the county, if you wish to opine, opine to them.
Otherwise, the bankruptcy is in the hands of the LOCSD, and there is a large hunk of debt on the line that will have to be resolved. It would be great to have some knowledgeable discourse about that!
Hello CK; I feel honored to be thought of as being you!!!
Our friend seems intent on personal attacks and running up his own singularly perfect solution as the one and only and of course it has to be in Camelot. He/She/It has not answered you or Shark in asking for some cost figures and apparently never will. Just another puff of smoke in the dissolving screen of delay. It is getting hilarious to watch the obstructionists withering in front of the Board of Supervisors. They don't seem to realize what fools they are seen as and that the County is going to build the WWTF after considering the best engineering and financial data available. Nothing the obstructionists can say or do will delay the 218 Vote or the construction of the treatment system.
The reality is:
We will have a well designed and modern sewer in Los Osos and we will not be installing composting toilets in every home in Los Osos!
We will have to pay for the foolish delays and the fiscal mismanagement of our CSD.
The LOCSD will be dissolved long before the RWQCB is disbanded.
Keep on posting CK and all those who see beyond the delays and personal attacks...
Maria,
Are you addicted to some sort of illegal substance? We're in some sort of a miscommunication that obviously did not come from my end.
I'm saying that you, Maria, are the problem. You are the problem because you don't know and I sincerely urge you to stop pretending that you do. Period.
I'm not going to sit here and have you patronize me because I know, for a fact, that you have clearly stated to your colleagues at Taxpayers Watch, that you want a gravity collection system at Tri-W and you want, "Yes" on the 218. As a member of a county-based committee, that is highly illegal.
Stop pretending. You're hurting us, Maria.
Sewertoons:
Only in Los Osos would people be so dumb as to say because of one's age that they should be dismissed. I've heard this before. He has the knowledge like no other. When and where did you hear him speak?
I was writing to Maria and would like her, if she is sincere, to meet with Dr. Alexander (rather than be taught be Gordon and Richard - there's no comparison!)
I'm not talking about a "sweet" man, I'm talking about a man who knows water. I'm talking about a man who works with the CDC. The CDC still consults with him, so obviously they don't think like you do.
I'd take his wisdom over any of the kids that work for Paavo or the Regional Water Board.
Also, I haven't read some of the responses directed at me. I saw 4crapkiller contesting what I saw. That's okay, but this is what really happened:
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9527/crapkilleroa7.gif
I put a nice big, red arrow on there for everyone to see.
Now I may not be a big city lawyer, but...
Let me just bring this quote up again. It made me laugh.
"Yes, 4crapkiller can be nasty in that she has been quick to identify posters who have been identified as taking out multiple names on the Tribune blogs and holding conversations with themselves in that he could not get anyone to agree with their pompous and egotistical positions, totally based upon speculation."
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
E. Russell Alexander, 1928-2006: Doctor fought infectious disease locally, nationally
By TOM PAULSON
P-I REPORTER
Dr. E. Russell Alexander, one of the world's top disease detectives, a nationally renowned epidemiologist and founding faculty member of the University of Washington School of Public Health, died Sunday at age 77 of pancreatic cancer.
Alexander, who for many years led the fight against infectious disease in Seattle and King County, likely was better known outside the region as a leading scientist with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and as one of the best, brightest and perhaps gentlest minds in all of public health.
?????????????????????????????
Keepmhonest/thedamntruth/Joey:
It appears you owe Maria Kelly an apology. The good Doctor has been dead for nearly a year and a half!
You might want to obtain a real little education of your own before shooting off your mouth or keyboard. Maria Kelly has far more education than you and actually uses her mind. You simply insult and will never be considered an Ecologist nor a Water Treatment Engineer. You will not ever see your "Regional" sewer in SLO County!
Sorry,
thedamntruth
I managed to use cut copy paste into textedit on the deleted comments and by pasting the different fonts and stylye I managed in about two min. to completly recreate your proof, a simple upload of the textedit file to any online storage server in GIF or JPG dose the trick with an accompanying Http address.
This is not to say that what you put forth is suspect, I have serious concerns about what or who crappy is.
Its just a reminder to all that everything you read on a computer is suspect. Like Ann says, Caveat Emptor!
Thanks Mike Green,
In case keepmhonest/thedamntruth/Joey thinks I would sink to his level by making up facts as he spins his yarns, go to the link and read the entire article about Dr.Alexander:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/261096_russobit28.html
I find it disgusting that the self proclaimed activist would not even check his sources while trying to castigate Maria Kelly. Typical of his tactics!!!
Mike, Uh, I simply posted a message that explained how that HTTP file could be created. I didn't say it was one way or the other
I always suspect posters that "cheerlead",
completely agreeing with someone, when what I like to see is the "yes, but..."
PS I'm not sure Joey has the compsavey to pull off a spoof. maybe I'm wrong but thats my opinion.
So, I guess it's up to you.
Prove you are "mike"
Crapkiller,
Proof from above that you are Mike. Wow, you're incredible.
Also, I was talking about Dr. John Alexander.
Can't believe you didn't know that.
Thank you Mike Green. It should be clear that the time of posting of the two posts , one deleted is exactly the same. Why should I lie and show myself to be a fool. I am only as good as my opinion and ability to explain consequences. This is why I am respected by the wise and hated by the bomb throwers.
Be very careful of thedamntruth. If you associate yourself with this bomb thrower, you put your own reputation at risk. I have never seen you do anything but express your opinions respectfully, and/or show human excellence. I have always respected your opinions. However, we have both been duped before, which is natural: generally honest people are subject to duplicity.
You have good reason to have concerns as to what and who crappy is. I have concerns as to what and who you are. Things are not always what they seem. It is up to individuals to discover the facts, and the purpose of the agenda behind the posted facts. Of special note is the omission of certain facts to foster an agenda, or the pushing of half truths.
Of course YOU understand this, it has nothing to do with you, but has everything to do with what people who do not research will "believe".
We stand on the same principle. The county will decide. We will vote for the 218 assessment even though it hurts our pocketbook because the consequences of failure will hurt even more.
I am with you. I will support any system that the county (BOS) selects. I will not put my finger on the scale. I could put a very heavy finger on the scale. But why?
I want a sewer, the best for the community, and the BOS will decide. I am no expert in sewer systems and my information comes from water quality analysis experience and the internet.
The other thing I know is that I have looked for three years for documentation that a ponding system on it's own will effectively remove nitrates. I have been unsuccessful, and no one has pointed me to any documentation. NITRATES. I started this quest because I really liked the concept of the Nelson Environmental system and realized that the CCRWQCB rejected the solution group system because of lack of documentation of nitrate removal. The same thing came out about the Ripley system after they had their hands on our money. There was a long discussion about this and no resolution.
To Mike:
It is possible that we have a Joey infestation here: the tactics are the same, the BS the same, the lack of documentation the same, but at this time I am unsure. In any case Joey is not a property owner here, will not pay the bills, and is subject to great criticism for being responsible for our problems.
Fear not! He always outs himself!
And yes, water plants in a wetlands situation can remove nitrates. It makes sense, nitrate is fertilizer, but there has been no monitoring or documentation of this. Send it on!
You can be who you are, but I will not put up with false information and totally unfounded speculation.
I give you a case in point: "When a country offers Dr. Alexander $1 billion dollars to come help with their water problems you would think that you and the county would listen and hear what he has to say, he lives just miles away and will talk and help free of charge."
The above is a quote from keepemhonest. ONE BILLION DOLLARS?
I would love documentation of this.
However, I feel that the county has contributed to our problems and liability must be assessed for their past permitting actions. We have had an absolute failure in government and they must be held responsible along with the LOCSD recall board that created our insolvency.
This will only come through litigation. Only the courts can decide.
It's the county's duty to include Orenco in the fine screening.
There's a big difference between over $200 million and $50 million.
The gravity system is a big gamble for the PZ homeowners to pay. Liquifiction, accidents, spills, fines -- and all with a "no cap" "open ended" "eternal payments right into the next life" -- who would vote for that?
To Mike Green and 4CrapKiller,
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9527/crapkilleroa7.gif
I'll post it again.
Here's how I did it. No folks, sorry to burst your bubble, but it's not edited, but I'll show you a much easier way to do it. Want to know what it is?
It's called PrtScrn and basically, you press that button and it copies what you see on your desktop. It's a very interesting key. Go ahead, look down at your keyboard. It should be right next to the F12 key. Okay, you press it, go into MSPAINT, which is normally included on every Windows OS and you press Ctrl+V (paste). Once you paste it in, you'll see the screenshot you just took.
Amazing, isn't it? That only took about 10 seconds, not 2 minutes.
Now Mike, I'm trying to figure this out so help me out here. Why would you spend all that time trying to recreate what you thought I did? Why would you spend that time trying to defend her and most importantly, why do you know so much about manipulating images?
Nevertheless, you got caught. I'm not talking about 4crapkiller, I'm talking about Mike Green, who is nothing more than a fraud himself. Well, for one thing, you must be very knowledgeable in the field of manipulation when you can create a visual replica of my screenshot? I don't know if that's perverse or criminally demented.
If any of you are interested, I also took screenshots of some very slanderous posts that 4CrapKiller has made also using PrtScrn to take my screenshots.
< sigh >
I feel like a dyslexic multi-personality disorder clarivoyant hearing voices. Is it just me or does anybody have the slightest clue who's talk'n to who?
thedamntruth said (11:58) > This is definitely a step up in terms of quality discourse.
conclusion said > Richard Legros was the drunken asshole, that represents the idiots who support his point of view, that posted the previous idotic repetitive comments on this blog.... Have a nice day!!:)
4crapkiller said (2:35 & 3:08) > The only conclusion is that Conclusion is the bomber of the site.... Will the idiot that trashed Ann's site stand up and tell us how proud he is of his actions?
keepemhonest said (7:00) > IT WAS YOU CRAPKILLER!!
Mike said (7:05) > Someone certainly is sick......and it's NOT Crapkiller!!!
keepemhonest said (7:46) > Did Crapkiller register as "Mike" now too? She's the only one who thinks she's not sick...
thedamntruth said (7:57) > So you think vandalism should be protected as speech?
mike said (8:28) > What silly games you folks want to play.
thedamntruth said (9:08) > It's one thing to say that one isolated incident was a coincidence, but when you have several coincidences, it's safe to presume that it's really not a coincidence.
mike said (9:24) > I know for a fact that Crapkiller did not write ....
4crapkiller said (7:02 PM 6/15) > There has never been any reason for 4crapkiller to post as an anon. 4crapkiller is proud of what she posts.
4crapkiller said (7:15 PM) > To thedamntruth: I support your efforts. You can start with keepemhonest and yourself. Otherwise, you will be quickly found out to be a very obvious fraud.
4crapkiller said (7:20) > For the information of ALL: 4crapkiller will NOT go away.
mike said (7:34 PM 6/25) > Bravo CK, nor should you go away!
thedamntruth said (7:46 PM 6/25) >I'm going to sit down with you, Crap, one-on-one because the following is directed to you: You are the Wastewater Antichrist. I see your posts as a constant reminder as to why the community is so divided right now. This is what you created. This is all a game to you. ... You call people names, guess at people's identities, make slanderous comments and believe me, if people knew the face behind this 4crapkiller, they would sue you and more. And for what? For what? You tell me, I'd love to know and I'm sure everyone else would love to know as well. Behind this character we know as "4crapkiller," there is a woman who has gone to several LOCSD meetings, insulted everyone who disagreed with her and created a firestorm of disarray.... I know this 4crapkiller is used by different people so I'm referring to all of you. Each and every one of you should be held accountable for your actions and the time for accountability is now.
keepmhonest said (7:47 PM) > TO ALL TRI-W SUPPORTERS (INCLUDING MARIA, RICHARD, PANDORA, SHARKINLET, ETC. ETC.)... None of you have any class.
thedamntruth said (7:52 PM) > On and by the way, see that comment that was deleted at 7:20? Well, I caught a glimpse of that comment. It was from "mike" and it read: "For the information of ALL: 4crapkiller will NOT go away." Gee, that comment rings a bell. Scroll up and you see that "4crapkiller" wrote the same thing. Gotcha.
keepemhonest said (7:55 PM) >Crapkiller - you are the new "Mike" because nobody spells like you. It looks to me like you are the one who messed up Ann's discussion board.
