Uhhhh, . . . .
So, O.K. I are real dumb. Here's the Tribune (NYT) story, "To Fight Somali Pirates, the West must first defeat red tape," wherein it it says that the pirates who have been hijacking huge, ginormous oil tankers in international waters and on the high seas and holding them hostage for ransom have a bunch of people in a tangle. "Bureaucratic and legal hurdles facing internaitonal institutions and national governments have so far defeated most efforts to deal with the nimble crews of pirates in speedboats, whose tactics have grown bolder as their profits have paid for better weapons and equipment.
"While the pirates have been buying GPS devices, satellite phones and more powerful outboard motors, officials in Europe have been discussing jurisdictional issues surrounding the arrest of pirates on the high seas and even the possibility that the pirates might demand assylum if brought onto Europen Union shores."
Uh, I thought piracy in international waters was illegal, and I thought that if somebody in a small boat sent an RPG across your bow or onto your bridge, it was reasonable to assume that they were intent on killling or kidnapping you or stealing your boat and cargo (Arrrrgggg, mates, it's wot we pirates do! Arrrggghhhh) and you had a perfect legal right to defend yourself, up to and including blowing said pirates out of the water?
So, why hasn't the Saudi Gov and other transshippers of valuable pirate-worthy cargo called Dick Cheney up and said, "Hey, since your Iraq war is winding down, ya got some extra mercs from Halliburton you can send over? Oh, and put me in touch with some arms dealers, we'll be needing some laser-guided rockets and such like that can lock onto fast, zippy little boats filled with guys with guns who are, even as we speak, zooming towards our ginormous oil tanker looking like the evil penguins from 'Madagascar'."
The story continues, "Germany this week announced that as many as 1,400 military personnel might take part in a European Union mission in the region. . . . If it gets approval, the German military is planning to send a frigate, the Karlsruhe, to join the European Union's first naval mission, expected to include as many as six frigates and three to five airplanes for maritime patrols. The European Union hopes to coordinate actions with other navies operating in the region, including those from India, Russia and the Unites States."
Woa. Why should the taxpayers of the U.S. pay to have navy ships in international waters protecting private tankers who are perfectly capable of arming themselves with all the latest toys (heck, if impoverished Somalis can buy all these cool weapons, why not Saudia Arabia?) in order to protect their product?
Think Wells Fargo and the grizzly guy riding shotgun on top of the stagecoach. Only after that failed (like suddenly the Somalis showed up with a dreadnought of their own -- highly unlikely, given the state of their economy) should the cavalry be called into to accompany the gold-laden stagecoach.
Uhhhh, I don't get it.
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.
85 comments:
Hi All,
I hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday.
Just and FYI from the CSD:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PRESS RELEASE
November 26, 2008
On November 25, 2008, the United States Bankruptcy Court approved settlements of claims that had been asserted against the Los Osos Community Services District by Monterey Mechanical Company and Barnard Construction Company, Inc. These claims arose from the District's now-suspended wastewater project.
Along with a prior settlement of the claim of Whitaker Contractors, Inc., these settlements reduced the total original contractor claims by 59% from $27,796,844 to $11,427,814. The reduction in these claims benefits the District's other creditors because it will increase the percentage distribution to creditors in the District's reorganization plan.
No claims will be paid until the Bankruptcy Court approves a reorganization plan for the District. The District intends to file this plan with the Bankruptcy Court after the County passes a resolution accepting responsibility for constructing a wastewater project.
For more information please call LOCSD General Manager John Schempf at 528-9370.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The so-called 'benefit' in the 'debt reduction' of 59% to $11,427,812 is still an amazingly large debt to be paid by home owners. Add in all the other debts for stopping Tri-W and we are at $50,000,000 (including 2002 Bond Assessment)....and still have to pay for the County's project of over $170,000,000 and counting.
We are looking at a new project costs of $170,000,000, plus home owner connection costs of $20,000,000, plus retiring old project debt of $50,000,000; for a total new project cost of $240,000,000.
So much for the pre-recall claims that 'moving the sewer' would be cheaper ($155,000,000 old vs. $240,000,000 new).
If you are wondering why the CSD has to wait for the County to officially adopt the Waste Water Project, the short answer is that the County's project will be the vehicle by which the money to pay down the CSD debt will be collected (via user fees by those connected to the County's project).
-R
Thank you Richard for the 411. I hope the information you have given us will get out to the greater public. These are concrete numbers to look at and it gives the Move-The-Sewer, last-gasp "let's wait and see" stance-holders a wake-up call. It will be years before this town is out of debt, but with the County accepting the project, there at least IS a way out of debt. It gives the No -Sewer people a wake-up call as well. "No sewer" road-blocks will finish off the CSD for sure, dumping all of that debt into the lap of each and everyone of us with no CSD for a shield.
I wish the fragile egos around here could just buck up and say they made a mistake, no, make that a big mistake. They could not deliver on what was promised, despite the fact there are some on the Tri-W side who know that they could have actually made the change to out-of-town, that they just did not know how to do it, nor, as Alon so aptly put in a post on a thread below this, did they learn on the job. That is all very sad. But in the end, if we want to survive and improve our Los Osian lot, it can be forgiven, as most of us plan to live here for a very long time and we should make every effort to make that time together pleasant. Sweeping this sort of thing under the rug may calm things down, but won't solve the problem until a new and unknowing population comes to take our places.
We WILL get a project and we do need to move on.
Healing comes when the truth comes out, when those responsible for mistakes admit to them, pay for them, and ask for forgiveness. Then it is up to the rest of us - those mad at Measure B and the recall, those mad at the directors who failed to deliver out-of-town, and every other sewer-connected mad - will just lay down the hatchets, forgive and make peace. I truly believe it can be done by most of us. But it will take the best we have in ourselves - both to admit and to forgive - to make this happen.
And the other thing that would be a nice wish, although I hold far less hope for this - a more informed voting public - voting less on spin and more on fact.
And to tie this into the blog topic - let's deal with our own pirates without the US Navy.
Richard once again hijacked another one of Ann's [unrelated] posts. Don't pirates hijack too?
Arrrrgh you sure?
osos change,
I find Ann to be an incredibly tolerant person as to what goes on in her blog. Why don"t we all emulate her tolerant behavior and let this rest. Richard's postings have been very informative - here is a place where we can actually find out what is going on in court, etc. We rarely get reportings of this sort anywhere else.
Lynette,
Why don't you create a web site for Taxpayers Watch and leave Ann alone? This site shouldn't be a place for you to wipe your ass on.
Hey Q & F.... Hope you had an uneventful holiday... Appears you still have heartburn and hemroids...
Say, how about you starting a website for those of your kind who will never understand why the County is in charge of the sewer project... Maybe call yourselves the LO NO Sewer Pirates...!!!! You could play spy on your neighbor and who can make up the biggest on-factual enuendo...
In the meantime, give it a rest, Ann is giving plenty of latitude for all presenters and their "facts"...
Nice language osos change. Is that what you teach your kid?
Yes. The word "ass" is such a vulgar word. Grow up.
So, Ms. Webmaster Extraordinaire, how about a Taxpayers Watch web site?
Hi All,
I am sure that Ann has no problem with my prior post as she wants everyone to be informed. Let us just leave it at that.
As for the topic du jour, I believe that excessive arming of merchant ships has been discouraged by maritime law for centuries. I suspect that ships in international waters are seen as part of the sovereign nations to which they are registered; hence governments are given the responsibility to protect shipping lanes; not private corporations or individuals.
-R
Richard,
There's something called etiquette. Use it.
Does etiquette stop pirates...???
Quote osos change, "This site shouldn't be a place for you to wipe your ass on."
Is this your idea of proper language etiquette for this blog? (A bar perhaps…if it is a skanky one.)
Grammar -- how about, "This site shouldn't be a place on which you wipe your ass." Sounds a little tonier, don't you think?
