Design Build Preliminary Meeting for Sewer Project
This just in from the county:
Attention Design-Build Contractors, Designers, and Sureties:
NOTICE OF PENDING REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN-BUILD SERVICES
Information for Design-Build Contractors, Designers, and Sureties
Design-builders interested in the Los Osos Wastewater Project are invited to attend a non-mandatory informational meeting which will provide an overview of the Project and allow time for questions and answers. The meeting will be held at the following time and location:
Friday, November 14, 2008 at 10:00am
San Luis Obispo County Government Center
1055 Monterey Street, Room 161
San Luis Obispo, CA
The County intends to procure two separate Design-Build contracts for the Los Osos Wastewater Project. The contracts will be for the following:
• Collection System Design-Build Services: Design and construction of a community-wide collection system, consisting of approximately 45 miles of pipeline, plus service laterals and appurtenances, to serve approximately 4,800 properties. The estimated construction budget is approximately $80 million.
• Treatment Facility Design-Build Services: Design and construction of a
1.2 MGD secondary wastewater treatment facility, with optional tertiary processes, on a greenfield site. The estimated construction budget is approximately $25 million.
The County of San Luis Obispo is currently developing the Design-Build procurement documents for the Project. In accordance with Public Contract Code §20133(d)(3)(A), the County is making Draft RFQ’s available for comment from the construction industry, including representatives of the building trades and surety industry. A formal Request for Qualifications has not been issued.
Go to the Project website at www.slocounty.ca.gov/PW/LOWWP/DB.htm to view the draft RFQ’s or contact John Waddell, Project Engineer, at (805)788-2713 for more information. Comments are requested by November 21, 2008.
Also on line
Final technical memo on Decentralized Treatment. (at the same website link above), though I have no idea why they wasted time (and money) with a Decentralized memo since it’s clear from the above that they’ve already settled on a particular type of project.
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
-
▼
2008
(205)
-
▼
November
(24)
- Uhhhh, . . . .So, O.K. I are real dumb. Here's th...
- Your Saturday PoemWhile you're saving the American...
- Good. And While She’s In Jail, Have Her Take Pare...
- Happy Thanksgiving.There is much to be thankful fo...
- Prop 8, More TalkAaron Ochs, over at http://ochsna...
- Prop 8 Supporters, We Gotta TalkO.K., all you folk...
- Uh, Ron Over At Sewerwatch is having Too Much Fun"...
- Deck The Halls . . .Yes, I know, it isn't even Tha...
- Calhoun’s Cannons, The Bay News, Tolusa Press, SLO...
- What I Learned At Last Night’s County EIR Sewer Re...
- Another View, Another StateThe essay below was or...
- The Hell With Waldo, Where's Tri-W? Today's Tribun...
- Tribune Viewpoint: Below, the Nov 12, 08 “Viewpoin...
- And Now, From The Department of Bwa-hahahah. Thi...
- Hey, It’s The Stealth Septic Management Plan For S...
- Is That A $6 million Illegal Loan, or are you just...
- Attend The Tale of Sweeny Todd . . .Well, not exac...
- Mark Yer CalendarsFirst up: An Evening With Waste ...
- Calhoun’s Cannons, The Bay News, Tolosa Press, for...
- Design Build Preliminary Meeting for Sewer Project...
- Tradition! Tradition!It’s nice to see, with this ...
- Murder in Sewerville!I saw you, your head started ...
- Aw, What’s In A Word, Anyway?Lori Anderson of Los ...
- Uh, Oh, Don’t Tell RonLetter in the Tribune yester...
-
▼
November
(24)
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.
50 comments:
Hmmm....
The County's RFQ gives an estimated budget of $105,000,000 for:
INCLUDED:
Component 1: a collection system (probably gravity) ($80,000,000)
Component 2: a treatment facility producing secondary level treated wastewater. ($25,000,000)
NOT INCLUDED:
No component RFQ for disposal system design/build.
No component RFQ for waste water recharge design/build.
No component RFQ addressing reversal of salt water intrusion design/build.
No component RFQ to maintain wetlands design/build.
No component RFQ to balance aquifer watertables design/build.
No component RFQ to provide parkspace design/build.
Hmmm....What will be the new cost above the $105,000,000 estimate when those 'other' components are included?
