The déjà vu was eerie. Winter. Cold. Night. Los Osos Junior High School. About a couple of hundred people out of a community of about 5,000 homes gathered to hear about a sewer project. One event in 1984, this one in 2010. Same people, same issue. Makes me tired even thinking about it.
Well, this workshop was the final piece in the Hideous Los Osos Sewer Project; the ordinance setting rates and charges. If the “protest” vote is not successful (with 50% plus one required, damned near impossible to accomplish), developed property owners will be paying to cover the capital costs of their neighbor’s undeveloped property, plus an additional fee based on their own (indoor) water usage. If and when water issues are resolved, and undeveloped property owners are allowed to develop, they will then pay the entire original assessment and R&C fees, and the total R&C will drop slightly on developed property (at least the fixed capital cost portion will.) If there is no water and undeveloped property can’t develop, the developed property owners will pay the full freight for the whole deal.
It was anticipated that a critical water report and other info coming in the spring may give a better picture as to water availability and if it looks like a sure thing, the County will hold an assessment vote for the undeveloped land-owners and if successful, the fixed portion of the R&C will drop accordingly.
The water portion of the R&C will be based on your Jan/Feb water bills. The presumption will be that that’s “indoor” water use. It will be figured on your Jan/Feb numbers, annualized, times $7.54 per unit. Check your water bill last year to see how many units you used in Jan/Feb to get a guestimate on what your individual cost will be. (The formula from the CSD hand-out is “usage found on your water bill x 745 gallons divided by 60 will give you average daily use”) A unit is 748 gallons) In addition, the CSD office has all kinds of great water info available to help you figure this out and how to conserve water as well. And the county website will also have info needed to calculate estimates.
It’s important to do this early-on because right now people may have the county’s glossy brochure figure of $194 total for their sewer bill floating around in their head, which is misleading. Onto that you’ll have to tack your own water usage from the R&Cs, which may come as a huge sticker shock to many people. And, of course, you still have your regular water bill on top of all that. I suspect that a $300-a-month water/sewer bill will not be at all uncommon. Oh, I almost forgot, a $300-a-month plus costs for hook up, if you financed that. So, will a $350++ a month water/sewer/hook up bill become the new norm?
It’s not known yet whether the R&C will come as a monthly bill or be added to the tax rolls. Landlords will be getting the bill so they’ll have to figure out a fair charge for their tenants.
The original $25,000 per home assessment will appear on the 2010/11 tax bills. The R&C won’t appear until the 2014 hook-up.
On lot costs will involve decommissioned septic tanks, pipe run to lateral and is the sole responsibility of the homeowner. Guestimated costs run between $2,000 to $5,000. The county is looking for grants to help with low-income folks to help pay for hook-up costs and the county is also looking into the possibility of waiving or reducing the various permits needed to decommission tanks (inspection fees & etc.), and I presume the County will have a list of recommended companies certified to do that kind of work so people can avoid shoddy fly-by-nighters who could leave them with an expensive mess.
The county is also working on making information available for homeowners who want to use their abandoned septics as a rain-water cistern system or as a cachement system to keep rainwater on their property for percolation into the ground. And for people who are using extensive greywater, they’ll have to consult with the county if they want to get a more accurate rate on their indoor water use, since that fee is based on the amount of used water that’s actually going down into the sewer pipes, which greywater isn’t.
And the county’s looking into financial help for poor folks who have no way of paying those high on-lot costs. It’s not known at this time if or how much help is or will be available, but some of the grants are only available to counties while others individual homeowners must apply for themselves. With the state broke, even more of this community fallen into PoorVille, this community needs to brace for more people losing their homes on account of this project. And brace for a shrug of indifference from various government agencies. Not their problem.
A few Questions from the audience:
Will cost overruns on the project be added to the R&C? No, legally can’t be added to either the base assessment or the R&C. The county’s not anticipating cost over runs, the bids that have been coming in on other projects are running 30% under the usual costs due to the lack of work and very hungry contractors and the cost guestimates were pegged in the mid-range so there’s some wiggle room before going over. And if costs end up going under the guestimates, the amount collected will also go down.
Supervisor Gibson said he intended to ask the RWQCB to remove the CDOs from The Los Osos 45. Yeah, well, good luck with that one.
Several people asked about holding a special tax for residents in the Los Osos Basin, a tax that would ensure that people living outside the PZ would be taxed and said tax would broaden the tax base for the sewer and would go to help pay for the sewer since folks living outside the PZ are benefiting from the clean water created by the treatment plant, but aren’t paying to clean it. That’s something Paavo Ogren said they were looking into and when the water reports are in, the county may take a look at doing that. If a majority (50%) of homeowners inside the PZ voted for such a “use” tax on their neighbors outside the PZ, it would pass.
