Field Trip! Field Trip!
The Planning Commissioners arranged for a bus to take a field trip to the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency’s treatment plant and also to meet with a grower in Castroville who uses the agency’s Title 22 treated wastewater for his crops. Members of the public could also pack up their PB&J sandwiches and attend. Some notes:
The Monterey treatment facility, which is huge, treats about 20 -22 milllion gallons per day. Been treating wastewater for 20 years, tertiary treatment about 12 years. The plant is a regional plant that serves several communities. Its huge anaerobic digesters produce methane gas which powers the secondary treatment facilities. It is the largest provider of recycled water to food crops in the U.S. (perhaps an indication of the “newness” of the concept of recycled water is. I have no doubt other plants will be coming on line in future.)
The success of the ag reuse was based on the excellent staff and operation of the facility which earned the support and trust of the ag community. The main drive for the ag exchange was salt water intrusion caused by overpumping the aquifer. The choices for the area were desal or reuse. Because the land in the area is so expensive, farmers need to get 2 crops a year, which often means green houses to “start” the seedlings to get a jump start on the growing cycle.
Early on, the Environmental Health Dept of Monterey balked at the idea of recycling water for food crops, so the plant got grants and for 11 years studied the safety of the water. All of the stakeholders were involved early on, they helped shape not only the studies needed but the farmers’ input was critical in making sure the delivery system and plan would meet THEIR needs. Later when we met with a grower, he stressed the importance of farmers getting in on the ground floor of any proposed ag exchange/reuse program, again to ensure that their concerns are dealt with early-on so the program can be shaped to make sure they’re not only in the loop, but are a vital part of how the program is shaped and ultimately turns out.
The treatment plant supplies water to 220 parcels of land, some having one owner, others being conglomerates. They don’t “contract” for water. Instead, there was originally a county ordinance that the ag areas would be required to use recycled water. Two years after start up, they would demolish the (ag) wells on their property. Also, several wells were capped and “donated” to the plan when the recycled water came on line. The ordinance was never enforced after the two years. Instead, it’s totally voluntary and the water is billed like regular water, so much per acre feet, and during growing season, every drop of recycled water is used with the onsite wells sometimes being used to make up the difference in quantity.
There are plans to extend the service area to include golf course, parks, etc., and other outlying farmers are on a wait-list to get the recycled water as their wells are also going bad from salt water intrusion or are just over pumped. In a few months, a rubber “seasonal” dam will be installed on the Salinas River and during the summer months a lot of the water can be captured, treated and blended with the treated wastewater with the ultimate goal being ZERO ground-water use by the farmers.
Irony. When using river water to supplement the amount needed was first proposed, the farmers balked. The river water was “dirtier” than the treated wastewater and could be a danger to their crops. More irony: most people don’t hesitate to let their kids play in creeks and rivers but would have a cow if their kids were handling Title 22 recycled water.
Originally, the RWQCB created a discharge prohibition zone circling Monterey Bay, so communities were allowed no ocean outfalls. The treatment plant was planned to be near ag land to take advantage of the recycled water. During growing season, every bit of the Title 22 water goes to ag use. In winter or off growing season, the plant drops to secondary treatment and the water is still dumped into the sea at their old outfall. Storing or finding new reuse areas for the treated water during the winter is still the challenge if they want to eliminate the outfall altogether.
Recycled water initially cost more, but the grower’s wells were running dry or being ruined by salt water, so they knew where that scenario was headed. Now, however, what with high energy cost and higher costs to build and maintain wells, (not to mention the additional cost of deeper drilling as the aquifer drops) the cost is nearly comparable and the reliability during growing season is a given. Plus, more and more water from farm wells is simply bad water and getting worse as the aquifer is being overpumped and degraded. (Sound familiar, Los Osos?)
Also, the costs of building and maintaining the reuse infrastructure (purple delivery pipes and treatment plant) was shared by the cities and outlying areas via an assessment. Even though they are not directly getting reused water, they benefit since everyone in the basin is drawing from the same pool, so to speak, and the same pool is in growing danger. So any efforts to stop or slow the degradation will benefit even “townies” by protecting their water supply. Once again, this cooperation by all parties was key to making this project successful. (The cost of this particular project is/was also low because it was built at a time when federal grants and financial assistance were readily available, which is not the case now, unless the focus is on “green” technologies and “green” water reuse plans.)
Right now, about 97% of the farm parcels are connected and about 9% are using the water. Of those not using it, several are greenhouses who need water with a lower salt content for their seedling starts (after which the older plants do just fine on recycled water, with it slightly higher salt elevation) and the other parcel has an owner who’s “philosophically opposed to using recycled water,” but apparently his farm managers actually are hooked up and using it on the Q T because their own wells are degrading and the recycled water is actually better.