Seems to me that Los Osos is getting far less of a waste water project for far more money than what Tri-W would have cost.
Such is life.
Ann says:
"I have no idea why they wasted time (and money) with a Decentralized memo since it’s clear from the above that they’ve already settled on a particular type of project."
Ann, you astound me. This memo was made necessary by the very likes of you! And you are complaining? For the County to not vet every feasible type of project before the public's eye, would open them up to the very type of complaints and comments that you have been making about the Tri-W PROCESS! No, don't YOU complain about the cost, because if they hadn't you'd be complaining that they didn't do their job!
Hey Mouth of Los Osos, (Looney Tunes)
...isn't that what they were suppose to do with the blank check you gave them?
The more sand has escaped from the hourglass of our life, the clearer we should see through it.
Niccolo Machiavelli
Hey franc4!
I gave them my EMPHATIC YES assessment vote for $25,000. (Be careful with the Looney Tunes name though, I believe it is trademarked.)
You can address your comment to Ann. I'm just fine with how the County spends the money - because I know it WILL result in a COMPLETED PROJECT. I'm not so fine with the obstructionist forces that made them spend the money this way, however.
Me? I think Tri-W would have served the community better as it addressed all the issues. Was it perfect? No. Was it the hideous monstrosity than the move-the-sewer people made it out to be - NO - NOT EVEN CLOSE.
My recent observations are simply that Tri-W addressed all the water component issues and really left the water disposal issues in the hands of the CSD. Too bad this project was so vilified that it would likely not be accepted now, but coming round the bend in the future, when the expense at adding in the other components will be railed against, it will be looked at with clearer eyes as the great project that got away through the short-sightedness and bull-headedness of the leaders of "move/kill-the sewer."
Yes mark, the sooner that "magic sand" idea is passed through, and eliminated from, the great wormy digestion tract of the move/kill-the-sewer divisionaries, the clearer Los Osos vision for the future will become in the need for preserving our water.
RL wrote: Hmmm....What will be the new cost above the $105,000,000 estimate when those 'other' components are included?
Lynette writes: I'm just fine with how the County spends the money - because I know it WILL result in a COMPLETED PROJECT.
Ying and Yang...
Lynette,
Take some time off. You could use it.
RL,
Good catch in identifying the piecemeal approach the county is using to slowly turn up the heat on the frogs...
No flys on you!
Richard, please don't mind me butting in - The so-called "piecemeal" approach ws mark identifies is Ann's chinese menu approach. I think he should talk to Ann as to why the County has needed to take this approach. Clearly mark doesn't "get" the history as to WHY the County needs to take this approach.
Hi Sewertoons,
The CSD5 and minions are FINALLY beginning to understand that not only did they lose the Waste Waster project; they (and the community of Los Osos) also lost all control of our water issues. The WWTF IS/WAS the centerpiece of how we resolve our water issues. When they lost the project, they inadvertently (or maybe purposely?) placed resolving the community's water issues into the County's lap. Good job!
It is ironic (and amazingly humorous) that at last Thursday's BOS meeting those that fought Tri-W so hard (Lisa, Julie, Linde, etc) were DEMANDING the County incorporate into their project solutions to resolve the issues of water recharge, reversal of salt water intrusion, maintaining wetlands, etc.; ironic as ALL of these elements were addressed and incorporated into the Tri-W Project (at a lower cost too).
My lord, as they pressed the Supervisors it sounded as if they were supporting the Tri-W project!
So much for the Chinese menu approach!
-R
Hi Richard!
And ws mark with his MBR technology seems to be too! Amazing!
The poor County. It is really doing everything it can to resolve this issue, but I'm sure they secretly find this process a bit like herding cats.
LO was taking care of itself nicely until the "move/kill-the-sewer" band of merry folk decided to trash things.
I guess we will get over our sadness over these follies, but we'd better be prepared for the whining to come when the costs of all of these things sinks into the greater public.
L'toons!
Loony,
Far clearer eyes than yours have determined that TriW is dead. Experts who know far more than you will ever forget have nixed TriW -- as they did first time around -- for all the reasons it should never have been floated as a project in the first place. It wasn't that TriW wasn't perfect, it was that TriW was a mistake. I question your financial smarts that you would consider building a "Sewer to Nowhere" because it was cheaper in '01 and may be cheaper now to make the same mistake twice. Making bad investments is a bad idea for Los Osos, and even though all the experts, even the county you worship, say TriW is a non-starter, you persist, trying to tell us that building the wrong project in the wrong place is still a good idea. Clinging to ignorance for sentimental reasons underscores a history of just plain poor judgment on your part.