Another question involved using old census data to determine median household income, for example. That data is certainly out of date and would have an impact on whether grants are available. If the old data showed us to be a wealthy community and that’s no longer the case, then that data must be updated. In addition, the grant monies and lower interest loans available via the SRF program depend on those numbers, as do Federal guidelines as to affordability. And, clearly, if this project wasn’t “affordable” under 2000 census data, it sure isn’t “affordable” now. Sometime in the spring, that data may be available, as will information from the SRF funds. So, that may result in better terms and hence lower costs. Or maybe not. One thing is sure, the really interesting numbers may start showing up with the new census data. Way back in 2000, the original CSD members were using numbers that guestimated that 33% of the community would be forced out of town by the (then) proposed sewer costs. Is that percentage still right or will it be higher or lower? The 2010 numbers may tell a tale.
The workshop was taped by AGP Video and so will be shown on local cable.
The Board of Supervisors meets Dec 14th to certify the “protest vote.”
Posts
98 comments:
C'mon Ann... The "out of town" sewer plant is going to be waaayyy cheaper than the old Tri-W plan....
Please help me remember just what the CSD5 "Plan" was and what was it projected to cost...??? We had 3 professional CalTrans Engineers newly elected to the CSD, so we know they did a risk/benefit analysis and a projected project cost... C'mon Chuck, Steve and John, what did your "Plan" work out to cost...??? Were you lying to the community, or just incompetent...???
Just what was it that Lisa and Julie said their "Plan" was going to cost...??? Wasn't it going to be less expensive to Move the Sewer...??? What figure is Ann using today...??? $300, $350...???? Sounds a lot more expensive than the old Tri-W plan... Waaaayyyyy more expensive....!!!! But then we're so special in Los Osos that we don't need no damn stinkin' sewer, the magic sand is all we need...
Test: I was kicked out by the program. My comments were not published.
Thanks for your comments, Ann. I was there shortly to find out how the billing system would affect my renters. Apparently the county is confused. They are not going to include sewer usage fees with water bills. My renters pay for their own water in that I cannot control their usage or diligence in reporting leaks.
I have not made up my mind as to the protest, but it is apparent to me that the county does not have it's ducks in a row despite their excessively high priced fat cats.
There is a disaster coming to Los Osos and it will affect property owners and renters alike.
The only thing in my mind that could divert this disaster is that the taxes and fees on this sewer NOT be imposed until the sale of a home, and taken from the proceeds. This goes for ALL property in the PZ.
Fat chance! The fat cats need to be paid and they do not care a wit about the property owners.
You are correct: 40% will have to move, however they will not be able to. Where will they get their resources: Property is not selling unless it is almost given away, banks are fooling around requiring high income for a loan, and the government is broke.
It sort of looks like they will become section 8 renters in their former home as a best case scenario.
Hard times ahead everywhere, wages and property values continue to slide, medicare is under attack with the health care bill, and there is sure to be a federal consumption tax to bring us out of debt from our excessive spending. Food and gasoline prices continue to rise. The Fed prints money backed up by air.
The state and the Federal government are broke, and yet there are some fools who still think that government knows best: more government and freebies for all.
I guess one gets what he voted for. We will see what Los Osos gets, and I do not think it will be pretty for those living from hand to mouth. Shame!
The blog comment section is screwed up!
Why should undeveloped property owners pay sewer fees when they use no sewer or water? Why should they be forced to?
Maybe this is something a Marxist/communist/progressive would like, but it is obviously a theft by government when it is unlikely that the undeveloped properties will never get one of the $50,000 building permits because of a lack of water. The property owner might as well give the property to the county!
Theft by government! Socialist/progressive government scum. Government for and by slackers and looters!
Well Ann, I'm sorry that our last comments are buried on the right side in the Love the Photo of the Bear thread.
But we can continue now here. I saw you talking for quite a few minutes to Steve Paige last night. What did he say about his lawsuit?
Spectator, nice seeing you last night. But I thought the County answered you, had you left by then? Your rental agreements need to include the info that the sewer bill is a fee the renters will pay. You say that you have no recourse if they don't pay the bill, like turning off the water, but what do you do if they don't pay the rent?
Also, the CSD is NOT in charge of the project this time around, they cannot do the billing. There are three water purveyors sending water bills to the PZ - how would they do the sewer billing? They control the water at the other end if you know what I mean!
Also, our poor CSD is likely to be hamstrung. January 19 is the beginning of the showdown in bankruptcy court. How could they add billing for the sewer even if the numbers were provided by the County? They are already stretched very thin on staff. How would they have staff deal with collection and delinquencies? Maybe S & T or Golden State could - but the CSD?
Think of the consequences of protesting. (Getting 3,000 protests is highly unlikely anyway.) What do you think the consequences might be - do you know? Last night County staff opined that the BOS would direct staff to come up with a variation of this plan (plus, "We Delay, We Pay" still works here) or the BOS could simply eat the $8 million, dump the project, and leave us to the "mercies" of the Water Board.