4crapkiller said >To keepmhonest:... I was not on the Tribune blogs anywhere near 1:20 PM, 3:30 PM, and 3:44 PM on 6/22/2007. I was busy painting doors and doing productive work, not easy for an old lady. I was on the blogs mid morning and then much later than the time of the trashing.... You are a fraud and a bomber involved in character assassination and do not help your cause (whatever that may be, and for what purpose). By false accusations without documentation you make yourself look very ignorant, and it is clear for any rational person to see.
thedamntruth said (10:27 PM) > 4crapkiller, For being an old woman and such, you have a lot of growing up to do.
4crapkiller said (11:58) > To thedamntruth: The post was not from Mike. I have no idea who Mike is, nor you. It was a duplication of the above post from me. You are so full of unfounded speculation that you stinketh. Worse than that, you "believe" your own totally unfounded speculations. Of course you did not notice that the time of post was exactly the same time of the one above it. You miss a lot. Can't read or comprehend. Sorry!
the damntruth said (1:20 PM 6/26) > I'm no longer going to comment to 4Crapkiller since it's been proven to be a waste of time, talking to an old beat-up Victrola.
4crapkiller said (5:06 PM) > thedamntruth wrote: ... Do I make you look foolish? Sorry! I do not care if you do not reply to me.
mike said (6:32 PM) > Hello CK; I feel honored to be thought of as being you!!!.... Keep on posting CK and all those who see beyond the delays and personal attacks...
thedamntruth said (7:27 PM) > Also, I haven't read some of the responses directed at me. I saw 4crapkiller contesting what I saw. That's okay, but this is what really happened: http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9527/crapkilleroa7.gif. I put a nice big, red arrow on there for everyone to see.
mike said (8:11 PM) > Keepmhonest/thedamntruth/Joey: ....You might want to obtain a real little education of your own before shooting off your mouth or keyboard.
mike green said (8:41) > Sorry, thedamntruth .... This is not to say that what you put forth is suspect, I have serious concerns about what or who crappy is. Its just a reminder to all that everything you read on a computer is suspect. Like Ann says, Caveat Emptor!
mike said (9:05 PM) > Thanks Mike Green, In case keepmhonest/thedamntruth/Joey thinks I would sink to his level by making up facts as he spins his yarns ....
Wow! Think what Shakespeare could make of this?
Oh, Crapkiller got caught! She's furiously fighting to cover up the fact that she got caught red handed.
Mike Green is in the thick of it I guess.
Busted...got caught with her hand in the (computer) cookie jar by the damn truth and now all they can do is tap dance like a bunch of jail birds trying to deflect attention away from them to anybody and every body else in the region, but it's crystal clear that crapkiller is Mike and crapkiller is using multiple identities, using the exact same dirty trick to tag Ann's blog as she accuses others. Nice try but it don't fly. You Lie.
crapkiller,
It's way past your bedtime. You're working too hard.
Um ... three quick comments ...
1 - Sayethdog, you have a great point. Blogger comment software doesn't allow for threated discussions or even for a "subject" line. Even so, I believe that having names makes things a bit easier to follow ... imagine how much more confusing this would all be had all your named individuals been replaced by nameless folks. Good name and welcome back!
2 - thedamntruth, the point Mike Green was making by replicating your proof is that it isn't proof at all ... so don't pretend that it is. On a side note, conspiracy boy ... you're a real hoot to suggest that Mike Green is doing something to support Crapkiller. Mike's above that and even if he weren't, he disagrees with Crapkiller so would likely not want to do something to provide her false support.
3 - I would like to suggest an alternative theory which makes sense even if thedamntruth's evidence is honestly generated ... it seems quite likely to me that Mr. Crapkiller is named Mike and that he sits down to make comments at the very same computer as does crapkiller. It is easy to make an error by not selecting the "use a different account" option. (That "mike" didn't quickly come clean does sort of suggest Mike Green's method or the PrntScrn method is more likely to be what did happen, however.)
Now a bit of commentary ... and this time I am sure that Ann would agree ... you're all making way too much about this. Sure, someone could easily adopt two personalities (on the Trib website it seemed that Joey was up to at least five or six during the times when I was paying attention). Who cares?
Maybe the use of a sock puppet is a bit duplicitous, but does it really matter? Worse here has happened with outright name theft. Please realize that the name "mike" or "Mike Green" or "conspiracy boy" could be someone other than the regular "mike" or "Mike Green" or "conspiracy boy".
I'm am not sure whether the best word to use to describe this situation is kerfuffle or hullabaloo. Any input on this matter would be greatly valued by me and would probably be more interesting to the rest of us.
I'm going to stop blogging. It's giving me a splitting headache.
I'm not going to debate with pathological liars. This blog is overrun by idiocy. I deeply apologize, Ann. I wish people would behave, but hey, can't change human nature.
Good Morning All:
Looks like the Joey-Virus (how many are him this time?) has again struck with lot's of quacking and saying nothing. Facts never got in his way!!!
I don't know how to prove to you Mike Green, but I'm just Mike and have probably lived in SLO & LO a bit longer than you, like 63 years so far. I don't even care how someone make nothing out of some posting they thought was mine. Yhey sure typed a lot words, said and proved nothing, typical of the MTS campaign! Lot's of noise, no thinking, no plan and never, ever produce a realistic cost analysis.
Thank God for Blakeslee and the County for seeing through the MYS BS and proceeding with the very much needed WWTF system planning. Our local yokels are and never were capable of producing such a major public works project!
Sayethdog sez:"Wow! Think what Shakespeare could make of this?"
What fools these mortals be? Yond' Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much; such men are dangerous? Much ado about nothing? A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a Horse!? It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing? All's well that ends well?
Never read nor saw that play Ann ... was it a Midsummer Julius McHamlet of Venice the Third?
....one of his lessor known works. Which is a shame cuz it seems to play itself out in our world so regularly. A very dark comdey with richly textured - some might say overly textured - characters and the foibles of living in a small community at the wrong end of a bay. Kinda like San Jose. It's notable among his many plays for being the only one in which he actually steals lines from another of his plays. Self-plagarism which is sorta the opposite of self-censorship. T'is a delightful parody of the human comedy. Act 1 begins with:
" A Sewer - To be, or not to be. That is the question.
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
the slings and arrows of outrageous flaming,
or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
and by opposing end them? Yea to end the heart-ache
and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to,
'tis a consumption devoutly to be wish'd.
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For to miss a blog must give us pause least the law's delay,
the insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit
of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin?"
Which then leads to many wild and wonderfully whacky highjinks the kind that only Shakespeare can pen. I hear Woody Allen has the screen rights.
Sharky:
I just looked at the sock puppet thing. Very interesting! But what eventually happens is that this comes out eventually.
To your proposition #3: The problem is time. How do you get the same time stamp if the original post was not duplicated by the original poster and then deleted by the original poster a minute or two later when it becomes apparent? Does it not take time to change to an alternate identity?
In any case you are correct about this stupidity. Makes no difference.
In any case it appears to me that Sharkey, Mike Green, Mike, and 4crapkiller are in lock step on the YES 218 Vote and letting the county do it's work. We really have no choice. We understand the law and consequences if the effort fails.
And perhaps Ann Calhoun also. Her most recent comment, and yours following made me spill my coffee.
(ROTF). Ha!
Ah, it's so nice to see all of those little blue names at the top of the comments.
Anonymous commentor (7:29 AM, June 26, 2007) wrote:
"However, until you tell us how we can expect to save money by putting the WWTF somewhere else, I'll have to support TriW."
Boy, that's a weird take. That line of reasoning reminds me of a child that covers his eyes with his hands, and thinks no one can see him.
Is it just me, or does someone else find it a little odd that the TAC is going through extreme measures to follow the CEQA process to the "T" in an effort to avoid future lawsuits, yet when it comes to the massive flaws found in the Tri-W project -- flaws that could easily lead to future lawsuits and yet ANOTHER false start on a sewer project, they just put their hands over their eyes and think no one can see Tri-W's many fatal flaws.
I love contrast.
Anonymous commentor (4:40 PM, June 25, 2007):
"As for Karner's comment on a possible loss of local government should the recall measures pass ... um ... that is exactly what did happen."
Someone do me a quick favor and run down to the LOCSD office, knock on the door, and see if anyone answers.
and;
"... but even though you mean to be critical of Karner it is clear that he was right..."
No they weren't, but they sure did everything in their power to try and make themselves right, huh?
and;
"On the matter of whether the CCC was snowed by Pandora in 1998 ... it would seem that your argument should be with them for not doing their job. Here's a question ... how much have you written that is critical of the CCC staff and board members at that time?"
Anon, you post here and on my blog so much that I just assumed you read my stuff. I guess I was wrong.
You guys in Los Osos want to bring down the cost of the sewer? Then go Ed Massery on all of those agencies I mention in that link, for those exact excellent reasons I discuss. You'll get your fat settlement.
Maria wrote:
"... Ron's interpretation of 9 acres vs. 32 acres and identified treatment options that may not fit on 9 acres."
My interpretation? Maria, that 9-acre site (Andre2) is in the TAC's draft Fine Screening Report (by the way, that's an interesting document. You might want to pick up a copy). If Andre2 isn't a viable location, then 1) why is it in the draft FSR as a potential viable location, and 2) why did the early LOCSD study it as a possible site?
Maybe I'm "interpreting" those two things wrong.
keepm wrote:
"... the new money that's come to town wants to turn Los Osos around to an upscale community (with no shanty town) and that will happen."
As someone that gets nauseated every time I drive past Avila Beach these days, I'm not as sure "that will happen" in Los Osos.
Mike wrote:
"... we will not be installing composting toilets in every home in Los Osos!"
Maybe not every home, but for the ones that CHOOSE to do that (remember, it's the property owner's choice), they won't have to pay for the sewer, and you and the rest of the non-composters will have to pick up their share of the sewer cost. I wrote about all that here. (Again, that's not me saying that, Mike, that's just me reporting how assessments work. No benefit [i.e. sewer hook-up], no assessment. It makes sense. It's fair. Good law.)
tdt wrote:
"It's called PrtScrn and basically, you press that button and it copies what you see on your desktop. It's a very interesting key. "
For you Mac users, to take a screen shot, hold down the "apple" and "shift" keys and press "3." You'll hear a little camera lens click (gotta love Macs), and then the screen shot will be stored on your hard drive as "Picture 1." I use that technique all the time. It works great. Your computer tip of the day, compliments of SewerWatch.
sayethdog wrote in a hilarious post:
"Wow! Think what Shakespeare could make of this?"
You know who would also have had a field day with Los Osos? Rod Serling. He loved that premise -- something that divides a group of people (be it access to a bomb shelter, or whatever) and then write around the ethos of that division. Brilliant man.
To Mike Green and All:
I see no sign that the LOS OSOS JOURNAL blog allows anon posting. I have not tried to post as an anon. When I read the comment section it clearly says that anon posting is not allowed, so I have not even tried.
And now, thedamntruth has turned on you and accused you of being a fraud.
You are no fraud.
I hope the possible Joey infestation is over.
I would like to see a serious discussion of the possible consequences if the 218 vote fails.
I would like also to see a serious discussion of the consequences of possible denial of the bankruptcy petition.
TO ALL:
The only way for Los Osos to have an affordable project is to vote "NO" on the 218!
The county has only offered expensive and more expensive solutions.
If the county will allow a private vendor like Pio into the fine screening (Paavo wants to) then it is the county's obligation to add other vendors for design/build (Orenco) in. And it is the county's obligation to offer an affordable wastewater project.
The gravity system is a big gamble for the PZ homeowners to pay. Liquifiction, accidents, spills, fines -- and all with a "no cap" "open ended" "eternal payments right into the next life" -- who would vote for that? ... only an idiot!
I am going to agree with Conspiracy Boy on this one (post at 10:42AM)...
After watching the TAC meeting last night, it is clear that opting for private financing would save $25 to $50 million on the electrical issue alone (only the State Water Board requires) -- on top of that we would also save the $6.5 million SRF loan payment!
That's a lot of money to save and a very good reason to go with the design/build alternative!
Ron said:
"You know who would also have had a field day with Los Osos? Rod Serling. He loved that premise -- something that divides a group of people (be it access to a bomb shelter, or whatever) and then write around the ethos of that division. Brilliant man..."
I thought the same thing. Only I thought maybe I'd upgrade my septic and when the "big" sewer fails, people will come to my house because I'll have the only working system and I'd have to turn people away...