It is also clear to almost everyone here (that is, before you and Maria came along, born yesterday) that launching TriW without a 218 vote two months before a community-wide referendum triggered the avalanche toward bankruptcy from which we as a community will never fiscally or spiritually recover. The facts are rather indisputable: It was the "short-sightedness and bull-headedness" of the leaders of "Save The Dream" -- Pandora, Richard, Gordon and Stan Who Ran -- who basically forged a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" in order to circumvent the EIR and satisfy their corrupt agenda -- that started the wrecking ball rolling downhill. Of course the project had to be stopped! When you see someone being mugged on the street, it's your civic duty to try to stop it. Oh, but you weren't here then, so you don't "remember" what happened and without a rear-view mirror TriW don't look so bad to You.
Did you also give the county your "EMPHATIC YES assessment vote" for $100,000? Can you afford to flip for the entire $25,000 upfront? Lucky you if you can. If you can't, then the actual assessment isn't $25,000. Sorry to be the one to tell you, but it's a helluva lot more in borrowed dollars. But you've got money to burn ...
What technology did the first EIR recommend? Do you "remember"?
Where did TriW rank in the first EIR? Do you "remember"?
Where do you live? Anywhere near NIMBY-land in the teen streets far from TriW? Certainly not in Cuesta next to the Community Center, library, churches, skate park, nearby homes, down slope from the bay, etc., etc. How about putting the sewer in the water tower overlooking your house? Hey, if it breaks, and it will, who cares about you and your mess? Just paint it puke green and shut up.
Where did Richard live and where does he live now? He's not as stupid as he looks sometimes. He knew what he did to the PZ and headed for the hills, far from the crater he ordered up to please Pandora. He's a trust baby, he's got his money, he doesn't work ... doesn't live in the PZ, where there's a "Wanted" poster of him on every telephone pole. But he has said over and over and over again in many different ways that he could care less what happens outside his bubble.
But the sun even shines on a blind dog's ass, and Richard is partly right when he laments: "Seems to me that Los Osos is getting far less of a waste water project for far more money than what Tri-W would have cost."
He's right that "Los Osos is getting far less of a waste water project for far more money," and that's because the county is ripping us off, overpaying for the collection system, and not considering far less costly, more energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly alternatives that fit our budget and do the same job, maybe even better, for many millions less. Again, I question your financial judgment, insisting that paying more is best for Los Osos, just because you like caviar. The only sewer Carollo and county public works know how to build is a big city sewer, and they'll make it fit in Los Osos if it kills us. You'll see to that.
As for yours and Richard's lingering addiction to TriW, it only points out just how tragically wrong Pandora, Richard, Gordon and Stan were back then, how wrong you and they are now, and how much we as a community have to fear today from reactionaries, backsliders and recitivists like the recalled board and their clone progeny who hold onto their jungle religion over simple science and common sense just because they can't say "I made a mistake." As a result, the community continues to pay the steep price.
I suggest you and your deadenders observe a mourning period for TriW (offline please) and then follow Pandora's advice to "Move Forward" before you are mistaken for retarded for continuously crying over the long overdue death of an exposed townkiller better left to rot in the past.
You know Sewertoons, I think Mark is right. You do need to stand back and take a break.
I take great offense to your comments.
I've lived here awile, and to hear your post of 4:54pm, November 06, 2008 is insulting.
You haven't had to live with the drainage problems, the road shoulders, or any road improvement in our neighborhoods for 25 or so years now. The County has done nothing for us and to hear you label them as almost the victims in this is disgusting.
Sincerely, M
Howies back! We have heard you opinions before; so thanks for the recap. Time to move on as the sewer is moved out of town.
The County has it's own plans for Los Osos; and Tri-W will not be revived. As for me, I do not care where the county builds the darn thing...or care about Tri-W at all. I have traveled to greener pastures my friend.
So Howie, Tri-W is a no-go. You should celebrate your win as you 'moved the sewer.'