You suggest, "…the taxes and fees on this sewer NOT be imposed until the sale of a home," but then who pays the loans to build this thing? Who would build waiting on payment for homes to sell? The County is poor too, they couldn't set aside funding to do this.
You say, "Why should undeveloped property owners pay sewer fees when they use no sewer or water" - well, they aren't!
Ann reports, "Several people asked about holding a special tax for residents in the Los Osos Basin, a tax that would ensure that people living outside the PZ would be taxed and said tax would broaden the tax base for the sewer and would go to help pay for the sewer since folks living outside the PZ are benefiting from the clean water created by the treatment plant, but aren’t paying to clean it."
Are they people who made it dirty to begin with? If they are on an acre, and are technically not polluting, I'd guess this wouldn't be thought of as fair.
Hello everybody, I've been avoiding posting anything sewerish as I no longer live there but I just received my Sewer update flyer in a much forwarded snail mail.
The format is in my opinion eerily familiar to what I've seen before, why is that?
Toons, the lines drawn in the sand for the PZ can not be justified considering that on one side you have a complete dissalowment of ANY discharge and on the other a completely unregulated ALLOWANCE of discharge, lines had to be drawn somewhere I guess, so there you have it.
Did they make it dirty to begin with?
Most probably yes, Alon is better versed than I am about aquifer flows but test well data was surprisingly inconsistent with the PZ line.
And Jon is right, disaster lurks right ahead, what is the County gonna do when 30-40% of the households default on the payments?. Will those properties fall into the same limbo as un improved parcels?
Or will the County become the biggest landlord in the state?
Do you honestly think the County has the political huevos to kick grannies down the street in shopping carts in order to sell the home for the assessment?
I don't think so.
But then again it kind of does make sense, Government in 'merica is real good at reacting to disaster, not so much preventing one.
To Sewertoons: It is one thing to evict a tenant for not paying rent, but when only $700 in sewer fees is involved, and at the end of a year, when perhaps the tenant has moved, this is another thing. I guess a much larger deposit would be involved, but this deposit is protected by law, and must be returned within three weeks of the tenant leaving, minus cleaning fees and repairs for damage. If I do not have a bill to the end of a year, and the tenant is long gone, what is my recourse? Small claims court? This is more expensive in time lost than the $700. Besides, one needs to get a judgement and an execution of judgement, in effect going to court twice.
If a tenant does not pay his water bill, the district or water company will turn off the water. The same thing should happen with a sewer bill, and it can be done.
My major beef is that the county has not fully fleshed out these charges and how they are handled. The devil is always in the details and the details are slim and speculative. Whatever they say now, can be changed in the future.
It has been clear from the beginning that the State Water Board is simply exercising its authority for authority's sake. Sort of like the TSA. They are environmental Nazis, and should be de-funded except they are supported by other environmental Nazis so this will not happen.
Perhaps if I file my two protests, it will give the county time to get it's ducks in a row. Right now, there are too many things up in the air, and it is the county's fault.
Mike Green: If the county does not have the cajones to sell homes in default of the assessment, every home will go into default. So they will put a lien on the homes or sell them if they can. They may not be able to sell the home for the assessment by law, and may have to collect at the sale of the home. I do not know.
In any case this is a gigantic cluster f...k. I think that we will have to see how this plays out.
Sewertoons: If the county can monitor water usage, and bill sewer fees on same, they can bill tenants who rent or lease property. If they cry "poor", THEY ARE FEEDING YOU AND US A LOAD OF OBAMA.
When the county allowed the build out of Los Osos and permitted septic tanks to increase property taxes despite the warnings of the water board, they stuck us in this position. I am glad that they loan us a pittance to get this sewer built, but it is nothing compared to the benefit the county has received over the years from our taxes.
Spectator, if the County drops the project because it cannot pass this 218, what do you think will happen next?
The County monitors water usage through data from the 3 water purveyors, there is no agreement or rule that would put that extra burden of processing and collecting sewage fees onto the water purveyors. Some sort of agreement would need to be cooked up and fees paid to do a bi-monthly bill, and those would be paid by the project, wouldn't they?
The only one crying poor would be the CSD who may not even survive the bankruptcy and whose assets (one being the water company) could be sold at a forced sale by the BK court. But perhaps there will be a happy outcome. We will know more by the end of January 19, perhaps.
The state is set up to make it very hard on landlords, I agree. An ex-husband owned apartment buildings and getting rid of non-paying tenants was an ordeal.
How much does it cost to turn off a sewer and where does the sewage go once it is turned off?
Wouldn't a house whose payments are defaulted on be sold by the lender and the repayment of the sewer fee would come out of the sale?
Lynette, I am not talking about turning off a sewer. I am talking about turning off the water if a sewer bill was not paid. The bills would be far better monthly: a big bill at the end of the year would be a hardship, especially for seniors who do not pay a mortgage payment that includes taxes.