There has never been a documented case of illness from recycled water. The states set different acceptable contaminant levels. Monterey produce is shipped to every state and continent in the world. (This is important since there were concerns expressed that produce using recycled water wouldn’t be accepted by produce buyers. Sea Mist sells to Kroger, Safeway, Costco, & etc. with no problem. ) Certified Organic growers using recycled water are certified organic. (This is important since there were some concerns expressed that if you used recycled water you couldn’t get organic certified. Not so.) And concerns with “emerging contaminants and endocrine disruptors” are moot with ag use since plants don’t take up into their cells the chemicals of concern. Furthermore, heavy metals are not showing up in the recycled water since there is no industry in the area, i.e. the waste stream is “pristine.”
And, more irony: when the spinach scare hit, the farmers using recycled water were prepared for the press with facts and figures regarding the safety of their recycled water. The tainted spinach likely came from a non-recycled source, i.e. river, run-off from a cow operation or other such source.
If the word for the future in the movie, “The Graduate,” was “PLASTICS,” the word for all ag lands in production today is SALT. From time began, all irrigation farming must contend with SALT. Salt in well water can ruin a field as well as salt in recycled water. But there’s certainly a higher dose in recycled water due to the front end users – i.e. water softeners both home use and commercial. But SALT is simply a way of life and growers in the heavy clay soils of the area have tile drains on their land which aid in runoff and leaching. Further, they all carefully monitor the levels and with the new rubber dam and blended river water, that can also serve as a way to adjust the water content.
The goal of Monterey eventually is ZERO ocean outfall, or total use. Hmmmm, sort of like what the Ripley Plan originally proposed, you know, the plan and group that wasn’t allowed on the County’s short list for the proposed sewer project?
We Meet At Sea Mist Farms, Blackie Ranch #5
And meet Dale Huss, Vice President in Charge of Artichokes and General Manager of Sea Mist Ranch.
Vice President in Charge of Artichokes . . . . It was worth the trip to meet someone with a title like that. Well, don’t laugh. Mr. Huss couldn’t rough guestimate the annual value of the crops coming off his fields using recycled water, but one of the Commissioners guestimated the value at $500,000,000. 00 a year. So, you can see this whole ag exchange program isn’t about a couple of farmers and a small bucket. It’s HUGE business since Sea Mist is but one huge operation in the valley.
Sea Mist grows romaine, artichokes, spinach and organic and non-organic artichokes. They’ve had no issues on yield or problems using the recycled water. Before the program they didn’t have enough water. Now they have more than enough, though they often have to supplement with well water since even with the treatment plant running at full capacity, it’s often not enough at peak season.
Mr. Huss wanted to stress how important it was for the growers in the area to get involved early with both water issues and water policy and plans so they could ensure whatever plan evolved had their input early on so it can be shaped to take into account their needs. Mr. Hass also stressed the importance of getting all the agencies on board, the Environmental Health Dept, public health, all parties concerned with water safety, since if their concerns are met in shaping a project, then future questions can be allayed.
In addition to making sure of water quality, the price difference between well and recycled water must be pretty close and the water quality and reliability has to be worth the extra cost (not to mention future energy costs and the importance of stopping general degradation or overdrafting of the area’s water.)
More irony, unlike Los Osos, the Monterey project was considered as a large “basin” plan instead of some marks on a map to create a small PZ while ignoring the outlying areas and the larger overall issues – something I can only hope the Planning Commissioners might want to think about as they consider the Los Osos Wastewater proposal.
The Planning Commissioners arranged for a bus to take a field trip to the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency’s treatment plant and also to meet with a grower in Castroville who uses the agency’s Title 22 treated wastewater for his crops. Members of the public could also pack up their PB&J sandwiches and attend. Some notes:
The Monterey treatment facility, which is huge, treats about 20 -22 milllion gallons per day. Been treating wastewater for 20 years, tertiary treatment about 12 years. The plant is a regional plant that serves several communities. Its huge anaerobic digesters produce methane gas which powers the secondary treatment facilities. It is the largest provider of recycled water to food crops in the U.S. (perhaps an indication of the “newness” of the concept of recycled water is. I have no doubt other plants will be coming on line in future.)
The success of the ag reuse was based on the excellent staff and operation of the facility which earned the support and trust of the ag community. The main drive for the ag exchange was salt water intrusion caused by overpumping the aquifer. The choices for the area were desal or reuse. Because the land in the area is so expensive, farmers need to get 2 crops a year, which often means green houses to “start” the seedlings to get a jump start on the growing cycle.