Keepmhonest,
I just "ran the numbers" on the issue of low interest SRF loan at 2.5% over 20 years and a $150M project versus a $120M project ($30M less) at 7% over 30 years. The principal and interest are the same. Over the life of the loan, the low interest loan over 20 years would cost each property owner $38k and the "cheaper" project would cost each property owner $57k. (The net present value of the two options, assuming 5% inflation are $24k and $30k.) Even with variations on the interest and inflation rates, the amount of the project and the amount saved by going with private financing and no electrical ... there isn't that much of a difference.
If we're comparing TriW ("as is") to some newly designed system that would take longer to design and get permitted, the inflation caused by delay in construction would swamp any savings you write of.
I won't argue for design/build (ala Orenco) unless AB2701 would allow for them to take the project and unless they'll guarantee the total cost in advance.
Certainly if we don't need the extra electrical work done (which for some reason ... why I wonder ... the State says needs to be included before we get a low interest loan) it would suggest that private financing might be a good option if we go STEP.
To Ron:
I have read the staff report that you bring up in "my stuff". I read it one or two times before. I wish everyone to read this.
It is a staff report. The decisions to implement a staff report are made by the board. Lots of Pro, Cons, etc.
Your comments are "shoulda coulda woulda." However, they are not filled with UNREASONABLE speculation.
The most vivid image is the shredding of the CDO order! However the image of a legal defense of this action, possibly costing the individual time, effort, and perhaps $40 to $50 thousand dollars with outcome uncertain, was never developed. I will give you an image:
Property owner to lawyer: I have to fight the CCRWQCB over a CDO that will make my property uninhabitable. Can you help me?
Lawyer: Of course, but this will be an expensive proposition.
Property owner: Why and how much will it cost?
Lawyer: First there is research to be done on the law. Then there are lots of documents to be filed. Then there are filing fees and court costs. Lastly there is payment to me to represent you. I cannot tell you how much time will be required, but I get $300 an hour for my time, and $100 an hour for staff time. There is also a charge for faxing and duplication of documents. I will probably need to get expert testimony from more than one expert and that will be very expensive. There will be discovery and dispositions. This takes time and money. I cannot guarantee that we will prevail.
Property owner: Well can you give me an estimate?
Lawyer: No I cannot. I have no idea how much time this case will consume. However a retainer of $10,000 will be required for representation. Most of this will be spent for research and consultations with experts before the case even gets to court. As more money is required, you will be notified. Do you have the money?
How much equity do you have in your home? Stocks and bonds? Any other assets?
Property owner: Well, these people are dead wrong in what they are doing and should be stopped cold.
Lawyer: I will represent you to the best of my ability, and I must warn you that even if you prevail, they may appeal, and we may have to sue to recover the expenses of suit from the state, and that may take years, while even costing more money. Can you write me a check for $10,000 right now for my retainer?
Property owner: Let me think about this. Oh hell, let's do it. Here is a check for your retainer.
Follow up: The first month's bill arrives from the lawyer:
Research by staff members: 100 hours @ $100 per hour. $10,000.
Lawyer review research documents:
7 hours at $300 per hour: $2100.
Copies of research documents: 200 pages at .50 per page. $100
Phone Consultation with experts: 4 hours at $300 per hour: $1200
Consultation fees to two experts: $2500 each $5000.
Phone costs: 240 minutes at .50 per minute. $120
Sub total $8520
Replenishment of retainer account: $10,000
Total: $ 18520 (due in ten days)
Note: The experts are available to testify in court at $500 per hour, minimum of $2500 per day. They will require a deposit to ensure their time of $1000 each. There will be additional costs for travel and lodging for the experts.
Within one month the property owner is already out $28500 for a case that is uncertain.
Lawyer makes a down payment on a new Mercedes. He has found an emotional pigeon.
The next month he files suit, pays fees, the case goes to court for scheduling and the judge hears arguments as to the nature of the case. This takes 8 hours. The judge accepts the case in that it shows merit based upon expert testimony.
The billing goes on and on. Lawyer to be paid, experts to be paid, copies to be made, telephone calls, etc.
Then the lawyer starts discovery, does dispositions, and even more bills are generated.
Before the case goes to be heard for resolution, the property owner is out $56,000. However the wheels of justice are turning.
Then comes the heavy money eaters: court time, more expert time, travel and food expenses, experts held over extra days for rebuttal, rescheduling for a variety of reasons, etc.
Before the property owner realizes it, he is up to $100,000.
Justice is done! The property owner prevails, but the state appeals! He spends an additional $35,000 to fight the appeal and wins! But the state appeals the decision of the appeals court to an even higher court. Another $35,000 is spent. The property owner wins again!
At this time, the property owner is out $170,000, but has to go back to court to get the judge to award court costs, attorney fees, and expenses to him: another $3500.
Lastly is the problem of collecting the fees and expenses and from whom.
The property owner is insolvent. He finally realizes that he should never have started the case, there is delay after delay in getting paid. The water boards do not have the funds, extra money cannot be appropriated, etc.
But Ron was right! However the case could have gone the other way. Regardless the lawyer wins, he gets paid, and soon as he does not, he drops the case with the judges permission.
How do you like this scenario resulting from a property owner shredding a CDO? This is not unreasonable speculation.
Perhaps the electrical requirement of an SRF loan is one of liability. There are plenty of weekend home expansion programs in Los Osos (as well as other places) that never had any permitting, yet included electrical components. I know on my circa 1948 former house in LA, I had to rewire my house to get decent and affordable home insurance. With an SRF loan that didn't require separate, new wiring, as has been suggested, is there any way that the state could be held liable if the electrical component of step overloaded the box in someone's house and it burned down?
On another note, did anyone watching/attending last night's TAC meeting get what step will bequeath each of us in our front yards? A 24" round, GREEN, cover for our tank! Won't that look great with my non-lawn, barks and rocks xeriscape front yard? Think they could find brown ones for Los Osos?
Thanks 4crapkiller, for letting us all get an idea what our CSD has signed up for in the Shaunna Sullivan defense that have agreed to pay 25% for…
Just a small technical point or two regarding "Ron's" 9:58 AM post-
He said "the TAC going through extreme measures to follow the CEQA process to the "T".." and "In the TAC's fine screning report.."
I don't believe that it is within the TAC's scope, responsibility or authority to follow the CEQA process. It would be the County staff's responsibility if the Prop 218 vote is approved and the project continues on to that phase.
Additionally, I don't believe it is the TAC's draft fine screening report. I think that it is the County's report, intended to provide information to the staff and the public. The TAC's job, as I understand it, is to be an impartial group of our peers that spends a heck of a lot of time reviewing the draft report, asking several follow-up questions, and developing an "official" set of pros and cons for the different options discussed in the report, as well as Tri-W, that will be made available to the public for reference before the 218 vote.
I hope I'm not being too picky here; it just seemed important to clarify. If I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will let me know.
Sharkinlet:
Let's get something straight. Orenco has said their project would cost $50 million....$50 million for the whole deal!
Even if Orenco went to $100 million (I doubt it), that is still less than half the cost of gravity (your figures don't include all the costs of gravity anyway - as step has upfront costs and gravity has many more in the back end.)
I assume Paavo has talked with Orenco, but do not know if they've been given a chance to come in and present their numbers.
The county should give us the opportunity to look at their numbers.
Let's not go any further with this until Orenco's numbers are presented and available as it is a waste of time.
The only way to come full cycle to have an affordable system is to vote no, let it come back to the CSD (broke or not) and have Orenco finance.
PS The Army Corp of Engineers must look at Tri-W. There are issues with the viewshed at that sight. There are definite issues with health risks. I would certainly hope that the county investigates all of this -- but for some reason haven't and it's just too expensive and too important to skip over these (big) details!
PSS Signing off now so we can let Crapkiller rant all day, she takes up a lot of space and time.
Sharkinlet:
I just thought of something. You never address that every expert says Step is better for Los Osos. Every single one (including the Peer Review!)
How can you promote a project and have us pay an unbelievable amount for it when it's No Good?
Now, that's what I call a waste of public funds!
keepmhonest,
If gravity was "no good" it would not have been permitted. The fact is that gravity and STEP are both good systems and both have benefits and drawbacks.
I won't discuss whether STEP should have been selected by the previous board or not at this time (even though it is an interesting question). Even so, to suggest that STEP is so much better that we should all line up behind it and oppose gravity is silly ... it is a question of the cost associated with each system. You'll tell us that STEP is cheaper. Others have disagreed. I'll tell you that if we go with the already designed plant we'll save time (and thus money). You'll disagree.
The question is what would each one cost (both in monetary and environmental terms) and which is the better deal for the associated cost.
As to whether Orenco is presenting solid numbers or not ... I don't know ... but it sounds like a question for the County. Certainly Orenco didn't do much besides trot out a dog-n-pony show in Los Osos back last fall where they promised us a system that was too small to handle the capacity of our current septage. Then there is the issue of whether Orenco can offer us a fixed cost that is a guarantee. I suspect that once they realize the mess that is the regulation of California's coastline and water they might not have such a low estimate. However, that is a question for them.
Certainly neither you nor I have the knowledge of what Orenco might propose enough to discuss it thoughtfully. (Other than the obvious comment that $50M is so low that there's got to be a catch somewhere ... how can the achieve what no other company will do for even $100M ... supply and demand would argue that they'll blowing smoke up our skirts or that there will be plenty of other bidders that clock in just about where Orenco is.) Again, the County needs to explore that issue more and if Orenco wants the job, they should be talking with the County.
Same for Johanson.
Sharkinlet:
You turn around what I've said.
I said that all the experts say step is best for Los Osos.
I said the Tri-W is no good, not gravity in general. Gravity may be fine for a city of 200,000. It may be fine if the homes haven't been built already.
I don't care that the Tri-W project was permitted. It wasn't the best location or technology for Los Osos. It was a mistake.
It was a mistake and you'd rather take that mistake (no matter how big) and have that system in place because you think everything else will cost more. You are so wrong.
As far as Patricia Johanson, I am assuming that she could only be hired to consult with the engineering firm who is finally selected and then with the county's okay.
C.B. wrote:
"The only way for Los Osos to have an affordable project is to vote "NO" on the 218!"
Dose that include the fines and enforcement costs that will be levied on each property owner by the Water Board? (which by the way, they have NOT changed anything with the CDO/CAOs)
And yes, IMHO, they are electioneering.
Who's gonna stop them? The courts? get real.
Last I heard they were just holding further actions in abeyance.
Talk about a nine hunded pound gorrila.
Mike Green,
I thought fines didn't kick in until January 2011.
If the 218 fails, Orenco comes in and can do it before 2011.
How can the RWQCB fine if the sewer is in or well on its way to be done?
Who's gonna stop them? We are when the "right" sewer is picked and started.
You go ahead and play the victim, that's your choice.
Besides, I'd rather take my chances on having the RWQCB prove that I am polluting than to give the county a blank check that puts a lien on my home starting at $60,000.00, yes, starting at $60,000.00.
With Orenco there is no lien on my property.
I'll vote no, thank you.
I will not be blackmailed into a yes vote by the county or RWQCB.
Both agencies have felt they were above the law, but just maybe a little justice will find it's way to little Los Osos.
CB, Look at a calender. I find it very hard to believe that any sewer will be on line by 2011. Even the way too expensive county ones.
The Water Board is holding in abeyance at the countys request and as long as the county can show progress they will continue.
What gives you the confidance that the same deal would hold true if the CSD is in charge, perhaps you are encoraged by the already levied fine, or how about the failed negotiations?
And you are completly wrong about there only being fines in 2011,
What in the word DESIST is confusing you?
What Dose ZERO discharge mean to you?
Look, I think for a moral high ground you have merit. I'm just trying to be pragmatical in this unreal situation.
I say vote yes on the 218 and scream like hell for the cheapest ( and if it's Orinco, suits me fine) project.
IMHO the county has the only realistic chance of avoiding fines and complying with State law.
Oh, as far as being a victim I plead guilty, I'm guilty of my own ignorance when I voted for the CSD in the first place.
An action that I rue to this day.
The CSD's a beggar, now the play is done:
All is well ended, if this suit be won,
That you express content; which we will pay,
With strife to please you, day exceeding day:
Ours be your patience then, and yours our parts;
Your gentle hands lend us, and take our wallets.