We are not talking about house payments here. We are talking about a senior homeowner who cannot pay the sewer assessment and fees. Most of the seniors at risk have fully owned their houses for many years, and hopefully did not refinance their homes. Perhaps a reverse mortgage will help them, but they have far less equity than in the past.
While these seniors are protected by prop 13, their property taxes go up every year and the assessment and fees will in effect more than double the tax.
I guess they will have to start making bird houses and rabbit boxes to make ends meet if they can. Nobody is going to hire them.
I cannot blame them for being mislead and fighting the sewer all along: they have been fighting for their survival. Now the end is in sight, and they are older and more infirm.
Government help is a carrot dangling from a stick, for we always get promises for votes. The government gives with one hand and takes twice back with the other, mostly to enrich those in government. This has always been so in the past, and will be so in the future unless the tea party prevails.
Do you think that Gibson, Patterson, and Hill (the socialist part of the BOS) will step up to the plate and save the seniors of Los Osos by making our sewer a fully county wide problem and help rather than punish Los Osos seniors and the people in the PZ?
How about the socialist water board? The problem has been caused by the fighting over a sewer problem that was instigated by the county. Divide and slide away, after all, every crisis is an opportunity to push this country into more government control. Communism = death or slavery.
Within three years there will be riots in the streets over loss of assumed entitlements and pensions. The damage cannot be undone. The worst part is very few see it coming and assume the government will make everything right.
The greatest stupidity of this whole sewer battle is that all the pollutants in our water can be treated and removed at the wellhead. And so we sacrifice seniors to environmental nazis. But we will have a sewer. I say at what cost in human suffering?
Jon, isn't there some rigamarole that needs to be done - you just can't shut off a person's water without doing certain steps. How long does that take and what sort of money does it cost the water purveyor to do it? If they can't recover that money or those costs attempting to get it, they spread the cost out to the other water customers, right? I speak generally here, not specific to the CSD's water service.
As for billing, it is done bi-monthly now. However it is done, there is a cost associated with it. I agree, a monthly bill is easier to swallow, but like property taxes , you just save up every month until the bill comes and then you pay it. Hopefully.
Payments will start on the 2007 assessment in fall of 2011. Perhaps the 2010 census will readjust the median income here and those in the lower incomes will be able to get help? I hope so. One way or another, I believe the low income seniors will have help, it is those in the middle that will suffer the most, the working, young families. Any words about them?
Who do you think is supposed to pay for the sewer?
Rail against the Water Board all you like, but until we clean up what is causing the water to be dirty, we won't be cleaning up anything from the well-head —Which also costs money to do, just ask the people on Golden State water service. This pollution isn't just in our drinking water, it goes out into the bay. People kayak in the bay, it is not just for birds and fish. Also, it sometimes stinks near the shore.
We all took a discount up front to buy property here. The coastal towns with sewers were, and are, far more expensive. The hammer was going to fall eventually.
The County will not pay for this sewer, they do not use it.
Are you planning on running for office?
Toons, You said "undeveloped property owners pay no sewer fees when they use no water".
That's not quite correct.
I have been paying around $375.00 annually for quite some time and the lot that has no water, sewer, or septic tank!
You ask " are they the people who made it dirty". Yes, absolutely, and in some cases more so than the vast majority within the crazy gerrymandered lines.
As I'm sure you are aware, many homes along Willow Creek and many other areas have their leach fields underwater for many months of the year, yet not in the Prison Zone.
Tell me why the two most nitrate threatened wells in the basin right below the 200 homes in Cabrillo Estates are being contaminated. I'm just curious to know.
After all these years the same questions asked.
I'd like to see the science behind the PZ line that was drawn. Where's any documentation on that?
I'd like to know how anyone could support the County's efforts when their first choice for the treatment plant was on about 600 acres with spray fields -- especially since Perc could sit a treatment plant on 2 acres and California is in a water crisis. Geez!
I'd like to know why there is no general benefit tax on homes outside the PZ.
I'd like to know why the County refused to look at cost effective collection.
Well Lynette, I wish you'd help me out here. You are an engineer, you are a lawyer, hey you know more than anyone it appears.
What is your professional background? I like to know that too!
Spectator has no wish to run for office here and cannot in Panama. Spectator has enough to do to keep Panama's economy growing at 6% + and increase the living standards of Panamanians through his interaction with his political allies in Panama and the US. Spectator is only here two months a year and at this time the cold caused by "global warming" makes him wish he was back.
The lines to the PZ were drawn wrong. OK. Which of us was here in 1983 and what did we do about it? If we lived here and did nothing - then who would you blame? Ourselves? That would be the correct answer.
If you bought here after 1983 and did not investigate thoroughly as to whether or not you wanted to buy within a prohibition zone, whose fault is that? Blame yourself.
If you bought here and were told nothing about it from your realtor, you might have a case against the realtor. What did you do about that? Anything?