Early on, the Environmental Health Dept of Monterey balked at the idea of recycling water for food crops, so the plant got grants and for 11 years studied the safety of the water. All of the stakeholders were involved early on, they helped shape not only the studies needed but the farmers’ input was critical in making sure the delivery system and plan would meet THEIR needs. Later when we met with a grower, he stressed the importance of farmers getting in on the ground floor of any proposed ag exchange/reuse program, again to ensure that their concerns are dealt with early-on so the program can be shaped to make sure they’re not only in the loop, but are a vital part of how the program is shaped and ultimately turns out.
The treatment plant supplies water to 220 parcels of land, some having one owner, others being conglomerates. They don’t “contract” for water. Instead, there was originally a county ordinance that the ag areas would be required to use recycled water. Two years after start up, they would demolish the (ag) wells on their property. Also, several wells were capped and “donated” to the plan when the recycled water came on line. The ordinance was never enforced after the two years. Instead, it’s totally voluntary and the water is billed like regular water, so much per acre feet, and during growing season, every drop of recycled water is used with the onsite wells sometimes being used to make up the difference in quantity.
There are plans to extend the service area to include golf course, parks, etc., and other outlying farmers are on a wait-list to get the recycled water as their wells are also going bad from salt water intrusion or are just over pumped. In a few months, a rubber “seasonal” dam will be installed on the Salinas River and during the summer months a lot of the water can be captured, treated and blended with the treated wastewater with the ultimate goal being ZERO ground-water use by the farmers.
Irony. When using river water to supplement the amount needed was first proposed, the farmers balked. The river water was “dirtier” than the treated wastewater and could be a danger to their crops. More irony: most people don’t hesitate to let their kids play in creeks and rivers but would have a cow if their kids were handling Title 22 recycled water.
Originally, the RWQCB created a discharge prohibition zone circling Monterey Bay, so communities were allowed no ocean outfalls. The treatment plant was planned to be near ag land to take advantage of the recycled water. During growing season, every bit of the Title 22 water goes to ag use. In winter or off growing season, the plant drops to secondary treatment and the water is still dumped into the sea at their old outfall. Storing or finding new reuse areas for the treated water during the winter is still the challenge if they want to eliminate the outfall altogether.
Recycled water initially cost more, but the grower’s wells were running dry or being ruined by salt water, so they knew where that scenario was headed. Now, however, what with high energy cost and higher costs to build and maintain wells, (not to mention the additional cost of deeper drilling as the aquifer drops) the cost is nearly comparable and the reliability during growing season is a given. Plus, more and more water from farm wells is simply bad water and getting worse as the aquifer is being overpumped and degraded. (Sound familiar, Los Osos?)
Also, the costs of building and maintaining the reuse infrastructure (purple delivery pipes and treatment plant) was shared by the cities and outlying areas via an assessment. Even though they are not directly getting reused water, they benefit since everyone in the basin is drawing from the same pool, so to speak, and the same pool is in growing danger. So any efforts to stop or slow the degradation will benefit even “townies” by protecting their water supply. Once again, this cooperation by all parties was key to making this project successful. (The cost of this particular project is/was also low because it was built at a time when federal grants and financial assistance were readily available, which is not the case now, unless the focus is on “green” technologies and “green” water reuse plans.)
Right now, about 97% of the farm parcels are connected and about 9% are using the water. Of those not using it, several are greenhouses who need water with a lower salt content for their seedling starts (after which the older plants do just fine on recycled water, with it slightly higher salt elevation) and the other parcel has an owner who’s “philosophically opposed to using recycled water,” but apparently his farm managers actually are hooked up and using it on the Q T because their own wells are degrading and the recycled water is actually better.
There has never been a documented case of illness from recycled water. The states set different acceptable contaminant levels. Monterey produce is shipped to every state and continent in the world. (This is important since there were concerns expressed that produce using recycled water wouldn’t be accepted by produce buyers. Sea Mist sells to Kroger, Safeway, Costco, & etc. with no problem. ) Certified Organic growers using recycled water are certified organic. (This is important since there were some concerns expressed that if you used recycled water you couldn’t get organic certified. Not so.) And concerns with “emerging contaminants and endocrine disruptors” are moot with ag use since plants don’t take up into their cells the chemicals of concern. Furthermore, heavy metals are not showing up in the recycled water since there is no industry in the area, i.e. the waste stream is “pristine.”
And, more irony: when the spinach scare hit, the farmers using recycled water were prepared for the press with facts and figures regarding the safety of their recycled water. The tainted spinach likely came from a non-recycled source, i.e. river, run-off from a cow operation or other such source.