Maybe "every Step 'Expert' says Step is the best solution for Los Osos" however, there are an equal number of "experts" who will say gravity is best. I'm waiting for the County to present a short list of possible projects before I get real worked up. I don't even care about the sewer now that it is tankfully in the able hands of a responsible government agency!
Now if you really want to get the blood boiling, explain how the actions of this BOD is capable of...no I won't go there, we already know they will not see the sewer project back into their control of design, location or construction.
No, what I'd very much like to be discussed openly is the use of sole source contracts for retaining an iterium GM. $17,000 seems a bit on the extravagant side, especially having been a sole source contract!
Next I'd love to hear some positive statements regarding just how much and maybe specifically, just what, has been done to prepare a plan to resolve the bankruptcy. September will be ONE YEAR since applying for protection from the creditors. So far it appears nothing has been done toward a realistic plan and in fact more money has been spent on a lawyer for non-bankruptcy business.
To Mike Green,
I have an email from Sam Blakeslee saying he'd been assured by the RWQCB that fines would go away when a sewer project is started. He didn't say that it had to be Tri-W either. I guess we'll all see what his, the county's and the RWQCB's true intentions are (especially your buddy Bruce Gibson.)
BTW, the CSD could never pull off building a sewer - the county has never done such a big project - and the county shouldn't have expected any CSD board to pull off such a feat.
This CSD can pull it off now by letting Orenco come and do the whole thing after the 218 fails, (and it will.) How easy is that?
Simple answers for our big problem. Everyone has to make it so difficult when it never had to be, but then how could so many people make so much money?...Carollo, MWH, etc. etc.
BTW, are you the new "Wonky" of Ann's site? Cute...
Sharkey,
"2 - thedamntruth, the point Mike Green was making by replicating your proof is that it isn't proof at all ... so don't pretend that it is. On a side note, conspiracy boy ... you're a real hoot to suggest that Mike Green is doing something to support Crapkiller. Mike's above that and even if he weren't, he disagrees with Crapkiller so would likely not want to do something to provide her false support."
Damn. Against every bone (which, by the way sharks don"t have) in my body I have to agree with you!
Thanks.
CB, Go back into the archives, I've been here a long time. (Wonky is funny)
Orenco can have it online by 2011?
Got a contract and permits?
Hooray! We are saved!
Cargo from the sky!
Why dose the 218 have to fail in order for them to get the contract?
Just wondering....
Atta Boy Mike Geen! If Orenco was serious, they would have saved the CSD and you and me long time ago! Guess there must be some reason the CSD wouldn't/couldn't/didn't????
Ya think they weren't going to really get a project for $50,000,000????
Maybe they shouldn't have spent $204,000 per year on a temp employee?????
Mike,
If you look carefully, we probably agree at least 90% of the time. The unfortunate nature of this discussion seems to exaggerate differences we find in our community.
Essentially, all people with credibility (of any sort) in this discussion seem to now support the County process. This would include you, me, PG, Ann and Richard at least ... possibly others as well.
Those who've advocated opposing a 218 vote haven't any track record of credibility here.
Again, I remain open to being convinced that the County is evil, that gravity is bad or that TriW is more expensive than alternative sites ... but no one has put forward those arguments yet.
Lastly ... to our friend keepmhonest ... I apologize if you feel that I've twisted your words. I did not mean to do so. I only meant that I see no problem, per se, with gravity and that you haven't convinced me (yet) that the benefit/cost ratio is better for STEP than for gravity.
On the question of whether TriW was a mistake ... if you provide evidence that the alternative that you propose is sooooo much better that it should be preferred or that the alternative you propose is soooo much cheaper that it should be preferred, I'll change my point of view.
Simply explain why STEP is better or why it will cost less (or both) and you'll have gained a convert.
Just saying "all the experts agree" or "Orenco promises $50M" doesn't convince. Those statements may be true, but without supporting evidence they are rather unconvincing. Imagine OJ Simpson's friend testifying that he "knows in his heart" that OJ is innocent. It doesn't really convince others unless facts or eyewitness testimony corroborates the "gut feeling" you have.
This is all to say .... show us evidence that STEP saves money or that STEP really is better. Heck, at least name a few of the experts who all agree that STEP is best.
I was going to turn the dang thing off and read a book when this one started bothering me:
"I have an email from Sam Blakeslee saying he'd been assured by the RWQCB that fines would go away when a sewer project is started. He didn't say that it had to be Tri-W either. I guess we'll all see what his, the county's and the RWQCB's true intentions are (especially your buddy Bruce Gibson.)"
Anyone want to take a bet?
I'll bet Sam and Bruce are going to do whatever benefits the majority of their constituents.
And that is not us!
Reminds me of the time I asked Sam on the Dave Conglelton show to explain why the "negotiations" failed. Ha Ha Ha that was a hoot, never heard him splutter so much, Egos, preconcieved notions, ect.ect.
It became pretty clear to me that "affordability" is a joke.
Untill someone explains to me in concrete terms how we are going to avoid the wrath of the water gods if the 218 fails or wrap those costs into a realistic project, I'm going to support the county.
As far as I can see the only success in this whole mess is the abeyance brokered by the county.
Maybe I'm wrong, what other successes have we had?
Oh, Crapkiller, or Mike or whatever your personality is at the moment:
You say, "... Maybe "every Step 'Expert' says Step is the best solution for Los Osos..."
Wrong again, Crapkiller...wrong again!
It is not every Step/Steg expert; it's every single expert that has studied our situation (some do mostly gravity.) They all say the same thing: Step is the preferred solution for Los Osos. Tri-W/gravity is not!
The peer review, remember? Dr. T, remember? the guy who Paavo and Rob Miller admire so...the guy who writes the books on sewers...where have you been?
You really should get a life, and remove yourself from blogging all day and night, it's made you a nut case. You haven't a clue what you're talking about.
To Mike Green and others:
What most people don't understand is that destiny is at work here. No matter what any of us do, fate will make it turn out very differently than what Paavo and the Dreamers expect.
The 218 vote is destined to fail. But we have to go through the county process of rejecting the most expensive sewer per capita in US histroy in order to get where we always needed to go.
By rejecting the 218 vote Los Osos finally gets the option that is not on the 218 ballot which is for the most affordable sewer system for the whole community, not just for those 10% who can afford a gold-plated sewer.
By rejecting the 218 we will have a chance at an Orenco type project that is far below the cost promoted by the county.
The irony is, only by going through the county process and voting NO will we get the project we should have gotten from the beginning.
You can't change destiny.
Conspiracy Boy...Not sure what you're trying to say, but, I really don't give a damn what YOU think, but I'm not CK or even who your conspiracy tortured mind may wish to conjure up next!
You even probably "believe" Blakeslee wrote you a letter, but like all of your incredibility, just not real, simply you wishing for some justification to throw up some other smokescreen in hopes of delaying the sewer.
CB,
Point by point rebuttal:
"What most people don't understand is that destiny is at work here. No matter what any of us do, fate will make it turn out very differently than what Paavo and the Dreamers expect."
So therfore it was our "destiny" to get to this point?
What kind of argument is that?
That is a huge logical fallicy!
"
The 218 vote is destined to fail. But we have to go through the county process of rejecting the most expensive sewer per capita in US histroy in order to get where we always needed to go."
What are you? some oracle?
Besides, even the sewer system you tote is STILL one of the most expensive in history (per capita)
"By rejecting the 218 vote Los Osos finally gets the option that is not on the 218 ballot which is for the most affordable sewer system for the whole community, not just for those 10% who can afford a gold-plated sewer."
The 218 vote is not about options, it's about the willingness of the property owners to get into compliance with State Law.
The options come later in the survey.
"By rejecting the 218 we will have a chance at an Orenco type project that is far below the cost promoted by the county."
Explain to everyone why a failed 218 vote guarantees the Orenco sysytem?
More than likely it guarantees Water board actions that they have already promised us will happen.
"The irony is, only by going through the county process and voting NO will we get the project we should have gotten from the beginning.
Voting NO on a county project is what started this whole train wreck in the beginning, So I guess you are right there.. Major Irony.
NO MORE CHEAPER, BETTER, FASTER EVER!
"
Hey Ann! 120 comments, Not Bad, and you didn't do a thing!
BRILLIANT!!!!!
Stripped socks rule!
To conspiracy boy:
Fate? Well this is just one way to look at it, AND it may be valid. If so, shut up. It is preordained!
For me it is better to vote for the 218 assessment and then beat the cargo cult drums and twist the dials of our cardboard transceivers.
Cargo will come. It will come from the county. It will not be free. If not, it will come from the state, and be even more expensive.
But thanks for the discussion of what you think will happen if the 218 vote fails.
Where the hell is Orenco? Let them tell their tale to the county. The same with Ripley, and Nelson Environmental. Let them also see if they can satisfy the CCRWQCB for nitrate removal. There is also another factor: we need water.
Dammit Mike Green, you better start disagreeing with me and start calling me names. They might think that we are one and the same. Do you want to continuously be called a fraud? For sure they think I am sharky and Mike. For sure Richard LeGros. And then there is the lady in a wheelchair. Who knows.
Well for ALL your information, give or take a lie or two or three, I am none other than Elizabeth Windsor, Queen of England, and when I say I can put a heavy hand on the situation, you better believe it. I am the richest woman in the world and all bow or curtsy before me. Certainly the SLO BOS, and the governator. Believe who and what you want because you are "belief driven".
Put that in your hashish, smoke it!
And keep posting.
My Royal group will accompany me to make sure Tri-W is selected to make sure that out of spite it is shoved up your renter rear end, and will make sure it costs three times as much as anything else so we can get rid of the riff-raff and populate Los Osos with wealthy Brits, producing Carmel by the sea in fine Tudor homes.
BUT! Feel free to call Caesar Chavez to take care of the problem with a $300 million grant to the LOCSD before I get there. I really do not want to come. Better he than I come up with the bucks.
There is destiny at work here, and I am part of it. Other than a lie or two, or three, accept your destiny.
So sayethdog: just another of my identities but excellent in putting things in perspective, give or take an omission or two.
And then there is Churadog: Woof!
I am not proud of what I wrote.
Mike Green ... you left out the obligatory cargo comment in your most recent reply. I'm surprised ... and you're slipping.
As for conspiracy boy, keepmhonest and those who advocate fighting the County every step of the way before we even know what the County is proposing to do ... go for it. Just bring out facts. Saying "go read Dr. Whatzawhozits" and "all experts agree" and "Orenco says $50M" doesn't really cut the mustard. Remember, we bought "better, faster, cheaper" and "38.75 per month" and we bought "less than $100/month" and neither of those actually happened. The upshot? We're tired of getting burned by folks who promise what they don't have the skill and ability to deliver. Get Orenco out here and get them to sign a contract with us that promises $50M and no more with their design/build approach (where, of course, if they misunderstand RWQCB, CCC and County requirements, they take the financial hit, not us) and we'll all vote no for the the County. You do your homework and convince us. Until then, those among us who have learned from the past will naturally be suspicious of those of you promising cargo will fall from the sky and make our lives better.
Inlet sez:"Shark Inlet said...
Never read nor saw that play Ann ... was it a Midsummer Julius McHamlet of Venice the Third?
7:51 AM, June 27, 2007"
That's the one! Great play! Turned into a wonderful movie, starring Bruce Willis as Titus The Fourth and Paris Hilton playing the bare bodkin. Wonderful, academy-award performances all 'round!
TCG sez:TCG said...
I really enjoyed what I thought was a very enlightening discussion at the PZLDF meeting last evening. The presentation by Mr. Lombardo was very interesting, and the follow-up discussion with Paavo Ogren was VERY enlightening. It became quite clear for those in attendance why the County is taking the approach of having the funding election first, then continuing to refine the final project options.
Anyone who continues to debate this does not understand the nature of this unique project and what an incredibly challanging undertaking it is. The more that I hear, the more I am becoming satisfied that this is our best chance for this debacle to come to a satisfactory resolution.
8:39 AM, June 26, 2007"
I had another board meeting to attend and so missed the Lombardo presentation. From what folks told me, it sounds really interesting, especially the purple-pipe component. The key, however, is IF Mr. Lombardo -- like Orenco -- will be able to put their propoisals on the table for a fair hearing and a TAC review and for a final consideration be included in the mix. And/or both groups can also come to the community for a public town hall-type presentation at some point. Seems like Lombardo's proposal is another idfferent approach, but like the rest, if it's viable and can survive the fine screenings, should be on the table and eventually up for a "survey" "vote" "preference choice" etc.