I asked you a question, Lynette.
Sewertoons says,
“Healing comes when the truth comes out, when those responsible for mistakes admit to them, pay for them, and ask for forgiveness.”
The truth needed for healing will need a lot more than Richard’s version of the pre-recall period. The TW masters want to rip apart the post recall board and glorify the pre-recall board. This is not the truth, but an attempt to rewrite the history books. TW has not yet admitted any mistakes or asked for forgiveness, because they think that they are above the law, and superior to the common citizens. But we, the common citizens, will be paying for their poor, self-centered decisions for a long, long time.
But would the truth instigate another recall? (After all, it is the common citizens who control the elections.) Then who would run? TW wears down and destroys all the good, honest talented people who stand up for what is right, and then rewards their puppets, (those who are responsive when the masters pull the strings). Maria is a puppet. Sewertoons, you are a puppet.
What is Marshall, a puppet or a master? How long has he been involved in meetings with the recalled board? Was he involved at the time of the site selection meeting for Tri-W? Before? What was his role?
A complete listing of all people affiliated with and supporting TW, including local and non local businesses and government agencies would be a good start.
“Healing comes when the truth comes out, when those responsible for mistakes admit to them, pay for them, and ask for forgiveness.”
Bring it on, all of it, all 30+ years so we can connect the dots.
LOCC,
I notice with interest that if "TW" is replaced by "CCLO/LOTTF" and "pre" is replaced by "post" (and, of course, "post" replaced by "pre") the comments you make (with the obvious exception of comments about Maria, Marshall and Toons) could have very well been written by Mike or Realistic.
About the time that the folks on one end of the political spectrum sound exactly like like folks at the other end is about the time when true healing most needs to happen. Perhaps if we all cut each other a bit of slack, it would be easier for the truth to come out and forgiveness to happen.
Once the people who are demanding a pound of flesh from Richard start asking for Lisa and Chuck to admit their failures ... once the folks who blame Julie for everything admit that Pandora made mistakes as well, we can start to make progress.
Richard sez:"The so-called 'benefit' in the 'debt reduction' of 59% to $11,427,812 is still an amazingly large debt to be paid by home owners."
Richard, are you oblivious to the fact that a good chunk of that money wouldn't be owed if you hadn't voted to start the project weeks before the recall vote? That was money you, Stan and Gordon pointlessly pounded into the ground. You seem oblivious to that fact, which I find very odd.
sewertoons sez:"Healing comes when the truth comes out, when those responsible for mistakes admit to them, pay for them, and ask for forgiveness."
Ron Crawford's got a pretty good start on tracking this project from day one. Alas, when he connects the dots, everyone hollers at him. No doubt, we need a truth and reconciliation hearing. Ron's got most of the story but a few of the major players up in Sacramento are gone missing or been "promoted" safely out of reach, but their sticky fingers and little footprints can be see anyway.
Was all this unnecessary. Yes. Was this a sad failure of so many, every step of the way? Yes. In addition to generalized incompetence and bungling, were there DELIBERATE efforts to inflict more and even unnecessary wounds on the corpse than required? Oh, Yes. DELIBERATE efforts to keep the train heading for the cliff even when the tracks COULD have been changed slightly, thereby avoiding the wreck? Oh, indeed, yes!
If you ever wonder how this country got into such a mess in Iraq, I can think of no better instructive than suggesting they study Los Osos for a blueprint of how it's done.
Inlet sez:"Once the people who are demanding a pound of flesh from Richard start asking for Lisa and Chuck to admit their failures ... once the folks who blame Julie for everything admit that Pandora made mistakes as well, we can start to make progress."
Actually, you have to go back farther than that. Like take a hard look at 83-13 and the credibility of the Water Board and the scientific shakiness of their "findings." And their slapping a moritorium on part of the community then allowing 1,300 NEW homes? Duh? Not to mention the failure of all parties to understand the danger not of nitrates but salt water intrusion and overdraft (to which 1,300 homes didn't help & etc.) And the failure of the County and CAWS to go into the back room way back in 1984 with an adding machine and hammer out a real cost number, then reappear together, arm in arm and say, Sorry folks, we agree that the cost is _____. And the failure to consider nitrate load versus the insistance of sewering the whole PZ, but not the other areas (again, based on shaky "science.") And the failure to really admit to the connection between sewers and growth instead of denying it, which only raised the paranoia and distrust level. And on to the failure of the Solutions Group/newly formed CSD folks to tell the community in a timely manner that the Ponds of Avalon wouldn't work and wouldn't be allowed to work & etc. and instead of going back to the community and changing direction, proceeded to throw coal on the engine and head for the clifff and the rest, as they say, is history. Yet even now, there's plenty of 'spainin yet to do.
Osos change sez,"There's something called etiquette. Use it."
May I suggest you ALL keep that i mind?
Ann,
While Ron started keeping track of the various mistakes, he got sloppy after reaching some conclusions. He started seeing mistakes by people named Pandora and Gordon where there were no mistakes. Even worse, he stopped looking for mistakes and serious errors in judgment when people named Julie and Lisa were involved. Sloppy thinking makes for a muddled analysis.
On the question of history, of course, things pre-date Pandora. Most of the discussion here focuses on the recent (post 1995) history.
Ann, Ron gets hollered at because he never blames anyone past October, 2005.
I think at least we are ALL in agreement that the WB and the County (of THEN - the County of now having to rectify those sins) carries a huge burden for this mess.
Just like I wrote... you Tri-W honks are hilarious.
You know where you guys f-d up (well, o.k., one of the many places where you guys f-d up)?
As usual, you didn't think things through when you went to the "support the county's process" card.
It never occurred to the Tri-W honks that the "county's process" would show the Tri-W project to be the exact technological embarrassment that I've reported it to be over the last four years.
So, now, the Tri-W project developers and supporter(s) -- I added the "(s)" just in case there's more than one -- are stuck in that funny, funny place of having to defend their technological embarrassment after the National Water Research Institute AND the County of SLO have shown them to be wrong... and me right.
So, hell yes I support the county's process. They're brilliant!
Hey, it just occurred to me... Boom -- common ground: 'toons, and Richard, and Mike, and the tiny, yet noisy, handful of the other Tri-W project developers and supporter(s), all agree with SewerWatch: Hell yea... support the county's process!
... Kumbaya do do, do do doooo...
Ann,
Let us look at the $50,000,000 debt for stopping Tri-W.
The Tri-W project started in 2001 with the approval of the FEIR (not beginning with construction in 2005); and was funded with $22,000,000 with the 2002 Bond Assessment. By 2004, over $21,500,000 of the Bond Assessemnt had been spent developing that project; and by June of 2005 multible contracts had been signed by the State; Contractors and various consultantss/engineers. YEARS PRIOR to the recall, the LOCSD was obligated to binding contracts that, if breached, would cost the LOCSD tens of millions of dollars in damages...EVEN IF CONSTRUCTION WAS NOT COMMENCED.
I repeat.....THE LOCSD WAS UNDER BINDING CONTRACTS THAT, IF BREACHED, WOULD COST THE DISTRICT TENS OF MILLIONS IN DAMAGES EVEN IF CONSTRUCTION WAS NOT COMMENCED.
Out of the $50,000,000 debt owed, the only portion that is assigned to actual constuction is $2,500,000...the remaining $4,000,000 (of the SRF loan) was still in LOCSD accounts at the time of the recall; and should have been returned to the State IF the recall board really believed their campaign rheteric that the SRF loan was illegal.
IN reality, the only portion of the $50,000,000 debt that MIGHT be considered 'pounding money into the ground' (depending on your point of view) is the $2,500,000 spent on actual construction....or a mere 5% of the total debt.
The remaining 95% of the debt (THAT'S NINETY-FIVE PERCENT) is directly attributed to the actions of the recall board for breaching multiple contracts, throwing away the assessment bond debt, payment of avoidable legal fees resulting from the breach of contracts, and fines realized by defying the State.