-R
Richard,
You say, "they (and the community of Los Osos) also lost all control of our water issues..."
Richard, wasn't that all part Blakeslee's AB2701 plan?!?
It's all about the water, and perhaps Blakeslee will get his regional plan for his developer buddies.
I agree with Howie. Tri-W was a mistake. You can't put a sewer plant in town when more than half the town doesn't want it there. How could you think there wouldn't be heavy opposition?!?
I heard that the engineer on the Tri-W project said that project would have dumped pollution from the plant right into the bay. He said that he could never understand that.
After all, it was the back bay which couldn't flush. That's pretty gross, Richard!
How could you, Lynette, Maria, Gordon, Stan, Pandora ever think that project would or could work??
It just couldn't. Thank you all for the big fraud you laid upon Los Osos, Pandora!!
Sewertoons,
Can you tell us why the County wouldn't consider clusters or decentralized when the US EPA PREFERS it?!?
AND, when the State and Federal Government has a nitrate level to abide by, how can the water board only pick on Los Osos by saying ZERO discharge? They have dictated a large sewer system. So, what makes Los Osos so very different from all other California communities?!?
There are good on site treatment systems that are used in Malibu. We should be allowed the same!
Well, for one thing, we are not
Malibu. We are (in the PZ) a small community of working class families. If you look at the density of homes per acre, you can see We Aren't Malibu!! Clusters and decentralized work well in some situations, but not this one. We're going to end up with a state mandated gravity sewer ( probably at the former TriW site) and it is going to cost us much more than it would have earlier. Thanks a lot LOCSD5
Getrealosos,
Whatever your problem with Tri-W, doesn't matter now, does it. If you want to see 'the devil' in everyone who disagrees with you on that topic, go right ahead. You have made your decision, so live with it.
-R
toons says:"Ann, you astound me. This memo was made necessary by the very likes of you! And you are complaining?"
I said I didn't know why they wasted type with this tech memo since they had already made up their mind -- the tech memo is posted online at the same time the RFP meeting comes out???? Duh?
toons also sez:"I'm just fine with how the County spends the money - because I know it WILL result in a COMPLETED PROJECT."
Uh, apparently you didn't read Richard's posting. No completed project. An incomplete project. And if you're fine with how the county spends the money, why your previous whine?
Toons again:"The so-called "piecemeal" approach ws mark identifies is Ann's chinese menu approach."
Wrong again. My chinese menu approach would have been: Project A, complete with full, truthful price: Project B with full, truthful price.
richard sez:"The County has it's own plans for Los Osos; and Tri-W will not be revived. As for me, I do not care where the county builds the darn thing...or care about Tri-W at all. I have traveled to greener pastures my friend."
Ah, now there it is in a nutshell. Help create a trainwreck then walk away, happily humming a merry tune. Time to move on my friends, pay no attention to the body parts all over the sand. Not my problem. Perfect.
Lynette,
Ann makes her point with a razor's edge, so you probably don't even "feel it".
Get some rest, you might think better. You don't seem to be "tracking".
RL,
Better see to that "cut"...
Nice work Ann.
It took a lot of folks to design and build the tracks and the train... There was a pre-recall crew on board who seemed to be running along right behind the track layers... Somewhere along the trail, a group of folks decided that they didn't like the direction the tracks were going...
So they spun a tail and convinced just a enough folks to let them take over driving the engine... Once in the cab, they paid off their political legal advisors and other cronies who helped them spin their tail that they were going to save the town by taking the train out of town... then they fired the crews laying the tracks... and since there was a bank full of money, even though ear-marked for other needs like a fire department and solidwaste management, the new crew promptly hired a legal firm to provide them advice...advice such as writing checks...to themselves of course...
The new crew didn't really have a Plan on where they wanted to go or how they could get there, but they sure had good legal advice...
..but in the meantime, the tracks were stopped being laid, but the crew, upon advice from the legal folks, kept pouring clean coal in the engine's boiler... needless to say, the train ran off the end of the tracks, they put up a fence around the wreck and sought more legal advice...and kept writing checks...to the lawyers! You see, the lawyers had made a pretty good guess as to how much was in the bank accounts, they even had a friendly contract GM who provided the law firm with the estimates... and the poor wrecked train lay in a weed and snail covered patch with falling down fence, waiting for someone to come right the train and put it back on the tracks... The new crew however was pleased just because they had derailed the train and just knew no-one would come to rescue... They proceeded to declare the railroad to be bankrupt and with great theatrics, loudly blamed the previous crews for having developed a real Plan, obtained all the legal permits and for building the tracks and driving the train forward...