Sewertoons sez:"With an SRF loan that didn't require separate, new wiring, as has been suggested, is there any way that the state could be held liable if the electrical component of step overloaded the box in someone's house and it burned down? "
If I understand right, the submersible pump in the tank is about 1/2 - 1 hp pump, runs for a few minutes every so often. If a house is so far on the edge that the small power usage of a 1/2-1 hp pump would cause it to overload and hence burn down, uh, shouldn't the county be taking a closer look at the whole house's wiring? Think what a dish washer would do, or a clothes dryer. Yikes.
Mike Green sez:"Hey Ann! 120 comments, Not Bad, and you didn't do a thing!
BRILLIANT!!!!!
Stripped socks rule!
Clearly, the blog site comment section is a sort of clockwork entity, sorta chugs along on it's own self-generated steam. Sadly, it's also being steered by the posters themselves, so it often degenerates and doodle-bugs off into a neener-neener fest and then crashes and burns on occasion. Sigh.
TO: Churadogs
The main point that I have recently come to appreciate is that, under the County process with the funding vote first, then the project selection survey later, new and refined project options can remain a possibility right up through the CEQA process, where all viable alternatives need to be addressed. It is not necessary for every exact nuance to be pro-conned by the TAC before our 218 vote.
The County has recently stated that there may be design-build, or semi-design build options available in 2008 that would make sense. Maybe the County takes construction bids for a gravity collection system and a step collection system, and the final specifications decision is based on that critical information. They have also mentioned funding related factors that may weight some system choices. But these things won't be known for maybe another year.
This is no different than the typical value engineering process that normally occurs when a project is about 80% designed. Independent professionals review the design concepts and suggest potentially cost saving changes that may be incorporated at that time.
If a specific project option is chosen before the Prop 218 vote, as some people have been preaching to the Board of Supervisors, none of these strategic decisions could be made later (as they typically are on large projects such as ours) even if significant cost savings could be realized.
Ann:
Funny!
Better Ann Coulter than Paris Hilton.
She is as skinny as a knife, and her wit cuts like a knife. However sometimes she cuts herself with her wit.
To Sharkinlet,
Sorry you don't approve of me not "trusting the county" and sorry you can't address the fact that all the experts have said that Tri-W is no good for Los Osos.
Orenco will present their numbers and they'll be between $50 to $100 million.
I am not fighting the county every step of the way (as you said) I am fighting to keep the county honest and fair (tough job I must say.)
The county wants a blank check, and you are not addressing that.
Step has an upfront costs and gravity has many more costs at the back end (that could go on forever) so the county's 218 selections vary in price tremendously - that equals a blank check for gravity if that is what the BOS picks.
Katcho didn't understand why the 218 was done the way the county is doing it. Will you call him nuts or an obstructionist or conspiracy boy? I'd like an answer on that!
Do you want to address any of this, or have you signed off because you have no real answers or good reasons for pushing Tri-W?
Yes, some of us DO know what the county is proposing to do (even if you don't) and that's offer ONLY the PZ homeowners to turn over a blank check to them which will include a big fat growing lien on our property (Orenco requires no lien.)
Hard to believe that YOU know what the county BOS will do when they do not. They will make the final decision.
However: Orenco better get their firm figures to the county FAST and have a method for NITRATE removal that is documented, and the price should include any piping for recycling of water.
They need to consider flow rates that include potential build out of the PZ of at least 100 gallons per day per person.
If they do not have specific documentation of NITRATE removal over a substantial period, they will be wasting their time. We have a NITRATE pollution problem here with an overdraft situation for water.
In any case I still will be voting to assess myself. If the 218 vote fails we will be in big do-do.
The county has the experts to verify the information and feasibility of the Orenco system.
They will be able to do full financial analysis in addition.
To Sharkinlet,
You said, "... keepmhonest and those who advocate fighting the County every step of the way before we even know what the County is proposing to do ... go for it. Just bring out facts. Saying "go read Dr. Whatzawhozits" and "all experts agree" and "Orenco says $50M" doesn't really cut the mustard."
Sharkinlet, are you saying that the peer review doesn't really cut the mustard?? What a statement you just made - unbelievable!
Conspiracy Boy raises a good point: Katcho did question the 218 at the last BOS meeting. Anyone in their right mind would.
Who would vote on an open ended project that could easily go $40-$50 million more than what's on this first 218 assessment....Are you going to do that? ....just because you trust the county? That's incredible too.
Either you are Pandora and/or husband or you don't live in the PZ or you're out of your mind like Crapkiller.
Have a nice day.
Regarding Orenco:
First, through the County process, it is entirely possible that Orenco will end up being the prime contractor on the project.
Second,if the Prop 218 vote fails and the County process ends, the following are a few questions that should be answered sometime prior to the 218 vote so that we are all informed as we vote.
1. Who will do the EIR and full CEQA alternatives analysis? This will require additional engineering, environmental and administrative support.
2. This environmental effort will cost a great deal ($3-4 Million). Where will this money come from?
3. In order for Orenco to bid, there will have to be a project design and specifications. Who will
do that engineering work?
4. Where will the $8-$16 Million come from to pay for that?
5. If it costs Orenco, for example, $95 Million to build a project, for which they expect to be repaid $100 Million plus interest, where will they get the $95 Million for the construction?
6. Who will finance the $95 Million for Orenco when their source of funding to repay the construction loan over time is unsecured service charges in a community where there is a long history of people opposing any sewer project? Just what percentage will not pay,in protest? What percentage will be delinquent due to the high cost?
7. What will the reaction of the RWQCB be to a failed 218 vote, and what will those consequences, financial and othrwise, be in addition to the cost of the Orenco project?
The fact that our CSD is in bankruptcy, and has no credit rating of it's own will not sweeten the deal for the lenders.
There are many more issues that I am not aware of that I'm sure others could add to the mix.
I know that the County has started discussions with representatives of Orenco. At some point, we should be informed about those conversations. In the mean time, I have great skepticism about Orenco, or any other private venture, making this work and, certainly, there has been no complete price quote from Orenco that can be counted on at this point.
Hey keepmhonest whoever you are:
Do you have any preliminary answers to the questions of tcg, or is this blogger just crazy like me?
We await your intelligence not your name calling. Put up or shut up. If you avoid these very reasonable questions put forward by tcg you will look foolish. If you call names you will look foolish. If you say that you do not know the answers you will look foolish.
Give us the answers please, and you are free to use reasonable speculation. Feel free to use what ifs.
If there is anything in the peer review that I remember was the discussion about NITRATE removal.
To TCG,
I appreciate your good points and questions. There are many details, and if the county is in "talks" with Orenco and looks at their numbers and considers them as an option, that would benefit everyone. Questions should be answered soon.
So far, it looks like the TAC is bias towards gravity and that certainly wasn't unexpected.
I feel like others do, gravity works okay for larger populations or if the homes haven't been built yet, but the construction mess is awful and I fear the costs of any accidents and problems that result from the gravity system will fall on the PZ homeowners exclusively. That is more of the blank check reality. We're on the hook for every dollar spent for whatever reason and with liquifaction alone there are bound to be problems with the trenching.
The county has made it so they are not liable.
Step/Steg is safer and environmentally better, and apparently the experts feel the same.
I do have a question for you, would the county impose a 12 - 17% administrative fee if Orenco's project were to be selected?
Regarding the RWQCB, they shouldn't be trying to force Los Osos into any particular project (especially with blackmail or electioneering) - it's wrong, illegal, and abuse of power. Also, how could they fine if a project were to be underway?
The county has the obligation to at least seriously consider a more affordable sewer if one exists.
My concern is this: The RWQCB has talked about Tri-W being the only project for a long time in many arenas with more than a couple of staff members weighing in - they are 100% bias towards Tri-W. How will that impact the process? Of course they are NOT allowed to tell us what kind of WWTF we can have, but that hasn't stopped them.
I appreciate your post and questions, and will search for more information as it becomes available from Orenco to the county.
To Crapkiller,
You ask: "Do you have any preliminary answers to the questions of tcg, or is this blogger just crazy like me?"
Crapkiller, TCG, is NOT crazy like you!
TCG might be the county girl, but I doubt if she promotes the county at every turn -- full time on everything (like the imported water pipeline.)
...and how convenient that you don't remember that the peer review said Tri-W wasn't the place to put a plant....isn't that what we call "selective memory"?
If you really live in Atascadero, why don't you tell us about the pond in Templeton that was approved by the RWQCB that Wallace did?
To conspiracy boy and keepmhonest:
You are advocating a NO on 218 vote, supporting and Orenco system, trying to change or foster vote opinion and cannot answer questions about necessary proceedures and steps to get it without a 218 vote.
I am dumbfounded! You advocate before you know! And yet when confronted with serious questions you do not know or cannot answer the questions. At least you are honest and say you do not know. But why do you advocate a NO vote?
It seems really foolish to advocate something that you do not know about.
Templeton? Templeton does not have a NITRATE pollution problem. This area is very unique. A ponding system would work in 99% of the locations in the US, especially with wetlands.
Why do you think there is no documentation of NITRATE removal by ponding systems? There was NO necessity!
The county BOS will decide where to put the plant.
keepmhonest, if the County can get a real bid out of Orenco, do you still want to vote no on the 218, and if so, why?
Oh my .... go away for one day ...
First some general comments for conspiracy boy and keepmhonest ... I get the feeling that you and I are flip sides of the same coin. We're both motivated out of sense of wanting the other side to prove their claims and we're all far too willing to take our own presumptions as gospel. Essentially, no progress will be made in the discussion if we keep saying to each other "prove it" and "until you prove it I don't need to change my point of view".
Essentially it is a difficult discussion unless both sides are willing to step back a bit and justify their assumptions.
That being said, your recent postings (yesterday) open the door a bit to allow me to sketch out the reason for my beliefs and suggest that you should do the same.
Now some of my background. I tend to think (now) that voting in the CSD was a mistake. The CSD wasn't set up by the Solutions Group and the County for success. The Solutions Group had one project in mind and they optimistically thought they could just convince the CCC and RWQCB to accept a fancy ponding system. When that didn't fly (and Ron points out quite well that the Solutions Group probably should have known in advance that there was a good chance it wouldn't fly), they should have done a bit more thorough of a site and technology search than they did but they didn't have enough money left from the fund the County started them off with. They also didn't want to come to us with a 218 vote to borrow money just to continue the search.
To me it seems that the Solutions Group situation perfectly parallels the CCLO/LOTTF/recall group situation. A "great" idea that everyone should have known in advance wouldn't fly. When it didn't work, they made some choices which were somewhat unwise.
Now the County has taken over. I don't think that we'll likely get the best of all possible sewers from them or the cheapest of all possible sewers from them ... but I do think that the County has the budget and technical background to consider the options carefully. You and I might not like various aspects of the choices they've made or will make, but I believe wholeheartedly that making progress ... even if it's not in the direction I most want ... is far better than continued arguing over locations and other things that essentially increase our cost.
Now to the issues the two of you have raised so well. I'll try to tackle all of them, but with a limited amount of time ...
First, conspiracy boy's questions.
1 - I don't believe that "all the experts" say STEP is best. I believe that many have said so. There seem to be two issues here. First is what is physically best and second is what is least expensive. On the issue of whether STEP is physically better than gravity, arguments can (and have and will be) made for either technology. Let's call it a tie. If you present evidence that STEP is uniformly superior in all ways to gravity, we'll change that to a win for STEP. On the cost issue, while the pipe installation for STEP may be less expensive than for a gravity system, there are the additional costs and issues that need to be considered. First, the easements for access to one's septic tank. Second, backup electrical work. Third, septic tank replacement. Fourth, the financing. Even if STEP is cheaper, adding extra electrical work to get cheap financing or going with more expensive financing options wipes out the savings from the less expensive installation of the pipes. Then there's the ever present issue of design costs, time until construction and inflation which all heavily favor TriW.
2 - Once Orenco presents a design that is clearly sufficient for Los Osos' needs and would meet the County and State requirements, we can talk about whether their option is best or not. Right now I just don't see their dog-n-pony-show numbers from last fall as being even ballpark realistic.