I guess my point is if you can't or didn't do anything about it yet chose to live here anyway - quit whining! Who ever told you that life was fair? Please, instead of whining here, give that person a good scolding, or just LET IT GO! Life is to short.
Property tax is property tax. If you own property, you pay tax. If you have a house on that property - you pay A LOT MORE TAX. If you do not wish to pay tax yet still own property, go live somewhere where there is no property tax. There is an obligation to pay tax here and I can't believe you DIDN'T know that when you bought the property! If I were you FOG, I'd be plenty p!$$ed at the County of old for not getting this sewer done ages ago so that you could have built on your lot. I would support the County right now to get this done. I know there is the water issue, and they won't say anything official, but the preliminary studies show that there is enough water for build out.
GRO, your questions have all been answered before on this blog. You might think up some new ones.
Spectator, stay warm!
I do wish I could join you in Panama, but there is still family and job to continue... but soon...!!!
In the mean time, the LO nutjobz keep trying to find a conspiracy under every grain of our magic sand... some are even "branching" out to protest a cell phone tower... there just are an endless number of conspiracies here to protest... BUT, the extraordinarily expensive sewer IS COMING thanks to the parade of fools, trolls, clowns, mental cases, moral tramps and over-the-hill cheerleaders...
Hope to see you in a couple of years... in the mean time I'll keep pissing off the shrinking group of obstructionists... Have a great day...!!!!
Merry Christmas and a belated Happy Thanksgiving
Happy Holidays to you too and all.
I submitted a question (Inspired by a conversation with Gail McP.)
Question was; Is this workshop going to be shown on Chanel 20 and 21- ? Has it shown this weekend?
I would had liked to see a clearer link between the sewer payments and the water bills. currently CSD bills for water 6 times a year. People should have a clear idea of the "when" so they can organize their month to month finances. That was the first question- submitted as a question re "will the bills show the operations and maintenance component separate from the infra-structure component". It relates to pass through costs to renters, also.
John sez:"I guess one gets what he voted for. We will see what Los Osos gets, and I do not think it will be pretty for those living from hand to mouth. Shame!"
Good Lord, John, you're sounding like a bleeding-heart liberal SOCIALIST!!! Get a grip. If your renters can't pay, kick them to the curb like a good Republican!
Toonces sez:"But we can continue now here. I saw you talking for quite a few minutes to Steve Paige last night. What did he say about his lawsuit?"
No lawsuit, no settlement/payoff (he laughed at that) It was an administrative "complaint," which was, of course denied, so now he has to go up-line. it's called "exhausting administrative remedies" (which The Los Osos 45 know all about) which you have to do before you can go to a "real" court.
Fogswamp sez:"As I'm sure you are aware, many homes along Willow Creek and many other areas have their leach fields underwater for many months of the year, yet not in the Prison Zone."
Bwa-hahaha. That's right! No CDO's for THEM from a RWQCB who's sooooooo concerned about water pollution. Nope. No CDO's and no sewer for them.
GRO sez:"I'd like to see the science behind the PZ line that was drawn. Where's any documentation on that?"
The "science" was always shakey. One of the best, most telling words to be found in the RWQCB's documents is the use of the word "believe." As in "we believe the nitrates are coming from . . . " This in the various legal assertions that became the basis for the PZ and the CDO's. "Believe?" As in, Well, I belive the moon is made of green cheese, so I'm going FORCE YOU TO PAY gazllions in order to build a rocket ship containing a box of Ritz crackers and a cheese knife so I can fly to the moon and get me some of that cheese that I "believe" to be there."
Mike sez:"What figure is Ann using today...??? $300, $350...???? Sounds a lot more expensive than the old Tri-W plan.."
once again, Mikee, you don't read and you're making stuff up. Right now the guesitmates of the county plan is UNDER what Tri-W was (and if Gibson is right and bids come in 30% cheaper than their guestimates, it'll be cheaper still. Maybe.) What I said (that you forgot to read) was if you tack the county's guestimate AND our hook up charges onto your regular water bill AND the rates and charges on your water use if you go above the guestimated base-line ($7.54 per 748 gallons) a lot of people may end up with a $300-$350 a month sewer/water bill.
You really should go to reading school, Mike. You just embarrass yourself.
Apparently Ann, YOU don't read what you don't wish to hear/see...
The question is whether the "out of town" sewer billings will be more per month than the Tri-W sewer billings would have been....
Is that now clear enough even for YOU...??? It's too bad we can't put a real figure on the cost of doing NOTHING to begin to clean our drinking water these past wasted 5 years... YOU should be so proud of being part of the parade to do nothing positive...
BTW, there is nothing wrong with giving dead-beat renters the boot to the curb...!!! Rentals are a PRIVATE business, not some low income government housing project... if you want low income housing, then go support a PUBLIC project...just be careful what you wish for... Would you support a low income housing project of say, 500 units, on the Tri-W site...??? or maybe next door to your abode...???? Bet Pelosi doesn't have a projetc next to her property...!!!