For 3 years the new crew continued their quest to discredit the previous crew and continued to send checks to their legal teams...oh yes, they also were so emboldened as to sue, at the advice of their lawyers, to sue the agencies responsible for permitting the tracks to be laid in the first place... Then, Nov 5, 2008, two of the old crew were replaced... and in December 2008, the old crew were taken to court and found guilty of misappropriating the funds from the bank accounts and required to repay the community for all the havoc they had brought down on the community...
There is a sequel where the the agencies who permitted the train and tracks drag the new crew and their lawyers off to jail, but that is coming later in 2009...
..and the community rallied around the wrecked train and put it back on the tracks, began laying the remaining tracks and the community smiled while the crew and lawyers languished in cold prison cells....
Richard wrote:
"... Tri-W is a no-go. You should celebrate your win as you 'moved the sewer.' "
Pop... pour... bubble, bubble... drink.
LOL Ann.....on to 'greener pastures' does not mean I do not care.
I do...just not issues sewerish. Those issues are in the hands of the County now; and what input we have will be in the 218 vote and upcoming survey.
I 'care' by working towards having the moneys illegally wasted by the CSD5 returned to the community; and seeing that the consultants (Wildan and BW&S) whose damaging advice cost the community $50,000,000 be made to pay that money back to Los Osos.
Meanwhile, what the heck are YOU doing to bring money back into our financially badly-damaged community? Just whistling Dixie? Sitting around on your rotunda playing the 'shame and blame game' is plain silly.
-R
-R wrote:
"Meanwhile, what the heck are YOU doing to bring money back into our financially badly-damaged community?"
Well, I can't speak for Ann, but what I've put into motion is my plan to save Los Osos $6 million, and pave the way for another SRF loan without having to pay back that $6 million that you guys wasted, Richard.
How?
By showing the bankruptcy officials, and county officials my challenge to the SRF loan, BEFORE it was released.
I was right on that (in fact, that's WHY I challenged it, because I knew I was right, and I wanted to get my tight, tight arguments time-stamped before the SWRCB cut that $6 million check, that Richard, Gordon, and Stan immediately wasted on tearing up the ESHA in the middle of Los Osos), and I still am right on that.
My tight, tight argument these days is: Los Osos shouldn't have to pay back that $6 million that Richard wasted. Why should the good people of Los Osos have to pay for the SWRCB's Division of Financial Assistance's gigantic mistake?
That's exactly right.
Richard, you gonna help me out with that argument?
It'll save your community $6 million, AND make the Gov's "signing statement" disappear, thus saving your community many more millions by paving the way for another, low-inerest SRF loan.
Whadaya say, Richard? You on board?
I wrote all about my SRF challenge at this link:
http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2005/08/sewerwatch-challenges-funding-for-los.html
Ron,
Then Do something about it...just sitting on you ass means nothing.
-R
RL,
You never addressed that your board never went to the effort of following the law in the first place.
You never caused a 218 vote to be made.
Which speaks to the point that there are three finger pointing back at you and your board as you attempt to "point" out the deficient...
I like how you are illuminating the county's current efforts, Good job!
The County, by their account, has made good progress in lining up a low cost (most likely 0%) loan for a good part of the sewer system cost.
The State is broke, and it's financial position is getting worse by the day. Budgeted revenues will not be realized and everyone in Sacramento knows it. Further budget cuts are coming.Many more agencies want, and need, the SRF money than what is available.
What would cause the State Water Board to even consider, let alone find, that it's own staff screwed up in making the earlier loan to the CSD and forgive the debt (when they don't have the money to do so, anyway)?
Oh, by the way, that would also require those politicians to make their Governor, who relied on their input, look bad. Not a good career move for appointed officials.
No matter how compelling Ron's argument may be, and I'm sure that he has some good points, getting the $6 Million forgiven has less than "a snow ball's chance."