3 - The County doesn't want a blank check. They want us to approve the borrowing of money to design and install a sewer system. If you want the ability to approve every detail of every public works project you shouldn't live in Los Osos, San Luis Obispo County or California at all ... it's never gonna happen. Face it ... there is 0% chance that the County can tell us in advance what system will ultimately be approved and survive various legal challenges so they can't promise us the sort of detail you want. They are obliged to promise us a maximum total amount and they are obliged to do their best to select the best system for the money that will meet our needs.
4 - STEP does have higher upfront and lower back end costs than does gravity. I expect that the County will take a lifecycle costing approach when making a choice. Ultimately if I pay $250 per month for a sewer I don't care if it's $200 for the principal and interest and $50 for the O&M or $220 for P&I and only $30 for O&M. I've discussed this issue before and I don't recall the O&M savings of STEP being enough to justify an additional two years of inflation in construction costs and pollution.
5 - Don't count on Katcho or anyone but Bruce to understand any of the details ... count on the staff to have an understanding of the minutiae. No, only you get the name "conspiracy boy" and only because you've adopted it. Katcho isn't an obstructionist either ... just someone who is asking reasonable questions without an awareness of all the details.
6 - I'm not pushing TriW so much as saying that what others are proposing as "cheaper" than TriW doesn't seem cheaper at all to me ... I'm even explaining why ... with numbers when possible.
7 - On the issue of the PZ paying versus the whole of the district ... I would think it is appropriate for all of the LOCSD to pay the various costs associated with the RWQCB fines and the previous SRF loan default ... after all, it was a LOCSD decision that caused these two problems ... on the other hand, it would be cheaper for those in the PZ to simply have the entire amount wrapped into a cheap SRF loan (if one is even possible for the entire amount) than to borrow the smaller amount at a higher interest rate.
Now keepmhonest.
A - I did not say peer review doesn't cut the mustard. I said that your claim without evidence doesn't cut mustard. Just demonstrate that "all experts agree that STEP is best" and you're good.
B - I would vote yes on a County project that could easily cost $40-50M more than the first amount ... because I believe the alternative is even more expensive. Essentially I don't trust the cargo cult which is now saying Orenco will save us and previously said that Ripley or Nelson or whomever would save us. It seems quite clear that as time passes the estimated costs keep going up and every time we've had someone offer us something that would be less expensive, it turns out that what we've been sold is a pig in a poke ... it costs lots more. Trusting the County now seems a whole lot wiser than trusting some company from Florida which doesn't necessarily understand the Los Osos situation all that well.
C - To suggest that I am Pandora or Gary is both silly and rude. Silly because I've been openly critical of Pandora and rude because I've denied being both in the past. To continue to call me either is sort of childish and doesn't promote discussion and healing.
D - Crapkiller might very well be crazy ... but at least on the matters of the sewer she seems far more thoughtful than either conspiracy boy or you. I've asked for both of you to provide evidence behind your claims here but neither of you have done so, so please don't suggest that you have the high moral ground.
Lastly, a parting comment ... to me it seems that we have the opportunity to make some progress in this discussion. I've tried to give you all a bit of an explanation of the reason behind my stances. I would be happy to do that even more ... but further beneficial discussion will require the two of you doing your share of the work. Maybe if you can trot out evidence that Orenco will really have a $100M project that will meet all regulations or produce some proof that "all experts agree" that STEP is uniformly better than Gravity for Los Osos we can make progress.
To Sharky:
Thanks for the defense, and you are absolutely correct: I am crazy, admit it, and it is because I write to hopefully correct those who do not understand unintended consequences on a blog that is seen by no more than 40 people: I am a fool to try and stimulate rational thought from those who are STUCK.
As I have said before you are too kind to fools, and deserve the HUMAN EXCELLENCE AWARD.
I have responded to many fools in kind, using typical liberal actions of character assination and non sequetors to those who do not use rationality or are incapable of understanding that 50 plus 50 equals 100. They start it, and really get pissed off when they receive treatment in kind, BUT DO NOT UNDERSTAND.
Usually logical people are above this, do not respond to the illogical, and it seems to work very well in American politics (they ignore insults).
Liberals and nihilists have been getting away with this for years with satisfactory results and JOOOOOOOOEY is an expert in this.
There is a lot to be said about fighting fire with fire, and that is how we put out forrest fires.
I respond in kind. Not right, totally irrational, but this puts me on a level playing field. It comes down to who can insult the "Master Baiters" from either side the best.
I do not like it, but will continue. Flame heats!
This is an economic situation: It is a question of sales of ideas and a product that unfortunately MUST be bought.
The property owners in the PZ are BUYERS. Our elected representative are buying AGENTS for us. AGENTS get paid for their buying ability and expertise.
We bought a LOCSD (buying AGENTS) to build a system initially that could not do the job. The product was not available. We did not pay for the engineering to do this and we got what we paid for. Nothing.
However, we did assess ourselves for a solution. 20 + million dollars, property owners, not renters like Perleman, Barrow, Dougan, Racano, etc. (excuse the bitterness).
A new product was bought (TRI-W), by our AGENTS that could do the job, but many did not like the product for many reasons. This cost us lots of money, and this purchase was thrown away along with the AGENTS with a recall election by people who wanted new AGENTS. Of course the renters had nothing to do with ths.
We bought new AGENTS who drained all our funds in the process of looking for a new product, which they said they had, but did not, and now, by law, they have been striped of their AGENCY to purchase. They voided contracts by the previous purchasing AGENTS and we will pay for voiding the contracts because we are BOUND by our AGENTS. In addition we have no FUNDS to buy any product. Money gone.
The Blakeslee law enacted new purchasing AGENTS and made them totally independent of the LOCSD. And this is the reason for purchasing AGENTS. But we must BIND ourselves to the decision of the AGENTS, and this is what the 218 vote is all about.
We can either accept the decision of the AGENTS who by definition, and reason of existance, are more informed and capable in purchasing than ourselves, or any individual, or reject the AGENTS.
There are consequences. There are extreme consequences for those who do not declare AGENCY and work as an AGENT.
I am not an AGENT. My computer number is a matter of public record, accessed easily by sopoena to my internet supplier. The owenership is a matter of record. Software used is a matter of record, registered. Purchase place of computer is matter of record. There is nothing anon about the blogs. When you buy groceries and use a card for discounts, you are known, gasoline too.
However, if you are posting with illegal software, there are criminal proceedures in place for theft. Pay the bill, it is the American way. Be careful if you live in a glass house before you throw the first stone. And if you are an AGENT, declare it!
AGENTS deserve to pe paid! They work hard for their money! It is the American way, but they are terrible agents if they cannot explain their product.
Next case!
I love legality. What say you?
"Still crazy afer all these years". Argue the above!
No arguement here CK!!!!
There are the Al Barrows, Swansons and Racanos in Los Osos who have insulted and threatened too many of the community. We have seen them try to turn around and cry foul when they run into those of us who have had enough and are growing increasingly blunt in our responses! Shark Inlet is one of the kindest and most reasonable bloggers out here and even his reasonableness draws the dishonest ire from those who shout liar at BOS meetings. There does not appear to be any civil way to deal with those who only want to delay and never be held accountable.
Keep firing back, you aren't nearly as crazy as the obstructionists want us to believe!
To: Sharkinlet:
Thanks Shark, for at least acknowledging MOST experts have preferred step. I haven't seen one expert say that gravity is better!
I don't know anything about sewers myself, and have to depend on what the experts say (neither the county or the Regional Water Board has the experts, they have some kids out of CAL POLY -- loyal for life -- so I forced to listen to what the "most respected" in the field have to say when they weigh in.)
Who do you know of (besides MWH or Carollo -- who only do gravity systems) that says gravity is better? I'd really love to know that one. I hope you don't consider Richard, Gordon, or Maria experts (but I would like to hear what Maria's husband has to say about step vs. gravity in our soil.)
You start to sound bias again when you say step and gravity could be a tie.
I know Dr. T says all tanks have to be replaced, but that's to be on the safe side, and if a tank were pumped and tested to see if they are air tight, maybe that could be done -- I'll have to check that out, because I don't understand why Orenco didn't have to replace all tanks in one of their latest jobs in FL.
What I do know: There is absolutely NO WAY that step would cost the same or more than digging 20-25 feet down into the sand. Step has a machine that goes along the road and gravity has lots of heavy equipment and men. Doesn't a Chumash rep have to be paid to watch over? How much will they find when digging so deep? I watched the work before on the upper numbered streets and what a mess.
So, Shark, common sense alone shows step is cheaper. In FL the homes didn't have to have a seperate electrical line and only the SRF requires that.
You are putting up the same road blocks that the TAC has done regarding step which shows so much bias and creates another hurdle for the community to overcome to get the information it needs to make the right decision, not one based on bias.
Now, I've got a question for you: If half the town voted for Measure B to have Tri-W out, then why would the county consider Tri-W? Why consider a project when half the population, a full 50% rating, doesn't want it and actually voted on it.
Why bother with an advisory survey when they already know that half the town says no to Tri-W? That's a very high percentage...51%!
The county is allowing all residents to participate in the survey. That's wrong. Renters and out-of-towners and people up on the hill get to weigh in on something that only the PZ homeowner has to pay for. That's just plain wrong.
Well, it's a sure sign of a "fix" for Tri-W. People on the hill want the big expensive project to get rid of some of the people they don't like (I know many who live in Cabrillo and want the town to change) and then you have the out-of-towners who will pick Tri-W because they don't want a sewer in their back yard.
That's why I can't trust the county. That survey alone shows their intent and part of the fix right there. The way they have the survey set up Tri-W will be the clear winner. And oh, boy, that's just the project the Regional Water Board wants (and Shirley, Noel, old CSD board, etc. etc.)
This post is getting too long. More later...have to go spy on the poker party!
conspiracy boy ...
I haven't said that most experts prefer step, just that some have. I don't know most of the experts but I do know that we've had many reports and many designs of various sorts floated and some have been for each type of system.
I am not an expert and neither are you. For you to suggest that the case is closed or that saying "let's call it a tie" reveals bias shows your own bias. You seem to be saying that anything but favoring STEP is wrong ... yet you've not offered us any evidence that STEP is far and away the best choice.
Again, please realize I don't care about the particulars of the collection system (among the options that are permissible) but only about what's it's gonna cost.
On the issue of cost and septic tank replacement ... perhaps Orenco is unaware that a large fraction of our septics need to be replaced. One estimate is about 85-90%. The cost of replacement, even if paid directly by the property owner, needs to be factored into the total bill much like the cost of decommissioning should be for any gravity system.
Why you say that there is no way that gravity is cheaper than STEP when you consider the depths to which trenches must be dug for gravity ... you are wrong. Simply put, the cost advantage of TriW already having been designed (and partially installed) and the inflation between now and when the construction of a STEP system would start will cause any savings versus the TriW collection system to disappear. (Please remember that if TriW was really over-bid by some 40%, the new bids for the County version of that project will be considerably lower to account for that earlier "screw the LOCSD because of the controversy" surcharge.)
Common sense says that an already designed and permitted system will be cheaper than a "cheaper" system which has yet to be fully designed and permitted and litigated. Which common sense is right? Yours or mine? I would suggest that at least in Los Osos there is empirical evidence that every "cheaper" plan is actually more expensive.
On the issue of electrical work and SRF ... you've already mentioned that the addition of the electrical work makes STEP more expensive ... but because it will be necessary for a low interest rate ... and the low interest rate saves so much money that even with those additional costs, it will have been worth adding the extra electrical work. If you're gonna argue that the SWRCB is nutso for requiring the additional electrical work, you may well be right but presumably that is the job of the SWRCB and not us to decide.
I am not, as you say, "putting up the same road blocks as the TAC has done regarding STEP" ... I am recognizing the same facts the County recognizes. STEP has some advantages and some drawbacks. The additional design costs, inflation and electrical work make STEP far less attractive than one would think at first glance ... perhaps even worse than the TriW designed gravity collection system.
As to your Measure B question ... Measure B doesn't address the collection system at all but instead discusses the location of the treatment plant.
On the issue of whether the TriW plant was voted down by some 51% of the voters ... I would suggest that many of the votes, perhaps even more than 5-10% of the total were voting for the recall and measure B because those promoting the recall and measure B promised that it would save money. Simply put, the voters likely agree with me that the cheapest solution is the best solution ... they were just too naive to know that the claims of the recall candidates were ... um ... chock-full-o-nuts.
If you're going to argue that only property owners should get to participate in a vote of which system we get, you should also have argued in the past that the renters voting on Measure B, C, D and E is what caused these measures to pass.