Lynette,
You sure like to go off point in your responses.
Let's try some of this again:
1) How can you support the County when they were so wrong with their choice of treatment -- about 600 acres and then spray fields?! Come on! Perc can sit a plant on 2 acres -- and throwing water away on spray fields??? Only Sarah Christie saved the day and got us out of that horrible plan -- but then the BOS forced her out for doing a good job!
2) Okay, let's try this one again -- has Lou worked with MWH in the past?
3) Since you are the know-it-all on this blog (ha ha) what exactly is your professional background? Where did you work...doing what exactly??
4) Why isn't there a general benefit charge for people outside the PZ (Paavo initially said there would be)?
5) Here's a new one.
If this whole sewer thing wasn't REALLY about real estate and taking it from the older people and lower to mid income people, then WHY was Johnson/Starlings so part of the whole thing (housing contractors, meetings with them at their offices, etc. -- hey, their computers were stolen the SAME night as MWH's were at Sunnyside -- hmmmm...)
Are you trying to tell us that it's not all about a "land grab" and the sewer was the only way to do it?!
Ann,
You wrote:
GRO sez:"I'd like to see the science behind the PZ line that was drawn. Where's any documentation on that?"
The "science" was always shakey. One of the best, most telling words to be found in the RWQCB's documents is the use of the word "believe." As in "we believe the nitrates are coming from . . . " This in the various legal assertions that became the basis for the PZ and the CDO's. "Believe?" As in, Well, I belive the moon is made of green cheese, so I'm going FORCE YOU TO PAY gazllions in order to build a rocket ship containing a box of Ritz crackers and a cheese knife so I can fly to the moon and get me some of that cheese that I "believe" to be there."
That's funny Ann!
ISN'T "BELIEVING" POLLUTION EXISTS ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET AND NOT THE OTHER CALLED RELIGION -- AND NOT SCIENCE??
Well, maybe Steve should save his money then, as the County doesn't seem to be worried about anything lawsuit-like that they know about. Doesn't look like he has a case that is going to slow down or stop the project. (Too late for PZLDF and the wasting of community funds - done behind the community's back I might add, that the Lisa board tossed at that lawsuit however.)
You know, if the RWQCB was forcing the community to pay for lysimeters under every house to test for pollution, there would be the same outrage from GRO about the cost. Fortunately smarter heads prevailed. When you cram 8 to 12+ houses on septic tanks per acre, it doesn't take a scientist (and maybe even a half-wit would get this) to see what will happen if you are sitting on top of your water source. Were the boundaries wrong, yes, its ancient history, get over it! Of course when you practice the religion of Magic Sand, these simple deductions make no sense!
Gee GRO, Perc wimped out at Morro Bay - and where were they in 2001 when it would have mattered?
The general benefit is still in the works, didn't you read Ann's column?
I don't know what you are talking about RE: Starlings. People would not be in this horrendously expensive position right now if the sewer had been built when it was under $40/mo. Oh wait - I get it! The stopping of that project was Starling's fault so the cost could go up higher and force more people to leave!! Duh!
Ah Yes, tis GRO's Gran Mal Conspiracy Theory...
Perhaps if GRO and the handful of nitpiker anti-anything,anywhere and at any cost cry-babies, had they actually listened several years back, they wouldn't be running around today squawking about the high cost of the sky falling... but it's a "free" country until the sewer and bankruptcy bills come due...!!!
Wonder if the magic sand will allow all the tears to flow down into the aquifiers, with folks like GRO crying their eyes out over the costs that they supported through their activist actions, the aquifiers might once again flow full with clear water...??? ...or will they slither out of town to go cry on some other community's problems...???
:-)
Ha-ha! We might need a de-sal plant for the amount of tears we've been getting!!! Then they will scream about the cost of that! (It was a plot (!) to get them to cry all along (!) cooked up by MWH (!) and the realtors (!) - I can just hear it now!)
Lynette,
You stray off the topic (yet again) -- but I'll answer to your latest comment.
It's the RWQCB's duty to prove the pollution. That is the law. It's not the other way around!
And smarter heads prevailed you say? Wow.
There are several homes in the PZ that I know of that are on over an acre and they are not polluting and have to pay for the sewer!!
If the water board didn't like the small lots then why didn't they correct the problem in '83? Like maybe following 83-13 and having a septic mgmt. program and maybe do clusters/decentralized systems like the USDA prefers anyway!!
And why was the County allowed to build MORE homes (what over 1,000) if the septics were polluting so bad. Smarter heads Lynette?!
Again, the County wanted 600 acres. Is that the smarter heads?
Throwing water away with spray fields -- smarter heads?!
NOW, let's get back to the real questions:
1) your professional background?
2) has Lou worked with MWH in the past?