If the word for the future in the movie, “The Graduate,” was “PLASTICS,” the word for all ag lands in production today is SALT. From time began, all irrigation farming must contend with SALT. Salt in well water can ruin a field as well as salt in recycled water. But there’s certainly a higher dose in recycled water due to the front end users – i.e. water softeners both home use and commercial. But SALT is simply a way of life and growers in the heavy clay soils of the area have tile drains on their land which aid in runoff and leaching. Further, they all carefully monitor the levels and with the new rubber dam and blended river water, that can also serve as a way to adjust the water content.
The goal of Monterey eventually is ZERO ocean outfall, or total use. Hmmmm, sort of like what the Ripley Plan originally proposed, you know, the plan and group that wasn’t allowed on the County’s short list for the proposed sewer project?
We Meet At Sea Mist Farms, Blackie Ranch #5
And meet Dale Huss, Vice President in Charge of Artichokes and General Manager of Sea Mist Ranch.
Vice President in Charge of Artichokes . . . . It was worth the trip to meet someone with a title like that. Well, don’t laugh. Mr. Huss couldn’t rough guestimate the annual value of the crops coming off his fields using recycled water, but one of the Commissioners guestimated the value at $500,000,000. 00 a year. So, you can see this whole ag exchange program isn’t about a couple of farmers and a small bucket. It’s HUGE business since Sea Mist is but one huge operation in the valley.
Sea Mist grows romaine, artichokes, spinach and organic and non-organic artichokes. They’ve had no issues on yield or problems using the recycled water. Before the program they didn’t have enough water. Now they have more than enough, though they often have to supplement with well water since even with the treatment plant running at full capacity, it’s often not enough at peak season.
Mr. Huss wanted to stress how important it was for the growers in the area to get involved early with both water issues and water policy and plans so they could ensure whatever plan evolved had their input early on so it can be shaped to take into account their needs. Mr. Hass also stressed the importance of getting all the agencies on board, the Environmental Health Dept, public health, all parties concerned with water safety, since if their concerns are met in shaping a project, then future questions can be allayed.
In addition to making sure of water quality, the price difference between well and recycled water must be pretty close and the water quality and reliability has to be worth the extra cost (not to mention future energy costs and the importance of stopping general degradation or overdrafting of the area’s water.)
More irony, unlike Los Osos, the Monterey project was considered as a large “basin” plan instead of some marks on a map to create a small PZ while ignoring the outlying areas and the larger overall issues – something I can only hope the Planning Commissioners might want to think about as they consider the Los Osos Wastewater proposal.
Posts
34 comments:
From: Mark Low [mailto:Mark@NOwastewater.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 7:01 AM
To: pogren@co.slo.ca.us
Cc: BGibson@co.slo.ca.us
Subject: Freedom!
Greeting Paavo,
I understand there is $28,000.00 left from the $7,000,000.00 you have requested from the Board.
Please consider this a Freedom of Information Act Request for the invoices and cancelled checks, which support the financial activity you and your team have paid out towards your LOWWP “study” process from the beginning to present.
I understand this is a tall order which will require considerable effort and may take more than ten days to produce so I will be patient as you perform the necessary and fiduciary work in response to this request.
Regards,
Mark Low
602.740.7975 voice
480.464.0405 facsimile
Mark@NOwastewater.com
P.O. Box 1355 Mesa, Arizona 85211
Spero Meliora "I aspire to greater things"
Ann,
Thanks for the report.
Overall the fieldtrip, while interesting, was a waste of time.
For such an facility and operation to become viable for Los Osos will require atleast a decade of planning and coordination (legal agreements) with farmers, water purveyors, and numerous local, State and Federal governmental agencies. By the time such a project is realized, the costs of the project will be astronomical AND our sole water source (the lower aquifer) will by that time have been destroyed by salt water intrusion. In short, Los Osos has neither the TIME or the MONEY for such a scheme.
I do not know if you caught the last LOCSD water committee meeting, but the LOCSD announced and acknowledges that that water blending rates of lower to upper aquifer water of 4 to 1 is not resulting in safe drinking water. What this means is that the LOCSD will have to INCREASE the blending ratio to 5+ parts lower aquifer water to 1 part upper aquifer water to achieve safe drinking water; which will directly result in more rapid depletion of the lower aquifer while INCREASING the rate of salt water intrusion. At the new ratios of blending, Los Osos will most likely find itself out of a safe and viable source of drinking water within the next 10 years.
As I have blogged many times, TIME is the greatest enemy to Los Osos. Every day that we postpone building a WWTP will dramatically increase costs AND bring LOs Osos closer to destroying its sole source of drinking water.
-Richard LeGros
The current county plan will bleed LO's aquifer dry by sprayig it away.
Better technology is less expensive than what the county currently has planned.
r- Clear cutting the Tri-W was a waste of time and money.