Whether the debt size is $47,500,000 or $50,000,000 is moot...what matters is that a very large debt is now owed by the property owners for the recall board's decision to breach binding contracts.
Additionally, the $2,500,000 spent on construction (which still exists as an asset in the ground) would not have been wasted IF the Tri-W project construction had been allowed to continued; hence their would not have been any debt at all; let alone money 'pounded into the ground'.
Ann, prior to the recall the board warned you and yours about what would happen if the Tri-W project was stopped, and why. Just review the video records of pre recall meetings and you will see and hear the warnings for yourself.
You and yours choose to not listen; nor could our warnings be heard over the whinning din of your and yours mau-mauing.
You and yours led a recall campaign based upon fear, slander and outright lies that resulted in confusing voters just enough to make a very bad choice.
Let me put it this way... how often do you hear folks that voted AGAINST the recall say....
"Gee...I should have voted FOR the recall for it benefitted the community and cost me less too!".
You don't hear that, do you?
What you do hear are folks that now REGRET voting FOR the recall as they now see the mistake they made.
That says it all.
-R
Ron,
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem ... both in the comment section here and when you summarize the EIR as supporting your opinion. Just to zero in on your problem, please focus on the cost/benefit question. Is the proposed County project comparable in terms of scope or cost to the TriW project? Perhaps if you had adequately addressed this question some four years ago, back when you had some influence, it would have caused fewer folks to blindly support the recall which has proven to have been a mistake (unless, of course, one doesn't mind additional pollution and is so rich that an increased sewer bill has no impact on one's life).
Lastly, as to supporting the County process and project, I dare you to call Paavo up and ask him whether the recall will result in lower total costs to Los Osos residents ... or not. I double dog dare you to actually report what he says in response.
'toons,
"I wish the fragile egos around here could just buck up and say they made a mistake, no, make that a big mistake. "
...don't you think Gordon, Stan, Richard and Bruce should be a few of the folks who should do just that?....actually the list is much longer, going back to Pandora & Co.
....also, your search for the "truth" reminds me of this;
"We routinely disqualify testimony that would plead for extenuation. That is, we are so persuaded of the rightness of our (sic,YOUR)judgment as to in validate evidence that does not confirm us in it. Nothing that deserves to be called truth could ever be arrived at by such means."
Marilynne Robinson, "The Death of Adam"
All of you anti-Julie-Lisa-present CSD folks, would do well to heed this statement.
Osos,
"Richard once again hijacked another one of Ann's [unrelated] posts. Don't pirates hijack too?"
...due to the egos' mentioned by 'toons, he feels it's the only way to voice his opinion.....since most thinking people don't give an iota of credence to wwhat he says, anyway....except Looney (aka sewertoons) and Mike.
Shark,
"While Ron started keeping track of the various mistakes, he got sloppy after reaching some conclusions. He started seeing mistakes by people named Pandora and Gordon where there were no mistakes. Sloppy thinking makes for a muddled analysis."
...I'm agast...you of all people!
.."where there were no mistakes."????????(by Panda)
...talk about "sloppy thinking".......
sewert,
"Ann, Ron gets hollered at because he never blames anyone past October, 2005."
...why would he? If you weren't so biased, you would see where the blame REALLY lies.
...hmmmm franc4... Isn't there a court case coming up in January (delayed from November because the CSD5's newest atty was unprepared) where the legal "truth" regarding the CSD5's fiscal accountability will be laid out for the whole community...???
Keep in mind there is more than 1 side to the blog stories, tall tales, piracy and out-right lies...
franc, like it or not, Richard's predictions have all come true. Too bad more people did not heed what he said.
In case you didn't notice, your quote applies to your side too.
franc, are you really saying that NO blame for this mess lies with the October 2005 Board?
I only blame the pre-recall Board for not holding the recall sooner. I'll bet they blame themselves for that, too. They wouldn't have been recalled, and we would not be having this discussion. We would have a functioning WWTF by now, in town, with the water coming out of it belonging to the CSD, for less money than we will soon be spending to get less, with 2/3's of the water being used OUT of town. (Of course we could have gone with that plan, the plan that the Oct 2005 Board had - the "we didn't have a plan" plan, you know, THAT plan.)
franc, aren't you even a little miffed that there was NO PLAN? Aren't you even a little bit miffed about them refusing to do a bridge loan so that there might have actually BEEN a plan? I'm trying to look at it from your side here.
Lynette,
How's the web site coming along?
Ann said:
"DELIBERATE efforts to keep the train heading for the cliff even when the tracks COULD have been changed slightly, thereby avoiding the wreck?"
Would you consider the Board's refusal to do a bridge loan for a couple of mil a "deliberate effort" to keep the train heading off the cliff? Remember all the warnings that they got from the Water Board? Remember they agreed to go gravity to keep the contractors working? They could have retooled, gone for another 218 to pay for the new design out of town (and the length of pipe to deliver the wastewater there). Why didn't they do this? Do they regret that decision now?
What website do you think I'm doing OC and why?
Feel free to jump in with an opinion on the bridge loan question.
Ah, once again the christian hypocrite Olduffo/Coalbus/Franc4 rears his outsiders head to comment on things that have absolutely no bearing on him whatsoever.
Once more time Coalbus, and this should be a very succinct, easy answer for you: How are YOU affected by the cost of the sewer? How have the actions of the prior recall board, the post recall board, or any board whatsoever affected YOU as a tax paying home-owning citizen of Los Osos?
Franc,
Are you saying that Ron only finds fault with the actions of Pandora and Gordon when it is justified?
To me it seems as if Ron is a bit quick to find fault ... and often it is not justified. Richard here has often pointed out alternative explanations for the things Ron has said are proof of evilness.
Richard,
After reading your post (at the top of this thread) -- taking your numbers at face value, which is never a good idea, your costs of retiring the old project debt is $50 million dollars.
Richard, this is your debt. It belongs to you, Stan and Gordon. It is about time that you accept responsibility for this debt. Will you be a man and do that?
The Tri-W project doesn't even rate on the new EIR, and it didn't rate on the old EIR. Obviously, this was a fix and it backfired. The Tri-W project was never, ever, a viable project, yet you forced it on the community to the tune of $50 million dollars.
It is time for some accountability. Step up here and admit that you screwed the town.
Shark,
Funny you should mention "please focus on the cost/benefit question..."
What was our benefit in the PZ on the 218..?
I'll tell you, no more threats of fines! That's it!
And the fines...fines without any proof of pollution by the RWQCB!
And BTW, new sewer project costs have come down because of the recession and because the contractors need work.
Why isn't that happening here?
The answer - FRAUD!!
AND LET'S NOT FORGET ABOUT OUR DEAR FRIEND LYNETTE...,
This community will never heal. Forget about it.
The reason? THE PZ.
How can YOU think it's fair and/or legal Lynette? (I'd like to hear your response to this one, hey let's hear from Mr. SmartASS Shark.)
You have one person in the PZ and just a few feet away one person is not! What a joke. A joke that's not funny at all.
At the BOS meeting when they voted to keep the "boundary line" (they didn't call it the PZ on their resolution), Julie Tacker was sure there at that meeting to say "It was fine with her!!!" What's with you people? Why was it fine with Julie? Because she doesn't live in the PZ? Why was it fine with Richard LeGros? Because he doesn't live in the PZ? Why was it fine with McPherson? Because she doesn't live in the PZ (but makes all the decisions for the PZ homeowners...)?
Where was the science on formulating the PZ?
Hint, hint -- THERE WAS NO SCIENCE.
It's all fraud Lynette.
How can you expect healing? There can't be any healing with all the FRAUD that exists. Or do you think everyone is so very stupid Lynette?
Definition of Fraud
All multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth. It includes all surprises, tricks, cunning or dissembling, and any unfair way which another is cheated.