To argue that people up the hill want an expensive project to gentrify the lowlands presumes those up the hill are all *ssh*les. That I doubt ... not all of them, anyways. However, if you're going to make that argument, what about the renters ... there are far more renters than folks outside the PZ and if the renters get an input, don't you think they of all people would want the cheapest system?
I doubt that the County is trying to fix the results. The reasons you've suggested are pretty weak at best.
In any case ... just show us how STEP saves money and we can have a great discussion.
Sharkey bubbled: "In any case ... just show us how STEP saves money and we can have a great discussion."
OK, I'll bite, here is a scenario:
218 passes
Step system gets huge aproval in survey
SLOBOS votes for STEP system
STEP system BUILT
Opposed to
218 vote fails
CDO?CAO reimposed
Nothing even close to done by 2011
Zero discharge rules imposed
Holding tanks installed untill whatever gets developed,
Well you get my drift,
In some scenarios STEP is cheaper.
Good point, Mike Green ...
I should have been more clear.
Crap Sez:"There is a lot to be said about fighting fire with fire, and that is how we put out forrest fires.
I respond in kind. Not right, totally irrational, but this puts me on a level playing field. It comes down to who can insult the "Master Baiters" from either side the best.
I do not like it, but will continue. Flame heats!"
This comment reminded me of a couple of good old sayings. One, of course, is that when you point a finger at someone, three of your fingers point back at you. When you say, for example, "fools in kind, using typical liberal actions of character assination and non sequetors to those who do not use rationality or are incapable of understanding that 50 plus 50 equals 100. They start it, and really get pissed off when they receive treatment in kind, BUT DO NOT UNDERSTAND." & etc, that finger-pointing observation comes to mind.
As for fighting fire with fire, it's been my experience that all you end up with is a pile of ashes with everyone standing there holding matches and looking stupid.
The other came from Colin Powell's autobiography wherein he noted the old saying that one should never wrestle with pigs; the pig loves
As for your comment, "They voided contracts by the previous purchasing AGENTS and we will pay for voiding the contracts because we are BOUND by our AGENTS. In addition we have no FUNDS to buy any product. Money gone."
If you're refering to the breach of contract suit, so far as I know that hasn't been settled or decided, that is, at this point I don't think anybody knows who canceled what and when, which is why I think it's really, really important for that lawsuit to go forward. I'm genuinely curious as to the time clock on that one, aren't you?
Ann, you are totally correct about flaming and for years conservatives took the higher ground: "They did not wrestle with pigs." So pigs rulled the barnyard for 40 years. Then elephants came and took over, but there was so much pig slop that they kept slipping and fell down with the pigs. Today we still have a big pig stye.
I agree with you about the breach of contract suit. However, the one action of stopping the construction on the sewer, brought the whole mess on.
Mike Green is correct. CDOs will be far more expensive than STEP. Holding tanks? Who will issue the permits?
4CK wrote:
"We bought new AGENTS who drained all our funds in the process of looking for a new product... "
You mean, "what was LEFT" of your funds, don't you?
"When you buy groceries and use a card for discounts, you are known..."
Not if you write down a name like "James Hendrix" on the application form, along with other fake information, like I did. That gets great laughs at the checkout stand every time I use it. One clerk told me that Elvis Presely comes up a lot, too.
Mike wrote:
"... you aren't nearly as crazy as the obstructionists want us to believe!"
As I wrote awhile back, as a Los Osos outsider, I need some clarification on just who the "obstructionists" are? I'm confused. Who are the star-bellies, and who are the plain-bellies?
CB wrote:
"Why bother with an advisory survey when they already know that half the town says no to Tri-W?"
I hate to keep to keep doing this (and by "hate" I mean "love), but I wrote about the exact topic here.
Someone needs to 'splain to Ronnie or is it James Hendrix or Paris Econolodge this week, that the "half" number used is merely a political justification number, not an absolute mathematical expression! Kinda like when he mixes up his compost with his wipes, not always the intelligent choice.
To Ron:
Try the same trick on a credit card. The grocery stores just want to know your buying habits so they can better order food.
Credit card companies watch you like a hawk. They track your travel movements, watch for unusual purchases, or anything strange. If something strange comes up, your account is immediately flagged.
To bad the government can't track illegals as efficiently. They can't even track social security numbers and it takes them 4 months to issue a passport.
Sharkinlet:
Dr. "T" says Step is best. He's the "man" -- go ahead and ask Paavo what the TOP expert said.
Shark:
Another thing, you say, "Common sense says that an already designed and permitted system will be cheaper than a "cheaper" system which has yet to be fully designed and permitted and litigated. Which common sense is right? Yours or mine? I would suggest that at least in Los Osos there is empirical evidence that every "cheaper" plan is actually more expensive.
You're not very rational. Why go with a project that was a mistake? Just because??
No, I rather see Pandora, Gordon, Richard and Stan sued for public waste and the 218 (2005) for spending and getting us into this huge financial mess. That's what should happen!
Hey Conspiracy Jerk, No, I rather see Lisa, Julie, Chuck, Steve and John sued for public waste and the 218 (2005) for spending and getting us into this huge financial mess. That's what should happen!
Maybe YOU ought to be sued also! You have not had the guts to even run for office and never had to make tough decisions or put up with the inane "public comments".
Conspiracy Boy:
I see no evidence that the TRI-W project was a mistake. It has never been built. How would you PROVE the the project was a mistake, when it has not been built?
Is not the proof found in the pudding?
You ASSUME the project was a mistake. Your experts, also ASSUME.
In any case the BOS will decide.
Crapkiller,
Oh, Mike gets up and posts very early in the morning ... just like you!... it's so obvious ....
Yes, Stan-Gordon-Richard could all be sued for public waste and for not conducting a 218 before starting the Tri-W. How much did they waste? ... millions and millions .. more than the current CSD.
Don't talk about my experts. They are not mine. You'd like to spin it that way. Dr. T is an expert working with the county. He is "their expert."
What a strange woman you are. One crapkiller can spell and one can't, one seems fairly intelligent some of the time when posting to Ted Peterson on the Trib site, and one is completely out of her mind. One is "Mike" who always agrees with Crapkiller. You sound like many talk show hosts on Fox News, Ann Coulter, and Paavo all wrapped up in one! But I'm done responding to you and Sharkinlet. I'm tired of the same old Dreamer spin.
Where was the engineer stamp on the Tri-W? Wasn't it not valid?
I am not Al Barrow. And the BOS will decide if a 218 passes, and it may not because the community is becoming increasingly more aware of the bias and con job with both the TAC and the county.
There was a valid Professional Civil Engineer Stamp, as well as County building permit approvals.
Your remark was just more in the line of createing some suspicion of wrong doing. You are a very angry person trying every tactic your sick mind can dream up in order to create every delay possible. Why do you bother living in this community that you obviously hate so much?
For the last time, I am not CrapKiller and I have probably lived here much longer than you, 63 years so far. Just another of your angry thoughts, wishing to validate another of your egocentric conspiracy theories.
Mike,
You said, " There was a valid Professional Civil Engineer Stamp, as well as County building permit approvals."
Can you tell me the name of the engineer, what firm, and when he left that firm? It is my understanding that his license had expired.
I was asking for information, can you give some details?
P.S. I wasn't asking about Co. building permits, we all know how the county gave out permits disregarding the 83-13 illegal discharges...a big error that we all have to pay for now. Yeah, we know how the county works...
P.S.S. As far as conspiracies -- there's enough to go around, the whole sewer project is fixed and it's all about real estate and if you don't realize that, I feel sorry for you.
conspiracy boy, maybe you can give us a report on the PZLDF fundraiser at Jeff and Julie's Friday night? What did your spying tell you?
Sharkinlet,
You say, "Why you say that there is no way that gravity is cheaper than STEP when you consider the depths to which trenches must be dug for gravity ... you are wrong. Simply put, the cost advantage of TriW already having been designed (and partially installed)...
This is why I'm done discussing things with you Shark.
There was only 1-2% of installed pipes.
I can not argue with someone who makes statements like this. You are biased towards Tri-W. You spin like Crapkiller.
conspiracy boy, you ask mike for details the likes of which YOU have been asked for many times, yet refuse to provide.
You said,"But I'm done responding to you and Sharkinlet. I'm tired of the same old Dreamer spin.
We are tired of the same old obstructionist spin - maybe you might try to gives some of the detailed answers others are asking for from you on this blog and we can continue the discussion?
I think I'll ask the same question of Ann that I earlier asked conspiracy boy - how'd that PZLDF fundraiser go at Jeff and Julies? Got anything to report on that???
Sharkinlet,
One last point, you said, "Katcho isn't an obstructionist either ... just someone who is asking reasonable questions without an awareness of all the details."
FYI, Katcho, asked the same questions many of us did, but we were called obstructionist.
The 218 is not being done correctly. Period. The county's lawyers are working in the gray area of the 218 law. They've used the excuse that they only had $2 million, but they went and spent that money on the "gravity" companies right away. It would have only taken a few months longer to select a project and have a vote.
This 218 is a blank check, no matter how you spin it.
If there is a yes vote, there will be more assessments, fees and charges. The county will be able to lay anything on to our bill.
Good that you trust the county 100% with your life and home. I do not! Sorry!
Conspiracy Boy said: "Can you tell me the name of the engineer, what firm, and when he left that firm? It is my understanding that his license had expired"
You are thinking about Dan Bleskey and his expired License, but then you must also know that Licenses are valid retroactively as soon as the fee is paid within a set time limit. More conspiracy, more smoke from someone who only spreads misconceptions and deliberate lies!
Answer Sharks questions!!!!!!!!
conspiracy boy, the O & M costs of step are the problem. They are more expensive than gravity! Do you expect me to believe the price on those costs given to me by a hungry salesman or the County? Most of us will rely on the County, unless they have watched too much bad TV and are looking for a conspiracy under every flower pot.
Then there is the emotional factor built into people which has nothing to do with logic - which is how people tend to vote -emotionally. That has surely been the case in LO, hasn't it? Step may be cheaper to install overall, but -
Some homeowners might be thinking, "- electrical box! I added a breaker and did some wiring myself without a permit - what will happen if a licensed electrician has to add another breaker for step and that home-made wiring is discovered?" OR, "My house was built in 1950 - the wiring is going to pot - how much is replacing all of that going to cost?" Do YOU KNOW the condition of your wiring? Do you think most in LO know?
Is any electrical contractor that will install another breaker or hook up a step pump - and SIGN OFF ON IT - if ANY irregularities in wiring is found?
Sure, everyone should live in a home where the wiring was done properly and was up to code, but in the PZ, I can find a lot of houses that sure don't look like that is the case. And many rooms (including bathrooms) were added without permitting of any kind. Could that hidden fact be discovered while wiring is being done?
Think of the problem the County has with mobile homes that burn because the wiring was not up to code. Do they have the time to go around and inspect all of these to prevent fires? Do they inspect houses for up-to-date wiring? NO!
Now, with step, we will be inviting licensed electrical contractors into our homes to hook us up. Most homes will probably pass just fine… but be prepared for an additional bill if your wiring is marginal. A half horsepower pump may not seem like much, but unless we are allowed to wire these things ourselves into our homes (and how many of us are going to attempt that?), there may be some unexpected costs of which people might be fearful.
Another emotional issue to step will be the destruction of our yards needing to be dug up to put in the larger sized tanks that BOTH Dr. T and Ripley have recommended. Some of my neighbors are on 25' lots and the entire driveway (where the tank is located now) will need to be torn up, and replaced with a larger tank that can withstand the weight of two cars parked on top of it. Or even just the roll of a car going into the garage. New tanks will be 5' in diameter and 8 - 10' long, bigger than the tanks we presently have. My yard - which has a native oak in the middle, will be far more affected by step than with the pipes for gravity. I'm voting to keep my oak tree.
conspiracy boy says, "It would have only taken a few months longer to select a project and have a vote."
And how many millions more to do the required CEQA to get to the point of financial information that you want? Who will pay for that? The residents County-wide? I don't for one second imagine that would happen.
Some good points Sewertoons:
You might want to add the effect on how the insurance company might view a claim on a house that burnt from an un-permitted elecrical circuit to an un-permitted bath or bedroom or converted garage, and then add in the un-licensed electrician. Surely Los Osos doesn't have anyone living in one of those situations?