In light of the very serious State and local fiscal problems, let's hope that specious requests veiled in a FIOA request are seen for what they are and that the FULL cost to prepare such requests are passed on to the requestor, in advance... and with the layoff's and MTO's, such obvious specious requests should be placed at the very bottom of the many more important needs of the County.
Perhaps the requestor should try approaching the Federal Supreme Court directly and quit playing games. No one in SLO County is interested in the aspirations of an unemployed meat sales person trying to become a sewer guru...
Coo-coo-Kee-choo, Mrs. Robinson, that was an awesome report!
Ann wrote:
" ... there was originally a county ordinance that the ag areas would be required to use recycled water. "
Interesting.
and;
"The success of the ag reuse was based on the excellent staff and operation of the facility ..."
I'm curious, didn't anyone ask that "excellent staff" what they thought of locating a treatment facility in the middle of town just so it can also double as a "centrally located recreational asset?"
I'd LOVE to hear their answer to that question.
And, Ann? Pictures?
Oh, you little computer whiz, you.
Well done!
Did you get free artichokes?
Ann's very sweet and goodness Monterey Chamber of Commerce advertisement makes Watsonville sound like the very place those complaining about the Los Osos sewer/no need for a sewer/ move the sewer/not over her dead body sewer obstructionists should move to... Monterey has solved all their problems, sounds perfect for GRO...
Now of course, comes the big question.... HOW LONG do we have to study and restudy and in turn restudy the Los Osos situation....??? How many objections can be flown in front of the BOS....????
We have a design ready and a site ready to resume construction... Do we need a regional basin wwtf...??? If so, where do we obtain safe drinking water in the mean time...???? Naciemento...??? a Desal plant on the golf course...???
Will the economy revive and housing starts resume and obliterate the need for an ag exchange...???
Just how long Ann...??? How long before Clean Water will be needed in Los Osos....????? How long can we accept delays as the answer....????
Richard,
I believe that the whole "time" argument can be used against you quite easily.
You, Stan Gustafson and Gordon Hensley spent a great deal of time pushing for a project that a lot of people were unhappy about. Granted, you got the permits for it, but you pushed through a project that -- according to the voter turnout for the 2005 recall -- people didn't want.
How much time did it take to materialize the Tri-W project concept from coming up with the idea to setting the shovel in the ground? I believe you know the answer.
Sure, restarting Tri-W would probably be the quickest way to build a WWP, but does that legitimize the integrity of your argument? Not really.
I talked about the community survey in the past, but if I were to approach the survey with the same rationale that Bruce Gibson had for justifying the results, the people who took part in the survey overwhelmingly chose the out of town option with the edge of town coming in second.
You seem to be at a clear disadvantage.
No offense, Aaron, but the survey didn't point out that "in town" meant sooner, waaaaay cheaper and keeping our aquifer healthier. No wonder it didn't beat out of town.
Aaron,
The current water situation is now so bad that we must all acknowledge that Los Osos is going to lose its' water supply in the near future IF a WWTP is not built ASAP. The cost of securing a new water supply will far outstrip the WWTP costs.
Past opportunities (or your opinions about them) are not pertinent to the issue today; and are meaningless to what we must do tomorrow.
The simple truth is this...Los Osos has run out of time. Haggling endlessly over technologies will not result in less expensive or better projects (never has either). As a pragmatic man I suggest that restarting Tri-W will be the fastest and least expensive way to solve our collective problems ASAP without further jepardizing our water source.
If the County were to conduct a comprehensive EIR process that included comparing the time schedule to; and total costs of; restarting Tri-W as compared to some new project that has yet (after 3+ years) failed to be defined, designed and permitted, Tri-W would be the winning pragmatic choice.
Further, if this comparision was included in the recent community survey, I have no doubt that the results regarding in or out of town would have been far different.
In closing, restarting Tri-W is a 'bird in hand' solution when compared to any 'two in the bush' nebulus alternatives.
-Richard LeGros
Aaron... You don't seem to understand, or is it you don't want to understand, why that recall passed...
It's easy for you to say "Granted, you got the permits for it, but you pushed through a project that -- according to the voter turnout for the 2005 recall -- people didn't want."
But young man, how do you you know people didn't want the Tri-W Project...??? Would you say that more than a few emotional lies could have been spread...??? Could a few threats have been made...???? Could some very vocal and extreme views have turned off the voters...????
Sorry Aaron, you aren't analyzing that vote very throughly to have jumped to your conclusion... Is it that easy to say that a hard working group of very decent folks who were able to produce a very real plan, purchase land and obtain every legal permit required "spent a great deal of time pushing for a project that a lot of people were unhappy about." Just who was "unhappy"...???