Source: Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed., by Henry Campbell Black, West Publishing Co., St. Paul, Minnesota, 1979.
....now all YOU have to do is PROVE your "opinion" that "...new sewer project costs have come down because of the recession and because the contractors need work.
Why isn't that happening here?
The answer - FRAUD!!"
OMG... Please PROVE there was (is) any Fraud...by the LEGAL Definition.... Now there is a court getting ready to entertain some rather well founded alligations of "Illegal" financial manipulation by 5 local individuals... That's real and that's going forward...!!!!
If you GetRealOsos (isn't that a new iteration of Joooey?) have any supportable PROOF, then why aren't YOU putting YOUR money where your mouth is...??? WHY haven't YOU sued someone, anyone...??? Is it because YOU have NO PROOF of anything...????
Only more sewer war mongering, blaming everyone but your self, making up more enuendo and lies...
The really great thing this time is, the CSD majority has changed and YOU won't get funded like the PZLDF has... YOU get to spend YOUR OWN MONEY...NOT THE COMMUNITY this time...!!!! So have at it you self styled sewer lawyer...!!!!
Get Real,
I have repeatedly posted that I accept responsiblilty for my actions and decisions as a LOCSD director.
However, I cannot, nor will I, accept responsibilty for actions that others did after I left office. Would you accept responsibility for actions that you had no control over; or for actions that others did without your consent?
Also, the debt is not 'my debt'....it is a debt now owed by the entire community of Los Osos; and a debt that could have been entirely avoided if the recall board had honored the CSD's contractural obligations AND the accepted the compromise plan offered by the State (which the recall board summarily voted to, in public, not to honor.)
So, are you man enough to acknowledge that the recall board's dishonorable welshing on binding contracts and throwing away the community's last chance at resolving conflict with the State?
As for the County's new EIR, Tri-W was not considered completely due to political (not technical or environment) reasons. To call Tri-W 'a fix' is rediculious as it went through years of review in order to obtain approvals for construction. That is history that is undeniable.
-R
Mike,
You are a moron.
Here is an article stating that construction costs are down.
Here you go:
City ready to move on wastewater treatment plant upgrade
November 21, 2008
By ABBY SEWELL, staff writer
BARSTOW • Barstow is preparing to move on to the first phase of construction in planned upgrades to its wastewater treatment facility.
The city sent a formal notice to proceed with the project to the Pacific Hydrotech construction company Thursday. The project’s official start date was Monday, and it is expected to be completed by June 2009, city spokesman John Rader said.
The actual construction may not begin until March, but the notice to proceed allows the construction company to begin ordering equipment and materials, many of which will need to be fabricated before work on the ground can start, said city management analyst Mark Murphy.
The Barstow City Council also agreed Monday to contract with So & Associates Engineers for construction management services on the project. So & Associates was the design engineer during the planning phase of the upgrade.
The city was mandated by the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board to get the level of nitrates in the effluent to less than 10 milligrams per liter by July 30, 2008 or face fines of $1,000 to $10,000 a day for each day of the nitrates exceed that level. High levels of nitrates in the groundwater are considered hazardous to human health.
Through most of the year, the nitrate level is below 10 milligrams per liter, Murphy said, but are times when the levels spike above the acceptable level.
The upgrade will entail modernizing the aeration tanks and associated equipment at the wastewater facility to reduce the nitrate level in the treated wastewater, Murphy said. The aeration basins are tanks contain bacteria that eat away the nitrates from the water.
Murphy said the city had originally anticipated spending about $2 million on the upgrade, but the downturn in the economy had the unexpected effect of reducing the project costs by increasing competition for construction contracts.
In total, the city will pay about $1.1 million to Pacific Hydrotech for the construction and $190,000 to So & Associates for the design, engineering and construction services, he said.
“One benefit of the slow economy is that a lot of the construction firms are looking for work, so the costs for a project like this are significantly less,” he said.
Once the aeration tank upgrade is completed, a second phase of improvements to the plant will include adding new screens to filter out solids from the sewage that comes into the treatment facility. That phase is expected to be completed by December 2009
Background
The city of Barstow is mandated to reduce the level of nitrates discharged into the groundwater in the treated wastewater released by the city’s wastewater treatment plant.
P.S. THANKS FOR YOUR DEFINITION OF THE WORD FRAUD. IT WORKS PERFECTLY -- FRAUD WAS COMMITTED BY THE PAST CSD, THE RWQCB, THE COUNTY, PANDORA AND ALL THE REST OF YOUR FRIENDS. HEY, I'LL INCLUDE SHARK TOO!!
Richard,
I don't agree with your argument, as I've stated before, a 218 vote was required by law (the RWQCB acknowledged this too) for the Tri-W project. Seitz said that "financial model" wouldn't work now proves my point.
As far as paying the debt through fees and charges, well, the County better think twice before they do that.
It is not at all clear that the County can simply add debt onto the homeowners. The Ventura Harbor court ruled that a 218 can NOT be used to pay off a debt that is from a previous project. The recent 218 vote was a blank check but it still doesn't mean that the debt of the previous Tri-W project can be dumped on homeowners as rates and charges. This seems to me to be a violation of the Ventura ruling and should be tested in court.
You are very lucky to be living in SLO County. There are many from the Regan and Nixon administration who found refuge here because it only has laws that protect them.
GetReal,
You suggest that I am party to a fraud of some sort.
You are incorrect.
I would also suggest that the moment you attempt to tag Richard with the costs associated with the decisions of the board after he was voted out, you lose any credibility you had. Can you really blame Richard for the costs associated with the hiring BWS and Willdan? Can you really blame Richard for the post-recall board's decision not to pay back the portion of the SRF loan which wasn't necessary to pay contractors for work already performed? Can you really blame Richard for the money paid to Ripley?
Nope, you seem pretty angry ... but don't let your anger cloud your thoughts.
Whether good or bad, the TriW project had a cost associated with it and there was a cost associated with stopping TriW and moving toward another site. If the cost was only $20M to stop TriW and now the County project is estimated to be some $30M to $60M more than TriW ... those costs all need to be borne by folks who will be paying for the sewer. (Yes, the debts are owned by the district as a whole, but the district is mostly PZ so mathematically, there is little difference.)
All in all, your share of the cost of moving the sewer is at least ($20M+$30M)/5000 = $10k. If that $10k is financed at 2% over 20 years (and you suggest that the debt cannot be, but let's pretend for a moment that it can be), it will only be an extra $50 per month ... for you ... more than what TriW was gonna run you.
Now, had the recall campaign slogan been "well, we can move the sewer but it's gonna run you $50/month extra to do it ... maybe more" would you have voted for the recall?
No matter how bad the decisions of the previous board may have been ... no matter how much one may have hated the previous boardmembers ... the only reasonable way to evaluate the wisdom of the recall is to ask whether people are better or worse off because of the recall.
I would suggest that those of us who don't have an extra $50/month to spare may view the recall as a huge mistake. However, there are others who can easily afford that amount or who live in Cabrillo or the heights who don't have the same point of view because they face a different cost/benefit situation.
Now ... back to the question ... who should pay the debts of the LOCSD, debts incurred during the Lisa and Chuck reign of terror? If it is the residents of the LOCSD who get to pay these debts, shouldn't we have the right to be angry at those who stuck us with these unnecessary debts?
Keep taking your meds GRO...
...and consider an anger management class, you certainly are showing how much YOU need some mental help...!!!!!!
getreal, how about scientifically explaining to us how you can put 8 to 12 houses on an acre with septic tanks and expect that there will be no pollution. Please don't mention "magic sand."
Or are you simply stating "no tests were done under each and every house to prove that it is true, therefore I should not be called a polluter until this is proven."