Just like with many other aspects of this sewer project fiasco, it is time to quit dwelling on the past, since history can't be re-written, and make the most effective decisions from here on, to get the thing built so that we can move on to other important issues.
WM, etal,
A 218 vote was not required to secure the SRF loan.
Argue the position that one was required all you want; but you would be incorrect. In the meanwhile, talk to Jon Seitz and/or the State Water Board if you want to understand why one was not needed.
As for the County, they do not need my assistance to 'illuminate' what they are doing. The County has been very clear, encompassing and proactive as to their planning process. I just point out what they have already told us.
-R
Proposition 218 Changes Local Governance
In addition to changing local finance, Proposition 218 changes the governance roles and responsibilities of local residents and property owners, local government, and potentially, the state. While the full ramifications of these changes will not be known for years to come, some elements are already apparent.
Increased Role for Local Residents And Property Owners
Prior to Proposition 218, the local resident and property owner's role in approving most new local government revenue-raising measures was minimal. Local governments typically raised new funds by imposing new or increased assessments or fees, or in the case of charter cities, general-purpose taxes on utility use, business licences, and hotel occupancy. In most cases, California residents or property owners could object to these taxes or charges at a public hearing or during a statutory protest procedure, but these taxes or charges were not placed on the ballot. In short, locally elected governing bodies held most of the power over local revenue raising.
Proposition 218 shifts most of this power over taxation from locally elected governing boards to residents and property owners. In order to fulfill this considerable responsibility, local residents and property owners will need greater information on local government finances and responsibilities. Even with this information, however, the task of local residents and property owners will be difficult, given the frequently confusing manner in which program responsibilities are shared between state and local government, and among local governments.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/1996/120196_prop_218/understanding_prop218_1296.html
RL,
This law was in effect when Jon Seitz "said what he said".
Don't you think it is telling that "Jon's Loan" was the first SRF Load to be "defaulted" on?
Argue the facts on a blog? Bwahahahahahahahahaha...
Please watch last night's CSD meeting. Jon Seitz, in an understandable nutshell, pointed out that a 218 was NOT, I repeat NOT, required beyond the one done for design, permits and property on the old project. He stated that new rules since then have been included - we will NOT be able to do this again, but AT THAT TIME, there was NO 218 NEEDED to pay back the project cost.
On another note, Karen Vega, CSD Administrative Secretary, employed at the CSD PRIOR to 2005, clearly stated last night that prior to October 2005, the CSD STAFF, (excluding IGM's) followed strict guidelines as to payment of bills. That they never made payments over or outside of the budget prior to that time. If was only AFTER that date that things went into disarray.
Oops, I forgot to post this earlier - forgot I'd saved a text file.
Ann, when I say completed project, I mean we will have sewer that works. We may never get what Tri-W was, and we have seen how the County has been so sold that Los Osos despised it, that it will barely get onto the survey.
Los Osos didn't understand the bill of goods it was being hustled by the "move/kill-the-sewer" people, nor apparently did the "move/kill-the-sewer" people understand what they were actually doing. Not having a plan while claiming they did was a HUGE DISSERVICE to the community and I think this is going to be recognized more fully as the County project unfolds.
The County meanwhile is doing all it can to get something into the ground at a lower cost out of town. So we will get your precious out-of-town sewer, possibly for a lesser price, and that is ALL we will get. That is the best we can expect at this point because Los Osos has so thoroughly shot itself in the foot - both feet!
Sorry I misunderstood what you meant by your Chinese menu approach. I guess we will get more choices, but we will have to do the math to glue the two parts together. Perhaps the County will give us a chart.
Gee Ann, you supported Measure B, I can't see how you would think 2 or 11 pocket sewers would be embraced by Measure B supporters!
Sewertoons,
Last night Jon Seitz was covering up for himself. He said the loan would be paid by connection costs. Not a dedicated source Lynette. The state's SRF doesn't require the 218, but does require under state and federal law a dedicated source to pay the loan back. BUT, the state law DOES require the CSD to have a 218. It's California Constitutional Law. They didn't. Neither board did!
Seitz didn't have a DEDICATED source to pay the loan back, and he actually put that in writing to the state water board. What's one to believe? Jon Seitz reply to the water board, or what he tried to say last night?! Ha Ha
The connection is from home to street and will cost $3,000 to $8,000. Right?! The connection (lateral) is the only part of the sewer project that you don't have to have a 218 for.