Hmmmm... Aaron, is it possible a handful, like say the same handful who protest everything that the County is working through, could have been so nasty and extreme in their push to 'no sewer/move the sewer but we don't have a plan like we lied about' that they created enough dissention and confusion that voters either didn't vote or were confused...???? Do you like being lied to...????
Think about that possibility anytime you think about running for office... Stan, Gordon and Richard were not the bad guys! They put up with a lot, yet they did accomplish what Gail, Lisa and company could not... that is unless you consider 10 year delays and much, much higher monthly costs to be the ultimate victory...
...and before you endorse a regional wwtf somewhere out of Los Osos... and some going to save our dringing water with an ag plan, do a comparision between the amount of land actually being farmed in Los Osos Valley vs Watsonville and surrounds... We don't have 1/8 the cultivated land in this part of SLO County... but maybe someone can convince SLO to start farming... It's going to be easier to convince SLO County to allow 50,000 new property tax payers...
As a small footnote: A little bird told me who "Mike" is. Your secret is safe with me. Just post as yourself, please.
Richard,
But isn't it also meaningless to criticize people for not being in lock step with your views? That is also not pertinent to the issue today.
There's a misunderstanding here. I'm not turning this into a "blame game" issue. I am aware of the issues, but I was just pointing out that your hard-lining stance on the issues -- the issues you want to talk about -- is slightly ironic.
Let's take a look at what you said at face value. I do agree with you on a lot of what you said and I do believe that haggling over technologies is a colossal waste of time. I also believe that going back to Tri-W is a solution that the County could default back to, but then again, we have the Ripley Report from 2006 and we could look at that as well. Ripley wasn't further down the permitting process, but that too was a process that seemed feasible.
I get what Richard is saying. It's not a likable choice, it may not be a popular choice, but it is a pragmatic choice to go back to Tri-W with the previous plan.
In the abstract, everything should be back on the table. We shouldn't play favorites. That mentality has been manifesting bad blood.
I didn't label anyone as being the "bad guy." Let's be honest, folks. This isn't -- and shouldn't be -- about who is worse or who has done more damage. That discussion is going to take us anywhere. I said that the previous board supported an unpopular project, but I did not say anyone was "bad," so "Mike," I ask you to not jump to conclusions.
Folks,
Well, I don't care how or where the or by what means the sewer system is built. You all can argue about it forever. BUT THE COUNTY HAD NOT START BILLING ME FOR PIE IN THE SKY! The TRI W system looked good to me. Sorry it failed.
I don't care if we put reclamation units in our yards.
I just want the whole issue to go away, sell my property in Los Osos, and let some other fools worry about the tenants.
We all gonna pay someday. At this point, I do not think so. The Us is going down the tubers, just watch! You got kids and grandchildren. Try Chile, we do not need you in Panama. (Oregon attitude).
Calhoun, you are stuck in Los Osos.
Suffer with high water and electric bills, taxes on your property, inheritance taxes, etc. I have a maid at $20 a day and a gardener at $20 a day, and I grossly overpay them for their honesty. Use them one day a week.
And I live in 5200 sq ft house with no property taxes for the next 18 years! Paid $383 grand. View fantastic! What you got?
If you got nothing, you are lucky. You don't have to worry about thieves. And in my estimation the biggest thief is our government!
You are right to watch them all like a hawk.
Just get the sewer done. Every day is more from your and my pocket. And who will suffer worse? Po folks.
Jon,
If you voted for Prop 13, Bush (the 2nd one) or the formation of the LOCSD, I have a bone to pick with you.
You have the ability to take your wealth and move elsewhere when I don't and if you voted for any of the above, you are at least in part responsible for the taxes and lack of sewer that you are decrying.
Let's rephrase. I am glad you get to live in a place you enjoy ... but if seems out of line for you to complain that "we" aren't fixing your problems when, in fact, you are part of the reason for the problems.
Perhaps that is not your intent, but your words came across as showing no sympathy to those who are in a pickle they didn't create.
Ron sez:"And, Ann? Pictures?
Oh, you little computer whiz, you.
Well done!
Did you get free artichokes?"
The pictures screwed up, so not sure why they wouldn't go where I told them to go. So, no "computer whiz." And, no, no artichokes.
And "Spectator?" Wasn't "Spectator" identified as being one in the same as that appalling, eeeeuuuu, piece of work, "CrapKiller," who was kicked off this blog a long time ago? Now he''s baaaacckkk? No thanks, Jon. Go away and stay away or I'll start hitting the little garbage can "delete" button.
Fortunately, there is law regarding FOIA Requests so your suggestion about “sorting” the request is useless.
So MIKE, are you suggesting there is Federal Law at stake?