Please show us how to finance lysimeters and tests for (xx) number of (months, years) under each house. What agency is responsible to do this - remember, if it is done here it will need to be done everywhere that has no sewer. How much more are you willing to pay on your tax bill to pay for this? Or should the homeowner pay for this himself? Can you give us a cost estimate on doing this? Will it be lesser or greater than $10,000 per year?
Please explain how it is forgone knowledge elsewhere that about an acre is needed to support the use of a septic tank without undue pollution, but that knowledge need not be applied here.
Please explain how adding piping to Cabrillo, etc., that will bring up projects costs proportionally higher than the rest of the PZ's piping costs will make the project cost less per household. Or does COST not matter to you but "fairness" does?
getreal, you might notice that your WATER BILL has gone up twice in the past year and a half if you have CSD water. You might notice how funds from Water revenues are transfered to Admin on the budgets. You might notice that Admin pays the lawyers and a bunch of other stuff. You might notice that there is a line item to PAY BACK the money lost on the defaulted ($ misspent on lawyers) bond payment. You might notice that there is little else to fund admin costs. You might guess that that increased water/sewer fees and charges might be used to pay back the debt.
GetReal asks an interesting question about whether the PZ is fair or not.
I don't want to discuss the science on the matter which some say is faulty (even though others disagree).
What I want to raise as an issue is the date of the PZ ... 1983. That ... um ... quick calculation in the head ... about 25 years ago. Anyone who bought a home inside the PZ during the last 25 years has known about the prohibition and about the requirement for a sewer.
That being said, the "is it fair?" question is most appropriately stated "is it fair to ask people (now) to pay for what they knew would be coming when they bought their homes?" I'm thinking that the answer is yes. Back in the mid 1990s, homes in Los Osos were selling for about $20-25k less than a "comparable" home in Morro Bay. Why? Certainly they should have been selling for more because Los Osos is a nicer place to live. The lower cost is because of the lack of sewer. People who bought homes, bought the package, including lower cost of home but the requirement of a sewer down the road.
That the sewer is now far more expensive than anyone in the mid 1990s had imagined is due to a variety of causes, but mostly due to delay associated with the LOCSD ... both the initial board and the post-recall board. Other key factors have been inflation and the delay actions of folks dissatisfied with TriW.
Property owners ... those who now will have to pay higher bills ... are those who voted for the LOCSD and voted for the directors who made the choices which are now costing us more money.
Is it fair to ask you, GetReal, to pay for the sewer you knew you would have to pay for when you bought your home? Is it fair to ask you to pay for the costs associated with the LOCSD delays? Is it fair to ask those in the PZ who are living too close together and too close to groundwater to safely use septic systems to pay to get a solution that won't pollute?
Heck yes!
And getreal, if you disagree with Shark, please explain that disagreement so we can all see your reasoning.
'toons said;
franc, are you really saying that NO blame for this mess lies with the October 2005 Board?"
Since you haven't been around that long, you would know the answer to that if you were a member of the now defunct "Sewer Blog", (The only participants here being Shark, Mike (aka Reapprasor and me....may be some others under different handles),so I'll bring you up date with "what I say". I NEVER said the board you want to blame for everything bad (Lisas'), was guilt free, but my gripe was (and is) that you and Mike blame them for EVERYTHING bad. I also claimed, since they had no idea of how POLITICS work, they were a bit naive, thinking that a solution was the goal of all concerned....hence their naivety.
You further asked, " franc, aren't you even a little miffed that there was NO PLAN?"
Not at all, because I know there was a plan.....not all drawn up and stuff like everyone thought they should have.(That's why Lisa told the arrogant "Water Gods" as much. You (and most, conveniently) forget the recalled majority left them with little money to have the plans drawn up proper like, whereas the recalled board had $20M or so to play with (waste).
What most of you find hard to believe is that these folks were HONEST and TRUTHFUL, something found lacking in real polititians. If you really knew some of the people you slam, personally, you would see how wrong you JUDGE them....especially that nincompoop Mike. He wouldn't know an honest, truthful person because he has no respect for anyone other than himself (even that is doubtful)...and , Oh yes, the thieves he continuously defends.
Lest you think me judgmental, just look at your own narrow mindlessness and tunnel vision.
Where you and other critics differ is that I give folks benefit of doubt and compassion for other human beings.
Mike (the moron) sez;
"(delayed from November because the CSD5's newest atty was unprepared)
Again you show your ignorance. The delay is not caused for your dreamed-up, false, unknowing reason. If you want to ask someone other than Richard (your only source of info)you will discover the TRUTH....something you are NEVER interested in knowing. GOSSIP is your ONLY forte.....that and writing "........hummm".....what a literary genius you must think yourself.
Billy,
So glad to see another remnant from a blog gone by. Who I really miss is zorro.
"Once more time Coalbus, and this should be a very succinct, easy answer for you: How are YOU affected by the cost of the sewer?"
First of all, it was COALBAS, and before that oldduffo (an alias I still use elsewere)
...how am I effected? I guess, indirectly would be an answer to that. As you fail to understand, that is not the reason I post. I seek FAIRNESS, FORGIVENESS FOR OTHERS, LOVE, UNDERSTANDING AND COMPASSION for folks who TRY to make a difference.
Does that answer your question?
franc - I am all for forgiveness, but those who have caused the community to have to pay more, plus endless suffering in the process (view the angst of the CDO recipients), THEY need to acknowledge that THEIR actions caused this and THEY need to ASK for forgiveness.
franc, when you say, "You (and most, conveniently) forget the recalled majority left them with little money to have the plans drawn up proper like, whereas the recalled board had $20M or so to play with (waste)."
What was the recalled Board supposed to leave them?? They left them the remainder of the SRF loan! Did they think they could do millions of dollars of planning without doing a 218 for $20 million or whatever just like the old Board did? Where was THAT money supposed to come from? SRF monies, even if it was to continue being sent, cannot be used for plans, land or permits!! Lisa and Julie were on the Board - they KNEW THAT! Then when they had the chance to do their own 218 - (yes, they needed a bridge loan - peanuts compared to what is being spent yearly now) - WHY DIDN'T THEY???
Just answer that one question franc, WHY didn't THEY do a 218 to draw up their plans?
So Sewertoons, or should I say Colonel Jessup. "you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall". That's the feeling I get from your constant vein of blogging content.
I keep wondering to myself, why would someone spend so much time doing what she does?
I keep asking myself how someone thinks they can waltz into town and dictate to us longtime residents here how we should have behaved in our choices?
I keep asking myself how someone can arrive in this town and profess to know what is right for the wastewater treatment in this town?
Ok, I know you are going to hit me with the "travesty that the present board has wrought" line and certainly there are issues. But please, they are not the only reason we do not have a sewer right now.
As for me, i'm not asking for anybody's forgiveness. I am simply asking for someone to finally do the right thing.
Sincerely, M
Sorry, didn't know that I was dictating. I thought I was putting out information. I have studied a LOT about this. I have bin loads of internet printouts, notes from meetings, all the TAC memos, Fine and Rough screenings, Ripley stuff - hey, do you go to any meetings on this topic? I don't see where living here long has much to do with one's knowledge on the topic anyway.
One reason we have no sewer is that a lot of people didn't/don't want one and no one made the town do it.
I think that the County is doing the right thing. And you?
I didn't see "A Few Good Men." What exactly do you mean?
Inlet sez:"On the question of history, of course, things pre-date Pandora. Most of the discussion here focuses on the recent (post 1995) history."
That's a huge problem here. This is all hipbone to thighbone to anklebone. You cannot simpley start "history" at some date since they're all linked. A begat B begat C. etc.
Toonces sez:"Remember they agreed to go gravity to keep the contractors working? They could have retooled, gone for another 218 to pay for the new design out of town (and the length of pipe to deliver the wastewater there). Why didn't they do this? Do they regret that decision now?"