Watch again Lynette, Jon Seitz contradicted himself.
The law has not changed. Court rulings have occurred, that's all.
Yeah, Lynette, watch again from 9:30 on. Jon was very nervous and Rob Miller was smiling. They know they screwed up.
The 2001 218 was only for the amount of $20,000 some thousand dollars, period. You have to have an amount for the 218 and it was just over $20,000. What can't you get that through your head? It's very clear.
You are wrong with this, and your are wrong on almost everything else!
P.S. Maybe Ann doesn't know that Measure B was written "the sewer had been dealt with at a reasonable cost.." it should have read "NOT been dealt with at a reasonable cost." That showed Measure B was written (then) for the SAME sewer out of town. Perfect for Jeff Edwards!!! Hmmmm. -- maybe that's why Julie Tacker liked Julie Biggs so much. Los Osos is full of fools -- no doubt about that now!
P.S. LeGros doesn't want to talk about Tri-W, so why don't you give me your thoughts on the engineer on the Tri-W project not understanding why that project dumped the plant's pollution into the back bay (which wouldn't flush out) -- nice walk through Sweet Springs huh?!
Lynette:
-the task of local residents and property owners will be difficult, given the frequently confusing manner in which program responsibilities are shared between state and local government, and among local governments.
You really should take a break.
getreal says:
"…the 218, but does require under state and federal law a dedicated source to pay the loan back."
Whatever Jon Seitz said, what is "not dedicated" about a line hooked up from your house to a sewer pipe? Do you get to turn it off if you feel like it? Most people pay their bills, even. On time, even.
The old 218 was for $24 million, you left off some zeros. $20 million in bonds were sold and the CSD holds around $4 million in unsold bonds (which Bleskey thought he could sell!!! Ha-ha!!!).
getreal, maybe you can explain why the "new" Board refused a bridge loan so that they could hold a 218?
mark, I live here, I don't get to take a break. I must stay on guard against people like you and your buddy Tom. You on the other hand…
Lawyers can figure out agreements between government entities, the problems really lie with the troublemakers who want to stop a project, any project. Look at the history of Los Osos' sewer.
For getreal, I'll post something Richard posted on October 1,2007: (I trust he won't mind - it really explains a lot, and very clearly, too.)
"In reference to what to do with the harvest water there was a plan. When the DESIGNED (assumed) water absorbtion rates were applied to Broderson, extremely conservative rates were used. These rates indicated that at FULL BUILDOUT that there MIGHT be a need to harvest water near the Bay to avoid surfacing of ground water. Fair enough! It was correct of MWH to use such conservative absorbtion rates. You ask the question of what to do with the possible excess harvested water (if any)
The plan was to monitor the ACTUAL (real world) disposal water absorbtion rates at Broderson AND monitor the flow of ground water to the lower elevatations of town over the first 5 years of the Tri-W plant operation. Why do this?
1. To develope real-world data to show if the designed disposal application rates at Broderson were too conservative or too optimistic. The goal here is to verify with real world data to solidfy the disposal protocols at Broderson.
2. The real-world flow of ground water from Broderson to lower elevations needed to be determined. It was calculated that harvest wells would NOT BE NEEDED for the initial 5 years of WWTP operation, as the dispoal rates would be less until full buildout was achieved (if ever).
The intent is that study of the real-world data on that application rates were reasonable and that the distribution of harvest water throughtout the aquifer to balance it would result in no excessive harvest water.
If the data showed that an excess of harvest water would occur (and how much), a plan would be developed to determine what to do with it. There are many options of what to do with this water; some of them not requiring additional disposal costs or 'add-ons'.
If you like, I would gladly discuss what those options are, but brevity of this post is more important at this time. In short, the plan developed was an amazing water disposal/harvest/distribution system which would have allowed the CSD to continually monitor and balance the upper aquifers while maintaining existing wetlands. This plan fulfilled the Coastal Commission's CDP requirements; and any future WWTP developed for Los Osos must achieve the same results.
Regards, Richard LeGros" October 1, 2007
Richard wrote:
"Ron,
Then Do something about it...just sitting on you ass means nothing."
Well, like I wrote, I already have.
That's why I wrote: "I've put into motion..."