BTW, one does not “approach” the Federal Supreme Court directly.
Cases that have played out in lower courts are appealed to that highest court in the land and are then “selected” to be heard.
Be patient, what else can you do?
The LOSTDEP "process" in no game.
The LOSTDEP "process" is not a game.
Ann wrote:
"The pictures screwed up, so not sure why they wouldn't go where I told them to go"
When you click on that little photo icon to upload pics, blogger automatically puts the piece of code for the image at the top of your post. What I do, is cut (don't copy) that entire piece of code (it can be several lines long), and then paste it where I want it to go. Works great.
If you were to go and 'edit' this post, and do what I just said there, the pics should end up where you want them. Give it a try.. it's fun!
And...
Richdora Nash-LeGarner wrote:
"As a pragmatic man I suggest that restarting Tri-W will be the fastest and least expensive way to solve our collective problems..."
Are you a "pragmatic" man, or, are you a recalled-LOCSD-Director man that was largely responsible for throwing $25 million of Los Osos taxpayer money at the Tri-W embarrassment, so, these days, you and your buds will say and do ANYTHING in a desperate attempt to get your embarrassment built, so it won't LOOK like you and your buds wasted $25 million of Los Osos taxpayer money on the Tri-W embarrassment?
Is that your definition of "pragmatic," Richdora?
"Only (9-percent) of (Prohibition Zone) respondents chose the mid-town (Tri-W) location..."
-- Los Osos Wastewater Project Community Advisory Survey, March 27, 2009
"Solution Group members are... Stan Gustafson, Pandora Nash-Karner, Bob Semonson, Frank Freiler, Jerry Gregory, Virgil Just..."
-- Pandora Nash-Karner, from a Solution Group newsletter, 1998
"Additional Endorsements for Richard LeGros: Pandora Nash-Karner, Bob Semonson, Frank Freiler, Jerry Gregory, Virgil Just"
-- SmartVoter.org, November 2002
"Yes, the Solution Group plan deep-sixed the County's Plan (in 1999)."
Richard LeGros, 2009
"It was inappropriate of me to rely on Solution Group members to determine community values for Los Osos."
-- Former Coastal Commission Permit Supervisor, Steve Monowitz, told to SewerWatch, June, 2005
Excellent example of reporting in the blog. I learned stuff I did not know. (Ok, only one thing- re Organic certification- but-there is a spraying on leafy vegetables issue) I didn't attend the field trip. And pictures too, this is virtually real.
What isn't real is a regional plan. It was proposed throughout the TAC. The Joint Powers Authority of Cayucos/Moro Bay nixed the idea in a pre-submission to the DEIR. So much for “regional” cooperation. I was one of the proponents. The other and primary proponent, Joey Racano is known to some of you. Joey had just been the target of a character assassination campaign by a local “Activist” who had a different agenda and did not like the competition. So much for “Local” cooperation. The county should have had this field trip in the early stages of the TAC. Of course, relieving a regulatory burden was the county’s primary and only goal back then.
Monterey 2007 County Total $3.823 Billion Ag production
San Luis Obispo 2007 County Total $653.87 Million Ag production.
Not all roads lead to Tri-W. But, the County can still walk away. In which case...
You can lead them to water, but without a restrictive covanent (ordenance) You can't force them to utilize it.
Jon (Spectator)succesfully pulled a "Sal Si Puedes". I testified before the waterboard at their Watsonville meeting recently.
Topic; TMDL's The Waterboard voted to install zero tolerance to bacteria in salsipuedes creek. My comment- "don't institute it. The agencies simply can't accomplish that goal."
A gradual correction just isn't insane enough to meet their 2025 goals.
Ann
If you don’t like the text wrapping I think it can be disabled.
Try inserting a break? “Less than” symbol followed by “br” then “more than”
Alon sez:"What isn't real is a regional plan. It was proposed throughout the TAC. The Joint Powers Authority of Cayucos/Moro Bay nixed the idea in a pre-submission to the DEIR. So much for “regional” cooperation. I was one of the proponents. The other and primary proponent, Joey Racano is known to some of you. Joey had just been the target of a character assassination campaign by a local “Activist” who had a different agenda and did not like the competition. So much for “Local” cooperation. The county should have had this field trip in the early stages of the TAC. Of course, relieving a regulatory burden was the county’s primary and only goal back then."
The water issue is really the most interesting. The county now has control of Los Osos water.(once it leaves the house and enters that sewer pipe.) Since they refused, from day one, to actually do real comprehensive design build, they've broken this all out into a piecemeal deal (keep MWH happy) and instead of a bsin-wide holistic approach to WATER, we're being handed an a priori bifurcated deal with the County as water wheeler. Interesting. As I said before, when the elephants dance, it is the mice who must be afraid.