Good question. I'd also like the time/date stamp and just who up at State issued the stop order for the 2nd portion of the SRF loan. Exactly. That was supposed to be part of the breach of contact issue that, I guess, is now being buried? In this list, you'd also have to ask WHY the Coastal Commissioners didn't say, WOA, when Potter used the words "bait and switchy." That failure was a HUGE, tragic blunder by a regulatory agency charged with looking out for exactly those words: Red flag! Red flag!
Mike sez:"All multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth. It includes all surprises, tricks, cunning or dissembling, and any unfair way which another is cheated."
Hmmmm, would that include officially telling (and in the official paperwork) the Coastal Commission that the sewer treatment plant had to be kept on ESHA land in the middle of town because there was an "overwhelming commuity value" that required that? Just asking.
Mike sez:"The really great thing this time is, the CSD majority has changed and YOU won't get funded like the PZLDF has.."
Mike, the CSD has an ACL and CDO on it with huge fines (for the firehouse and water office) Their "share" of the PZLDF case is to defend the CSD (citizens) against those ridiculous fines (there is no relationship between the "pollution" and the fine; compare that fine with the amount of pollution and fines at other sites in the state and it's laughably clear that our fine was pure coercion (for the 218 vote) and kangaroo court punishment only.) So Shaunna's partial payment by the CSD is for the CSD's ACL and CDO issued to the CSD -- NOT for the Los Osos 45. Those "forgotten folks" had to have fundraisers and BBQ sales & etc. to try to raise money to defend themselves. These are two separate issues. I wonder if you've conflated the two since the case is con-joined, but the fees are not. If the new board votes to kill off the CDO defense and "settle", the citizens will pay big time for that. Are you aware of that?
Toonces sez:'Or are you simply stating "no tests were done under each and every house to prove that it is true, therefore I should not be called a polluter until this is proven."
Please show us how to finance lysimeters and tests for (xx) number of (months, years) under each house. What agency is responsible to do this - remember, if it is done here it will need to be done everywhere that has no sewer."
Interesting to note, waaaaaayyyyy back when the County had the project originally, during Bud Laurent's tenture, the county isntalled three lysimeters for about a year's worth of testing. Apparently this had NEVER been done before the the results surprised everyone. Denitrificaiton was taking place in the vados zone AND taking place in standing hi-ground water. Percy
Garcia (if memory serves) with the county headed up that project -- he's now retired but the paperwork is still at county) All the sewer experts were surprised by the results since it was gospel that denitrificaiton does NOT take place. Indeed, during the ACL/CDO Mad Hatter RWQCB "trials" RWQCB staff member called the local onsite septic "expert" Mr. Matt Thompson testified, under oath, that nitrates go unchanged directly into groundwater, which told me he was unaware of the county's study, which told me the RWQCB was sloppy and incompetent.
While the study showed denitrificaion tanking place, the overall reduction was futile because of the overall load (county built too many houses) and of course, didn't solve the problem of houses sitting on the bay or in low areas by the creek (outside the PZ, hahahahah) & etc. The other issue that became clear with the RWQCB's kangaroo court is that "real" courts require "real" direct "evidence." i.e. what evidence does the state have that Mr. Jones, who has just been issued a CDO that legally can lead to his losing his real property, is actually, really "polluting." Clearly, there are a lot of homes in the PZ that are NOT polluting. They're high enough from groundwater, even though in the PZ, that they are NOT doing anything to the waters of the state of California. Which means that this whole 83-13 and PZ has created an odd problem of "reasonable" requirements to protect groundwater, versus clear "science" and/or individual legal property rights and legal mechanisms not really set up to deal with this sort of problem. The RWQCB is stuck with trying to shoehorn square pegs into poorly thought out round holes.
Toonces sez:"One reason we have no sewer is that a lot of people didn't/don't want one and no one made the town do it."
As someone watching this saga for 24 some years, I would have to disagree with your statement. X% wanted a sewer, a smaller Y% wanted no sewer and Z% wanted an affordable project. (Combine X & Z and you have and have always had a majority) The problems of solving water issues (legal jurisdictions), separating water from wastewater, understanding the "science" of nitrates (and as mentioned earlier, the astonishment when some "science" was done and the results startled the given Gospel), properly drawing a PZ (how can you possibly declare a moritorium and then admit 1,300 new homes and expect anyone to take your "emergency" seriously? Right there you've set up real suspicion that the whole things is phony, an effort to declare an "emergency" to get federal money, etc, not a "real emergency" & etc.), toss in real legal issues regarding taxing mechanisms, proportionality, private property, etc, etc, etc. in short, sewering an already built community is a hellaciously complicated and expensive project no matter how it's done. Then when you toss in a group forming the original CSD that misled the voters out of the box,then refused to go back to the voters, failed to even do a Chinese Menu giving them either a 218 and/or a "survey-choice-vote" with prices in-town, out of town, etc, the disasterous choice to start construciton before the recall, the LAFCO dissolution attempt, the cover your butts up at SWB and RWQCB as this whole thing came unraveled . . . All of which created a totally unnecessary mess. But even without the original CSD deception and the failure of the RWQCB to step in at that point (as Ron is fond of pointing out -- Briggs wasted 2 years for Pandora & Co then wasted absolutely NO time when Pandora & Co emailed him to "fine the CSD out of existence"), this project would have been complicated and expensive, no matter what. Paavo had it right when he said (and he should know, he was the original CSD's General manager) the (original) CSD didn't have the resources to do this project right -- i.e. do The Process that the county is now doing. That really should be the sad epitaph for this town. That and a whole system of checks and balances that should have prevented this train wreck failed.
Ann,
Despite history, the simple fact of all this is that Los Osos is now saddled wth a $50,000,000 debt that must be paid; regardless of where you want to place blame.
Blame whomever you wish. It does not matter as the $50,000,000 debt is owed; along with a project that will top $200,000,000.
It is now time to FOCUS on what matters; which is bringing Los Osos into comliance with the law as quickly as possible to keep costs to a minimum AND begin the legal process to recover as much of the $50,000,000 debt from the LOCSD consultants (Wildan/Blesky & BW&S/Biggs)who gave such disasterous advice to the LOCSD.
-R
Ann,
I'll disagree with you about the whole history question for one simple reason.
One can still make a reasonable choice on the question of recall or not based on only information available in 2005 even without a thorough understanding of anything that predates 1995.
Ann,
Sharkinlet makes an excellent point.....regardless of history, the community had a choice to make during the recall. The community chose to elect a board that was determined to kill another waste water project. Again, the costs were raised for all. As you and yours are so caught up in history, has not history shown that each time a project is killed that project costs go up?
Whether or not you or yours agree with the law (or the science and methods used to enforce it), it is not relevant; Los Osos must comply.
FOCUS on reality today Ann...not the past
-R
RL:
In response to your request to focus on reality today:
ECOfluid USBF MBR Bioreactor for $7.4 a gallon that produces tertiary Title 22 water together with directional drilled and installed collection systems, are a fraction of any contrivance currently considered.
Why is that?
What good is a "cracked reiw view" if the "present" is not being properly considered?
What good is a "cracked rear view" if the "present" is not being properly considered?
Mark,
Talk to the County about what you offer. If your product/service is verifiable, then the County will use it.
You have made your point so that we all understand where you are coming from.
-R
Franc4,
You say, "What most of you find hard to believe is that these folks were HONEST and TRUTHFUL,..."
Are you saying that Julie Tacker has been honest and truthful????
It seems that she and Jeff have gained the most by what the County has planned so far.
Why didn't Julie want a 218?
Maybe Lisa was honest, but don't tell me Julie hasn't been out for her and Jeff from the very beginning. ie "MOVE THE SAME SEWER OUT OF TOWN"!!
Sewertoons & Rein,
Why don't you two answer a question...
How can we trust the RWQCB on anything when they've picked on LO to build a big sewer and KNEW about Morro Bay's bad pipes and/or NO PIPES THAT HAVE BEEN POLLUTING MUCH MORE THAN ANYONE yet they failed to say a word about it....WHY????