Please stop repeating Pandora's same old slogan's ie Magic Sand. If you had a brain in your head you'd know what kind of a filter the sand we sit on is!! And besides, I'm one for vacuum -- no sand needed for that.
You know what my point was. The RWQCB "believing" what homes were polluting and drawing a line is not science, "believing" is religion.
This is just more evidence of a land grab.
Mike/Richard/Pandora's hubby:
You think it's funny that the County wants a system that costs double of what a system has to cost.
Yeah, real funny.
But we know we have to get rid of all that riff-raff that Pandora wants out so badly. And we know we have to get the seniors out so the realtors can cash in.
It's all a joke to you two but it's not funny. It's fraud. And I don't think there is a statue on fraud.
I'm not crying, I'm glad that you all will get what's coming to you.
Wrong Bucko (GRO)... The Water Board declared that Los Osos needed a sewer...that's a MANDATE to comply... That was also upheld in a court of law if you remember, but it doesn't really matter what you "remember"... It's been mandated and we have NOT COMPLIED...!!!! The Water Board is under NO REQUIREMENT to prove anything...!!!! Ya don't like it, sue the State and do let us know how far you get.... We, as a community within this society of government laws for the betterment of ALL citizens, are now, and have for some 30+ years, required to produce a water treatment system... so far, all that has happened is a fully planned and permitted waste water treatment system that would have complied with that mandate, but thanks to that small but vocal group of ego-terrorists, that Plan went in the septic tank(s)... now we have had another 5 YEARS of plodding slowly through the feces to a very expensive and VERY LARGE waste water treatment OUT OF TOWN...!!!! Hey, you won, now quit bitch'n and get ready to pay your bill for the needlessly expensive sewer, going to be more expensive water and let's not forget YOUR wonderful bankruptcy...!!!!!
May all your nightmares feature the CSD5...!!!!!
Oh, so you DON'T live here GRO - "I'm glad that you all will get what's coming to you." Quit moaning and groaning then!
Why don't you google Lou to find that connection with MWH GRO?
And what is YOUR "professional" background GRO? Dirge composer? Professional wailer? PERC pusher? Member of a vacuum sales claque?
Thanks Mike for an on-point posting!
Off to the pre-closed session CSD meeting to see if there are any new bankruptcy reports.
Lynnette:
You wrote: Oh, so you DON'T live here GRO - "I'm glad that you all will get what's coming to you." Quit moaning and groaning then!
You didn't get my statement right == again -- I meant there just might be a surprise lawsuit. Things are brewing.
And, I live closer to you than I care to.
Mike (Richard),
If my memory serves me correctly, in 2002 Rose Bowker admitted that the RWQCB had NOT mandated a sewer, but mandated that we clean up our water and left the method of compliance up to us.
Your memory is fuzzy as usual... and it doesn't even matter which way you want to skew your thoughts... there was and still is a MANDATE to clean up our water... We as a community are NOT IN COMPLIANCE...!!! That mandate has been in place for 30 years, we had a real design, plan, land and all permits which would have put our community into compliance...
...but thanks to folks like YOU, we are still plodding along and maybe in a few years we'll have something... I'm guessing YOU won't like the County solution and will continue to complain... Since you like to nitpik and complain so much, why didn't you have a real solution 7 years ago...??? Was it because you who wanted to move the sewer out of town really had no Plan...??? Wasn't it all just a lie...??? YOou never had anything, just wanted to complain...!!!!
So now we wait and listen to your whinning and watch the CSD floundering in it's slow death as the thin curtain of bankruptcy protection falls... So there will only be high water, sewer and garbage bills and we'll see how we'll have to pay for the CSD5's folly in creditor lawsuits...!!!!
GRO, don't forget, the method of compliance may be up to us, but it has to pass muster with not only the LCP, but the RWQCB, and the CCC, etc.. Plus the PEOPLE have to approve the treatment mode and conveyance. Which they have done - out of town with a GRAVITY system.
BTW, who am I going to believe, YOU with your veiled threat of a lawsuit —big whoop — OR the County which doesn't anticipate anything able to derail this process. You will be going against the WILL OF THE MAJORITY, so please keep that in mind. Happy brewing, I'm sure that you are feeling a bit desperate right now, but save your money, don't bother to hatch your plot.
Last night was a sad parade of nitpickers not happy with the 218. It was really a hoot to see Julie tell the community that the State Water Board would not come after us - it is no longer about nitrates! Like we would believe Julie saying "they won't come after us!"
Julie may have been correct...she doesn't own property, so the State wouldn't be interested in her specifically... although the State is patiently waiting for the outcome of the bankruptcy...!!!
...she may still be in a very large orange jumpsuit for her part in the CSD5 "misappropriation" of tax funds before the criminal part of the case is completely settled...the State is still interested, but has to wait the final settlement or rejection of the bankruptcy... Theft by elected public officials is very much frowned on...!!!! The fire may not be bright at this time, but the coals are still very warm...!!!!