I've already made county and bankruptcy officials aware of my challenge.
Whether they want to pursue it, and easily, and immediately save Los Osos $6-plus million dollars, and pave the way for another SRF loan, is entirely up to them.
What I would recommend for you, Richard, and Gordon, and Pandora, is for you guys to get off of your asses, and push the county to argue my challenge... because I was right, and I still am right, and the county would win that argument, easily, hands down.
So, help out, Richard, and Pandora and Gordon. After all, you guys are the ones with ALL of those ties to every single media, county, state, and elected official in the area.
It'll be a slam dunk, and we'll all be pulling in the same direction, for once.
Cantcha just hear it? The faint strains... "Kumbaya do do, do do doooo..."
Ron...but you have nothing to your "challenge"... You are simply a wantabe hack... All you have done is live in the past and in the real world, you are just another outsider to the sewer issue of Los Osos...
You, Ron, have never been and never will, be "right" except in your own mind...!!!!! Your own ego has created only you as the legend of your own mind... You never will understand the issues that you can't make up... Your obsession with condeming the past Board members and Pandora makes us wonder who's paying you since you have no other stake in Los Osos... No one as obsessed as you would keep spinning around a park as long as you have without some financial kickback or mental disability... You either have a developer paying you or you are mentally imbalanced... Either way you have nothing to offer in the way of a "challenge" but some other something to blame in your wantabe expose style...
Ron,
So you are 'leaving to others' to fight your fight. To the point, you lose as others are not taking on your cause as you need to lead it. If you believe it, then get off your ass.
-R
Hey MIKE,
Everyone who will solve LO/BP's septic tank discvharge problem is an "outsider", everyone.
...except that "we" who will have to pay for the system, whatever, where ever....
...and thanks to "sales" folks like yourself and buddy Tom, we will never ever trust snakeoil sales pitches again... You pumped up the Reclamator as the great saviour and in the end, it was all just a scam...
We're probably going to have to listen to you mark, but we will hear and trust the County loooong before ever trusting you again...!!!!
mark says:
"Everyone who will solve LO/BP's septic tank discvharge problem is an "outsider", everyone."
Yes, but they will be fully approved by insiders. THAT is the difference.
sewertoons,
"Me? I think Tri-W would have served the community better as it addressed all the issues. Was it perfect? No. Was it the hideous monstrosity than the move-the-sewer people made it out to be - NO - NOT EVEN CLOSE. "
....does that mean you are "anti-Growth" or just a little looney....toons?ralkmen
'toons,
"Jon Seitz, in an understandable nutshell, pointed out that a 218 was NOT, I repeat NOT, required "
I think, many moons ago on a now defunct blog, someone ( probably Shark) said it was Bruce (Phi Beta Krapa) Behul said that.
I believe, as someone said, you should take a rest. You are working yourself into a frenzy over some nobody HERE HAS ANY CONTROL...especially you because you don't have all the facts or are just plain stupid....just like Mike (REappraser)who keeps spouting his take on events, incoherently. He like you support the old CSD...Stan, Gordon and Richard...the REAL cause of the problems your community faces. Can't you see that, at all?
'toons,
"Jon Seitz, in an understandable nutshell, pointed out that a 218 was NOT, I repeat NOT, required "
I think, many moons ago on a now defunct blog, someone ( probably Shark) said it was Bruce (Phi Beta Krapa) Behul said that.
I believe, as someone said, you should take a rest. You are working yourself into a frenzy over some nobody HERE HAS ANY CONTROL...especially you because you don't have all the facts or are just plain stupid....just like Mike (REappraser)who keeps spouting his take on events, incoherently. He like you support the old CSD...Stan, Gordon and Richard...the REAL cause of the problems your community faces. Can't you see that, at all?
franc4 - double posting? Are you tired or do you have the just-too-much coffee jitters?
The "the REAL cause of the problems your community faces," were caused by a "new" Board too befuddled to realize that they had bed legal advice and an incompetant IGM.
...hmmmm....you may have hit the real root cause of the problems... "they had bed legal advice"... are yo saying she bedded the legal advisors AND the IGM....??? Sounds like a chapter in the book: Julie does Osos...
Wow! I'm sure this was a Freudian slip - I meant BAD! But on that personal note, the rumors sure did fly, didn't they?
Post a Comment