P.S. The PZ is illegal, and has been since '96 when the 218 law was passed. Everyone in LO benefits and has to pay their share for cleaner drinking water, sea water intrusion prevention issues, etc. Not only is it not fair, but it IS illegal.
Shark doesn't want to talk about the science of it because the PZ line was drawn WITH NO SCIENCE. If you two have proof of science in drawing that line, I'd sure like you two to share it with us! You simply can't say that one home is polluting and another only a few feet away is not!! You can't say homes up on Highland are polluting and Cabrillo is not.
Why not test the wells before putting in a big unnecessary sewer that will end up costing, what, $250 million or $300 million? What?
And, WHY NOT DO A SYSTEM THAT WOULD COST $100 MILLION LESS? THE ONLY ANSWER WOULD BE CLASS CLEANSING. Nobody, that includes the County, would put in a sewer for $100 million more than they need to. Are you people nuts???? Or have a completely different agenda? Why don't you share that information with us??
Lynette,
One more thing regarding the pollution issue here.
This is still the United States of America and in this country we are innocent until proven guilty.
The RWQCB feels they are above the law and claim pollution and fines, CDOs etc. with no proof. They have the burden of proof.
Shark talks about credibility. HA!
The RWQCB has no credibility. They are stupid and have abused their power. They wanted septics pumped every couple of months -- that would turn them into cesspools! They draw a line and claim pollution with no science! They totally ignore the pollution in Morro Bay and focus ONLY ON LOS OSOS!
Hmmmm. Is someone there getting a kickback from MWH? ... sure looks like it to me!
Richard,
You said, "..regardless of history, the community had a choice to make during the recall. The community chose to elect a board that was determined to kill another waste water project...."
Richard, you know this isn't true.
Measure B was written that "the sewer had been dealt with at a reasonable cost" and the Measure left out the collection part. Hmmm. Sounds to me like it was written for the same sewer out of town, paving way for Jeff Edwards (and Julie) to build 90 some homes next to the Tri-W site.
Of course, these so-called mistakes with Measure B were blamed on Al Barrow. They said he wrote the Measure. HA!
Nope, this CSD was NOT about "no sewer" at all -- just the same sewer out of town. I just can't figure why they wouldn't do a 218 -- why Julie Biggs didn't want to do a 218 (especially being a municipal law attorney...) Hmmmmm.
I can't believe with all the money spent on BWS, that we ended up like this.
And I still say if you would have had a 218 before pounding all that money in the ground we wouldn't be facing the financial crisis we are facing today.
P.S. Costs are coming down, as I stated in my post on Monday with a recent newspaper article, and was stated last night at the TAC meeting -- so there SHOULD NOT BE any more talk of "if we delay, we pay.." All that is over now. We are in a recession on the road to a depression.
getreal, you are not sounding at all like the intelligent person I think you might be under the denial that clouds your vision.
Morro Bay - population 10,500 or thereabouts.
Los Osos - population 14,600 or thereabouts.
Morro Bay - has a sewer that cleans up - let's say 75% of the pollution, 25% pollution goes right into the ground. (It probably cleans up better than that, but let's just give it a number - you can go up or down.)
Los Osos - has 4700 septic tanks dumping pollution directly into the ground. No sewer at all.
Do you see the difference?
No one is saying the homes in Cabrillo are not polluting. Their pollution just doesn't happen to be going into the drinking water aquifer.
I asked before and so far no one will answer. You say no science defines the PZ - what science do you want to see? How much will that cost, who will pay for it? Testing the wells does not pinpoint who is doing the polluting.
To quote Ann, "The other issue that became clear with the RWQCB's kangaroo court is that "real" courts require "real" direct "evidence." i.e. what evidence does the state have that Mr. Jones, who has just been issued a CDO that legally can lead to his losing his real property, is actually, really "polluting."
So - don't just say there is "no science." What do you want to see and who will pay for that?
PS Don't forget we could do costly -oh-so-costly- testing with a lysimeter under every house for a year and still find 75% of the homes are polluting -- BUT THEN we will be paying for the testing AND the sewer. You just want to stall as long as possible on the flimsy premise that we are not being "fair." That is BS in my book. 8 to 12 houses per acre is evidence enough. We all bought houses under those conditions and now it is time to clean up our mess.
GetReal,
Perhaps it is because you haven't been around for very long that you don't know that the PZ definition has been discussed over and over here ... by me and others.
The proximate cause of the seawater intrusion is that we cannot drink the water polluted by those in the PZ. The PZ is clearly the group causing the nitrates in our aquifer. The nitrate levels are high only under the PZ. In conjunction with the fact that the nitrate levels have been rising ... but only under the PZ ... there has been no other plausible explanation besides septics which would explain this phenomenon. You say that there is no science behind the PZ definition ... I'll turn that around ... the PZ is based on data and a solid understanding of the relationship between septic system densities and distance to groundwater. Those claiming a lack of science here are the ones who need to first come up with a plausible explanation of the pattern in the observed data. Without such, those claiming a lack of science are sounding like crackpots.
No one is saying that one home is polluting and another not, but that within the PZ the density of homes and the proximity to groundwater are unsafe.
As to your class cleansing point ... the reason the costs keep going up is people fighting the various solutions which seem to keep coming up. If there is a solution that is "too expensive" does it make sense to reject it when the alternative solution is even more expensive?
Until you can point us to a solution which is guaranteed cheaper, I'll have to go with the observed pattern that delay only raises the costs.
getreal, there was NO requirement to have that 218 back then - fees and charges were to pay back the cost. It was LEGAL to pay the money back this way. You have been told this repeatedly, why doesn't this information stick?
"Nope, this CSD was NOT about "no sewer" at all -- just the same sewer out of town" If THAT were true, they would have taken a bridge loan and done their own 218, right? I think you are fooling yourself on that one.
So where along the path, someone has forgotten that the RWQCB is NOT in the law making business... It's main purpose is to ENFORCE laws given to them by the State Legistlature...
The speed limit is set and posted by the goverment agency that sets the laws in that area... The CHP only ENFORCES those laws... It's not the CHP that sets the speed limit and it is your choice to view the speed limit as the law or just a suggestion... Yelling that the CHP officer who writes you the ticket (or CDO?) is picking on you won't necessarily get you out of paying the ticket...
If you don't like the PZ boundary or even demand "proof positive" that the septics are polluting, well...that's just tough...!!! Bitching at or about the RWQCB won't change the laws... We have been given a ticket (CDO?) and now we can yell at the RWQCB or we can find a solution to comply with the laws... Don't like the laws, then go after the law makers... you elected them to write laws and laws and laws protect our coastal waters and our drinking water... just quit bitching that the mean old RWQCB is doing their job...ENFORCING the laws...!!!
Maybe we should be thankful that no one as yet had to pay a fine... and don't give me the BS that the PZLDF is "protecting" me...!!! The post-recall CSD basically gave the finger to the cops and the law makers...and now you and I are caught in a political/economical war that won't be settled on this blog or by any CSD... It does appear that the County is taking all the right steps this time and the CSD will get back to managing the few assets left... Hopefully the County has the patience to ignore all the extremists and actually build the sewer (any technology & anywhere) that will bring Los Osos in to compliance with the laws... Then we won't need to spend so many words on a meaningless blog...
Ann wrote:
"... as Ron is fond of pointing out -- Briggs wasted 2 years for Pandora & Co then wasted absolutely NO time when Pandora & Co emailed him to "fine the CSD out of existence"
That's exactly right, and those 2 wasted years were HUUUUUUUGE!!!!