Why certianly not, mike!! Not here in LO, where everybody obeys the electrical rules!
When I bought my house here, there was a windowless, 4-walled bedroom built inside the walls of the garage! That was the first thing to be torn out (not that I have ever managed to unload the boxes still in the garage enough to actually get a car in there…)!
Ha Ha Ha I've seen that a few times (and worse with growlites!) and been told it was the teenagers temporary bedroom, the parents apparently didn't appreciate the next generations music or the hazmat dump site formerly inside the house.
If folks are known to do a few slightly illegal (and some seriously worse) things around the homestead to avoid the $300 permit, why would any building department trust home owners to put in a legal electrical circuit for a septic system. Could you imagine the weekend handyman installing his own pressure tank?
Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!! I can imagine it and the sight is pretty darn scary!!
Conspiricy Boy:
1. The county is working with the Blakeslee bill which required the steps for the county to build a sewer. A 218 Vote must pass before anything can be constructed. Then the county will decide WHAT will be constructed. Otherwise the county washes it's hands of the project, it goes back to the insolvent LOCSD, which can do nothing, and we get CDOs and discharge permits at a far greater cost than any sewer.
2. Tri-W was permetted fully and an engineering company signed it off. The CCRWQCB looked at the project and approved a low interest loan. Bleskey was not involved, you are confused. Terribly confused.
3. I am not spinning for TRI-W except that it should never have been stopped. I simply try to show the errors of your assumptions and the false information you spread around. At this point I just want a sewer that will remove the nitrate problem and allow us to recycle the water to stop salt water intrusion.
4. Mike and sewertoons make valid points along with sharky. There is no question in my mind that both gravity and step/steg have problems.The big problem is retrofitting an area with existing homes and infrostructure.
5. Mike makes a good point about electrical service. Never hire an electrition unless he has proof of liability insurance and is bonded for possible mistakes.
6. If the county uses their right of way on the streets to sink septic tanks and wires them separately from a pole or coffin, and is totally responsible, I see nothing wrong with step/steg. As far as an easement on my property for county equipment, that I cannot build over etc., they will have to pay for the property used that I will not be able to use. They will also have to pay for pumping and maintanance, in that it will be their septic tank, on their easement.
7. I bet it is far cheaper to have a central location for sludge, than 5000 septic tank sludge generators. The county will decide.
8. Dr. "T". is not the worlds formost sewer expert. He is simply a knowledgeable person who happens to live in the area.
Yet another day where I don't check the blog and about 100 comments come in.
I'll respond briefly to sewertoons and then to conspiracy boy.
Sewertoons, yes there are some aspects of STEP that cause the O&M to be higher. However, these are more than outweighed by the fact that at the treatment plant there are far fewer solids to deal with so the sludge hauling costs are vastly reduced. I am not convinced that STEP is better ... or worse ... than a gravity system. It is different and has some benefits and drawbacks.
Now, to the several comments of conspiracy boy ...
First you claim that TriW was a "mistake". Even if some didn't like all aspects of TriW, the fact that it was permitted means is isn't a horrible mistake. Even if you don't like TriW as designed, it likely is a whole lot less expensive than the costs of the actions you're advocating (voting no on the County 218 vote and then tossing the project back to an insolvent CSD). By many criteria, the action you are advocating is a mistake.
As for Katcho's comments ... I have never called anyone an obstructionist. If you don't like the term that has been applied to you, argue with those who called you the name, not me.
On the issue of voting no on a 218 vote ... you're convinced that we ought to vote no and you've called a yes vote a vote for a "blank check". Fine, you'll vote no. Please try to convince us that voting no will result in a better result than voting yes. Even if you don't like the County or TriW in any way, it can be argued that the continued delay tends to only increase our costs. Pleas explain why voting no on a County 218 vote will save us money. If you're convincing enough, you'll get me to vote with you.
Admittedly this is a tough thing to do, but unless you try, those of us who are voting yes primarily because we see the estimated cost rising every time we vote for a "cheaper" plan won't change our mind at all.
So ... give it a go. Let us know
Sharky speaks the truth:
"However, these are more than outweighed by the fact that at the treatment plant there are far fewer solids to deal with so the sludge hauling costs are vastly reduced."
However: The septic tanks would have to be pumped to remove the solids that accumulate there.
Does anyone know of a septic tank that does not accumulate solids and does not require pumping sooner or later. How about filter change required for good effluent? Would the filter trap the solids and reduce solid build up. How much would new filters cost, and how often would they have to be changed to reduce septic tank pumping to a once every ten year period? How about stink from filter change? We know pumping stinks.
What say you, conspiricy boy?
It seems to me that solids are solids. You either get them at the tank, or get them at the treatment plant.
Crapkiller ...
One benefit of a septic tank is that the solids break down into liquids and liquids are far easier to treat than solids.
You are right that STEP would still require pumping every few years (every 3 or so was the last number), but the chief benefit of STEP versus gravity would seem to be the far more efficient treatment of solids inside the tank.
Sharkinlet,
Voting "NO" will guarantee an affordable project.
Because our CSD is broke, that is the perfect reason to go with a design/build/finance company.
A design/build/finance company can do a project that will cost less than half of what the county is proposing. What is so hard to understand about saving $100 million dollars?
TCG ask questions and I have the answers if you would like me to post.
Orenco doesn't require a lien on my home -- I prefer that.
The CSD could put out an RFP right away and the process would move quickly and the RWQCB could not fine while we make progress and begin building a sewer. The sewer could be built in a year.
Orenco doesn't ask for a blank check -- I prefer that.
Orenco tells us their price and we'd have no back end costs.
We will know the exact amount we have to pay, it will be faster, it will be a safer project.
Right now, the county isn't liable for anything and we'll never know the true cost to each homeowner, ever...ever...costs will be added way into the future. Not so with Orenco -- I prefer that.
Get the sewer done, give me a reasonable bill, let the Chumash rest, keep our trees, ...yes, voting no is the only way to get a good project.
P.S. I hope it is not true that Bruce Gibson is asking the CSD to endorse a yes 218 vote. That is electioneering.
conspiracy boy, do you work for Orenco? Why do you put so much trust in this for-profit corporation? Do you own a piece of it? Will you profit if they win the job?
You say, "Orenco tells us their price and we'd have no back end costs." Why do you believe that? No company can tell you what all the costs will be before a project is completely designed, and even after there are surprises. If they did, they would be lying.
Why not let the County deal with Orenco - their credit rating is a lot better than CCC. What kind of rates do you think they will offer us?
You say, "RWQCB could not fine while we make progress and begin building a sewer" Who told you that? They can too! Didn't you get that warning letter in the mail?
Did anyone get their "new" "improved" Golden State Water bill yet? How can anyone afford to stay in Los Osos with an outrageous sewer assessment, an added monthly sewer fee and charge, the high water bill, the imported water bill...
What's it gonna be? $1000. a month for all that? ... more???
And liens for heaven knows how much, on my home. No, I have to vote NO.
Conspiracy boy ... don't you actually want to know Orenco's price before the 218 vote?
Sure you're telling us that we'll save $100M ... but you've given us no details. Perhaps you don't know them.
To me, voting no on a 218 seems like blank check (or a death sentence for our town). Simply put, voting down the County plan because you hope and pray that there will be a cheaper option somewhere else is voting for whatever happens next instead of the County plan and there is no guarantee on the costs of that plan. You say Orenco will save us money. They could charge us whatever they want and we would have to pay.
I just wonder ... if the LOCSD is over a barrel why do you think that Orenco won't decide to raise the cost to make a profit or "to cover unforeseen project changes" (like denitrification or groundwater recharge requirements)?
Oh as a technical point ... please know that the RWQCB could indeed fine us for not making progress if we turn down a County plan.
Lastly, even the great cargo from the sky cannot get a sewer and treatment plant completed within a year. Even the magic of design/build isn't that powerful. Even if the various permitting agencies all sign off on a completed design ... which would take half a year to get ... it would take at least another half a year to negotiate the permitting ... then another 18 to 30 months to get the project built.
Did you work for "better, faster, cheaper"? What you're telling us sounds remarkably like what both previous groups of the CSD have told us and has always failed to materialize.
Sewertoons:
I work for me, not Orenco. I'm trying to save my investment, my home.
The RWQCB would have a very difficult time fining us when we're building a sewer. I thought that's what they wanted. Or are you indicating that they will fine if it's not Tri-W and gravity?
Why do you put so much trust in the county? They created the very problem we are having and not paying a dime towards it. We've paid for the county to help all other areas in the county (except for California Valley apparently) and we are getting ripped off big time. They've lied, they've changed the rules as they go along, they're working in a gray area of the law, and on and on.
I'll pick Orenco because I personally don't like being ripped off, tricked, lied to or treated like a fool.
The only way I profit is by holding onto my home and not lose any more equity.
The county will not consider Orenco. Bob, and other TAC members have told people already that it will be gravity. It's a done deal.
P.S.
Orenco has a good credit rating. No problem there. They can bid, I've estimated on the higher end anyway for them. I think it can be done for $75 million. The county's project (gravity) could be over $260,000 million when you factor in the archeological digs and accidents and cost over runs, you name it. You are asking for trouble with gravity in Los Osos.
Sharkinlet,
What's everyone waiting up late for me tonight??
Matlock is on, I'll get back to you tomorrow!
P.S. We have Orenco's price already.
To Sharky:
Why do not the sewer engineers conside one large 4000 gallon county owned septic tank in the middle of the county owned street to take care of four homes for each tank? The roads could be widened. This would reduce the number of high tech septic tanks to 1/4 of what is now needed and the pumping accordingly. It would take care of the easement problem and reduce the electrical problem accordingly.
The county will decide. To vote no on the 218 assessment would be a disaster as of 2011.
On the Orenco site, they have a coffin with a textile component to reduce nitrates to a low level (At least they claim). Unfortunately they do not have ANY documentation over a period of time that shows the effectiveness of this. One would think that they would have it for all to see.
I find no evidence on the site that Orenco is a public company, and as a result their financial status, worth, etc. is not readily available, and as a private company the accuracy would be unknown. They have never taken on a 5000 home system by themselves that I can find. However, it seems that they make good equipment.
After the 218 Vote passes would seem the best time to pressure the county to do the best they can do at the best price. At least a 218 passage would hold the CCRWQCB off from issuing CDOs.
I can see the possibility of Orenco, or another private company, constructing the project--but only through the County's proposed process and after a successful Prop 218 vote. Last week I raised some serious issues (questions) about how the CEQA process would get funded and done, if not by the County. That key issue is still out there. However, if, by some stretch that actually did get done, I can not see how Orenco would risk it's corporate assets without better security than the CSD can provide.
Does anyone understand why this private company would invest this kind of money (say $100 Million) on the basis of a contract with the CSD, backed by the promise to levy service charges for the next 30 years to repay Orenco's investment?
Without voter approved property assessments to assure repayment, there is no guarantee that Orenco would be repaid. For that matter, there is no guarantee that our CSD will be in business in a year, let alone 30. Orenco would have to borrow the capital to build the sewer, and I can not envision anyone loaning it to them under those circumstances.
If I am off base here, I hope someone explains what I am missing. Thank you.
To All:
If one goes to the testing of the Advantex New Zeeland test on the top of the Orenco site you will note that figures are only given for total nitrogen reduction. There are no figures for NITRATE reduction. There is a big difference. We have a NITRATE pollution problem here. One can see that as of 2006, this system was still expirimental and undergoing evaluation. Why did they not test for NITRATE? They initially made claims of NITRATE reduction for their Advantex coffin in 1999.
Of course this would have no effect as to the suitability of their collection system (step) but clearly a treatment plant to bring water to tertiary levels would be needed for Los Osos for recycling.
As of this time there is no documentation that I can find for any ponding system (cheap) that brings effluent containing NITRATE down to tertiary treated levels.
I would love to be corrected.
We went through this with Nelson Environmental, then Ripley, and now with the proposed by conspiracy boy, Orenco. They all talk of total nitrogen reduction, but never of NITRATE reduction.
Sounds to me like used car salesmen selling sewer systems. There is no doubt in my mind that these systems would be fine for all other applications where NITRATE removal was not a factor and recycling of water needed.
Conspiracy boy ...
You tell us that we have Orenco's price already.
Have they given us a guarantee?
I would love to see that guarantee and the various provisions and stipulations. The devil's in the details, my son.
Post a Comment