Thanks to Alon and Ron for the photo/blogger/paste info. Will go experiment.
Ann,
I don't believe "Spectator" be my favorite, crafty ole' "Crapkiller" at all. She knew how to comminicate coherently....a bit caustic at times, but spoke her mind. I loved (and miss) her view on alot of stuff. Besides, she only owns rental property in LoSo. One of her tenants is (was) "Jesus".....not the real one. ;-) Furthermore, she knew the rules of Polo!!!!!!What a gal!!! Sorry you two didn't get along.
Why wouldn't Mr. Lagros still champion TRI-W, pragmatic or whatever? That's the only way he, Stosh and Gordy have the slightest chance of "saving face".
And Mike...... another story, defiantly un-pragmatic, but I just had lunch.
Ann,
I don't believe "Spectator" be my favorite, crafty ole' "Crapkiller" at all. She knew how to comminicate coherently....a bit caustic at times, but spoke her mind. I loved (and miss) her view on alot of stuff. Besides, she only owns rental property in LoSo. One of her tenants is (was) "Jesus".....not the real one. ;-) Furthermore, she knew the rules of Polo!!!!!!What a gal!!! Sorry you two didn't get along.
Why wouldn't Mr. Lagros still champion TRI-W, pragmatic or whatever? That's the only way he, Stosh and Gordy have the slightest chance of "saving face".
And Mike...... another story, defiantly un-pragmatic, but I just had lunch.
Ann
Thanks for the detailed report and good photos.
Twas not surprising that Richard called it "a waste of time". Probably because it may be helpful to the out of town process. Just more face-saving spin.
Go slow to go fast and do it right this time around seems appropriate.
Right Foggy... Let's take another 30 or 40 years... That's been the "move the sewer (actually, we don't want to pay for any sewer)" mantra..... and our drinking water will be coming from where in the mean time...????
Mike
Haven't we all seen the very poor and costly results of "jump-starting" a project in the wrong place?
The song goes "Slow down, your going too fast, we got to make this project our last".
Go slow to go fast.
Fogswamp wrote:
"Haven't we all seen the very poor and costly results of "jump-starting" a project in the wrong place?
The song goes "Slow down, your going too fast, we got to make this project our last"."
Hey, that's clever! Picked up on the whole, "The Graduate/Simon & Garfunkel" theme, AND a perfect use of it.
Well done!
And, I guess we gotta make this note here: the chair of the TAC was Garfinkel.
And one more: Where's that Jensen report? I think I can hear the sounds of silence.
Ron
Thanks, never thought about TAC and Garfinkel, but it fits. That's good.
Yes, Jensen has been conspicuously silent, perhaps he's taken the fifth, doesn't want to incriminate himself.
If and when the report comes out it will no doubt be full of lawyer-speak ambiguity.
Sorry Foggy...
I don't consider the Tri-W site and the technology to have been a poor choice... I do know that the CSD5's "No Plan" was an exceedingly poor choice...!!!
We would have had a fully functional wwtf and no worries about CDO's.... but thanks to Lisa and her handful of dreamers, we have serious delays, much higher costs and a bankruptcy that the community is one day going to begin paying... That bankruptcy isn't the total panacea some mis-guided folks think it is... We are going to be paying for that folly for many years once it starts and that's in addition to whatever the monthly sewer bill and sewer bond payments will be...
But, keep on trying to find the perfect sewer... just how many more years will that take....????? Remember, Tri-W would have already be operating and the bills would have been a lot lower than they are being projected right now....
Oh, did Ron say he was writing Grant Requests for us...??? I do know Mr.Hensley was doing that for the CSD, but Lisa threw it all away...
Oh well Foggy, it's only money... Even when (if?) the State ever gets a budget, we can expect a lot of difficulty obtaining Grants or even Loans.... The economy is not looking so good right now and our extremist demonstrators may find their special interests have less money to play with.... Even some Cal Trans folks may have some extra days off and less money in their pockets...
Ron "Bodacious
" Crawford wrote: Where's that Jensen report? I think I can hear the sounds of silence…"Hello darkness my old friend"
FOWSWAMP,
What MIKE and the other blind mice don't understand the importance of putting and keeping the county proces on the record.
When the county attorney puts his "opinion" on paper then there is something to use/target/question even if he uses Swahili.
Making the record is so very important if there is to be accountability...
What MIKE and the other blind mice don't understand "is" the importance of putting and keeping the county proces on the record.
"Process" is spelled with two "s's"
Yo' "sorry, I forgot his last name" :ynette,
When is Lou gonna let you off of being grounded?
Or did you get some new orders to "shut up"???
Post a Comment