Those two years that Briggs allowed Pandora to waste caused the train wreck. Those two wasted years led Pandora as then LOCSD vice-president to force her SECOND sewer plant project into the exact same spot as her FIRST sewer plant project, even though her SECOND sewer plant project required exactly ten times less land, and there was absolutley no reason to put it at the Tri-W site whatsoever, OTHER than the time pressure created by wasting those two years chasing her dead-on-arrival "better, cheaper, faster" project.
I wrote all about that at this link:
http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2006/03/rush.html
Awesome story!
Richard wrote:
" The community chose to elect a board that was determined to kill another waste water project."
Which, according to every shred of documentation coming out of the County these days, was the exact right thing to do... unless you STILL think that the community should have built the Tri-W embarrassment, that was never going to work, and that county officials laugh at (literally, and out loud) these days.
Just like I wrote, Richard, you guys having to defend your embarrassment in the face of all of the excellent, recent information that shows it was a colossal embarrassment, is hilarious. It makes me laugh... literally, and out loud.
I wrote all about that at this link:
http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2008/11/hilarious-dynamic-on-display-in-los.html
"You just did just what I thought you were gonna do"
-- Barenaked Ladies, from One Week
Ron,
Believe what you wish....as it does not matter to anyone but yourself. In short, 'whatever'.
-R
Ron,
You tell us that stopping TriW was the right thing to do.
Here's a question for you. If the out of town project will cost us more than TriW was and if we'll also have to pay more to get water back into our aquifer and if we'll also have to pay for the LOCSD debts associated with stopping TriW ... don't you think that at least stopping TriW cost us money?
And if stopping TriW cost our town money ... but the recall campaign promised us lower bills ... isn't that exactly the same sort of thing you complain about when you fuss at the solutions group for promising us $38.75 back in 1998?
Face it Ron, your analyses all seem to ignore time and money ... but we all know that time and money matter. To pretend that money doesn't matter (for all but the wealthiest among us) is to make unwise choices.
If the out of town project will cost us more than TriW
Why should it?
Aren't blogs great?
Stupid Is As Stupid Does
For your viewing pleasure, exclusively at:
SewerWatch
Ron, the County EIR states nothing of the sort. Tri-W is on level "B" because of lack of community support achieved through outright lies.
Tonini is at the head of the EIR "A" list because there are only 2 houses in the location. Thereby making it hard to carry much objection. Your silly composting toilet idea didn't even make the "C" list.
Broderson as a place to put water is on EVERY "A" list option on the EIR..
The Scott's Valley Wastewater Facility trip that was sponsored by the County showed the 25 attendees $800,000 houses 15 feet away from the open treatment system - the headworks were even open, so don't talk about "inappropriate" in the middle of town. That is unsupportable except through fear and spin. People interested in buying the Tri-W property for development had a self-interested stake in not wanting the plant there. No Sewer people didn't want it there (or anywhere).
Going on right now in Los Osos is a hue and cry over its lack of parks! Sorry, it is very clear that people here DO WANT PARKS. San Francisco has a lovely bayside park with a wastewater treatment plant UNDER it.
I'm angry that you think the huge sums of money WE, NOT YOU, get to pay back are NOT a factor in your less-than-truthful assessment of this project.
If you have any guts at all, you will address Shark's question.
Ron,
Lemmie help you out a bit. You will appear less of an idiot if you actually take the time to read the various comments here.
Your rant to Packard in the form of a question (which you just linked to) has been answered here repeatedly. That you don't like the answers doesn't mean that they haven't been available to you.
The simple fact is that TriW was not as bad as you make it out to be.
The County analysis doesn't show that TriW was a mistaken choice in 2001-2004 but it wasn't selected today because of political opposition today.
You also seem to regularly overlook the cost question. Let me ask you again. If the cost of a sewer for Los Osos are now 50% higher than they were gonna be before the recall ... how can you justify saying that the recall was the right thing to do? Maybe some folks don't mind paying an extra $100/month, but a lot of us do.
Ignoring the costs is a mistake. Suppose you really need a car ... now. Do you refuse to buy a Camry today because a Taurus is nominally cheaper today but because it is unavailable today we have to wait three years to get it and then it will cost only 50% more than the Camry today.
That what you advocated for the people of Los Osos back during the recall. Are we better off because of the recall? No way.
Mark,
You know, these guys above me? Yeah, they don't know what they're talking about. They're not wastewater experts, never will be wastewater experts.
It's all BS.
OC,
Seems to me that "these" guys and gals are not interested in learning anything.
One can learn allot about wastewater process these days on line, it isn’t rocket science.
Here are a couple of links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activated_sludge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Membrane_bioreactor
As I have been recently reminded, LO/BP are in position to go from obstructionists to world visionaries.
If only some could see past their bias.
Lynette, Rein, and Richard,
The bottom line is that the developers are having the PZ pay for them to be able to develop.
You can write and write about how wonderful Tri-W was, and how a big sewer is needed, but it is not.
There are other methods to meet any RWQCB's requirements for $100 million less.
Can I ask what's wrong with saving $100 million?
It's all about development. Period. Not pollution.
Lynette, why are the seals dying up and down the coast around LA and they all have their big sewers? The studies show that they are dying directly from human waste. The problem has really started in '98.
I don't care what you say, there was no science on the PZ. The wells haven't been tested in the last couple of years. In the 80's the RWQCB knew the wells were polluted from surface run-off, but blamed on septics anyway.
The homes on Highland, Woodland, etc. do not have any density issue.
This whole thing is a scam, no matter how you and Shark try to spin it. MWH is paying some off to get the big jobs when big jobs aren't needed these days. HMMMMM...
BTW, are you Pandora's secy.?
And Shark, stop acting like you have been assessed...it's getting old. You are a paid lobbyist for the big sewer, we all can see that. You and Lynette.
Well, I guess GetReal has settled all discussions.
I would encourage everyone to read what he or she has said and to make up your own mind.
Hi Sharkinlet,
Yup...Get Real has 'drawn the line in the sand' as to his opinion. No need to discuss (post) anything with/to him ever again as his mind is madeup.
I say let him stay on his side of his 'line'...he will be very lonely there.
-R
I see that both of you have been on here solely to change people's minds. It's sad that you people continuously attempt to assume that Los Osos is uninformed and mentally inept by providing a web of lies on a daily basis.
Such shameless, vile creatures.
I'll tell you what:
I'm going to issue a challenge to all members of Save the Dream, Taxpayers Watch and those who post anonymously in support of them (those who haven't yet posted verifiable information).
Ready?
1. Post proof of pollution in the form of links, PDFs or link to a source that could be verified.
2. Post the scientific reasoning for the establishment of the Prohibition Zone in the form of links, PDFs or link to a source that could be verified.
3. Post your reasoning why MBR/gravity system is far more efficient, sustainable, environmentally friendly and more affordable than current viable technology. Include engineer reports, expert testimonials outside of San Luis Obispo county and independent research (that can be independently verified) to back your claims.
4. Post case precedent where the Regional Water Quality Control Board has proposed CDOs -- in another town -- based on suspicion of pollution. Cite PDFs or documents from verifiable sources.
5. Post how, in your opinion, will the currently proposed County sewer be affordable to PZ residents. There is one condition. You cannot rely on grants.
The challenge consists of answering these 5 questions. Since they require research, you will have one full week to complete the challenge. Failure to do so will damage the reputation of Taxpayers Watch and comments made by Taxpayers Watch members on this blog will be printed and delivered to every homeowner in the Prohibition Zone on January 1, 2009.
..and just WHO are you to be demanding anything challenging ...??? You can't back any of your claims with any authority...just your opinions... and of course your usual enuendo and rumors...
You probably should be addressing your queries to the State Water Board or Atty General... I seriously doubt any of the TW folks even care about your meaningless "challenge"...
In case you have missed the past year, Los Osos does not have authority over anything sewerish...so you are simply attempting to grandstand and blowing in the wind...
Keep taking the meds...
Send an e-mail with your answers to ososchange@yahoo.com.
Time is ticking.
Post a Comment