Maybe the Water Board won't come after her - but what about the rest of us -- but then thinking back, it has always been about Julie, not us, so the rest of us was not even part of her statement!
Passing this 218 is critical to the bankruptcy and the County continuing on with the project. Much inane comment was made about the pro-218s "scare tactics," of saying the County could drop the project, the Water Board will make good the threats on CDOs, etc, but the REAL SCARE, and not just a tactic, is the 218 in relation to the bankruptcy. Without the project we are pretty much cooked. Not something to gamble with and 4 directors out of 5 played it smart and were not willing to gamble. Chuck, defeated, left early with the anti-218 crowd.
Gro sez:"ISN'T "BELIEVING" POLLUTION EXISTS ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET AND NOT THE OTHER CALLED RELIGION -- AND NOT SCIENCE??"
Yup. One of the CDO recipients who was dragged through the Kangaroo Court, Mad-Hatter Tea Party "trial" stands accused of "polluting the waters of the state of California," while his neighbor -- literally his neighbor, whose septic tank is probably 100' away -- isn't. Neither are the homes along the creek on the east side of South Bay Blvd whose leach fields are regularly under soggy creek water. Not polluting anything. No CDO's for them. So, "science?" Go figure. From day one this has been a basin-loading problem (for both nitrates and water) and that ball has repeatedly been dropped by the county, the CDS(s), RWQCB and the CC. In the case of the RWQC and the County, that ball was dropped to the tune of 1,100 additional homes allowed AFTER Resolution 83-13. Science? I think not. 45 citizens are paying a hard price for that decision.
Oh, but septic tanks and leech fields underwater all along the creek bed and elsewhere outside the PZ lines in the sand, are "appropriate" according to "toons" in a recent post.
But that's just "toons"eh?
Never lost for words and using her intellectual fuzzy logic in the narrow sense, again.
Yup Fogswamp, EVERY septic tank in the Los Osos general area should be removed immediately...!!!!
Are you ready to pay the bill that sewer...???? If not, then YOU are only playing games and trying to nitpik... I'm sure YOU could have drawn an equitable and less costly boundary around LO, but YOU didn't, you just blame and complain...!!!!!
The best that we can do now is put up with whatever the County comes up with...and listened to complainers with no real Plan... but a sewer is coming...!!!!
It's interesting how the Solutions Group TRIED to make that PZ boundary be less, and not sewer everyplace, yet they get NO praise for trying, and they are regularly slammed for a bad plan. (Like Ripley, leaving stuff out made it cheaper.)
FOG, where did I say it was an appropriate line? Where did I say it was just? I simply said that most homes causing the pollution are the ones crammed 8-12+ per acre. I said if you did nothing and lived here when all this went down, you have nothing to say about it now. If you bought within the zone and knew - same thing. How is all this whining about it helping? Will it change one darn thing about it? NO. So what is the point?
FOG, I can't believe that you are name calling. Not like you.
Ann, not everyone of the 45 is basket-casing over this, you might want to reduce your number to the ones in the PZLDF case. How about you put your PZLDF monies toward persuading the Water Board to INCLUDE those houses across the street and along the creek? Now THAT would be useful!
And, would you really like to take those 1,100 homes out of the payment equation right now? Do you REALLY want to pay even MORE for this project?
Both the blog postings and the CSD meeting proper suffer from a high noise to signal ratio. The noise coming from those who like to repeat what they know best no matter how moot.
Magic lawsuits alluded to by GossipRelentlesslyOsos. The relevance of PZ borders that are not going to change at this point any more than STEP is going to rejoin the train from some siding still ahead. Water board actions leading to consequences that are still backfiring. Los Osos has been let down by many agencies, but what is still in our grasp, are the details. Question is; what details and are those details being addressed by public comment?
What is lost in the fog of war, is that the County R&C ordinance has some flaws that prior communication and coordination with LO’s primary water purveyor, may had avoided. This seems to be the comment that two directors were making, Ochylski and Kelly. I’m not sure if they saw the same things, but moving forward, it is the details of billing structure within the current ordinance, and how they relate to future command and control in managing the basin wide utilization patterns of the basin’s consumers, that matters (in my cursory review).
I didn’t do in depth analysis of the County materials. I SAW SOME PROBLEMS- The obvious need of the county to proceed with this funding mechanism- Not being one of them. Criticism that would be constructive should be in reach. Instead, we got the same old same old. The agency letting Los Osos down, this time, being -“public comment”.
So while I did mean it when I said ” there was good public comment at the meeting” , because there was some. This is just another instance of locally clichéd comment about the past once again swamping the entry of constructive criticism regarding current and likely conditions.
Toons:
"It's interesting how the Solutions Group TRIED to make that PZ boundary be less, and not sewer everyplace, yet they get NO praise for trying,"
Uh, They knew before the formation of the CSD that their "Plan" Was not going to work, they had in hand definitive studies that said their plan was not going to work, they had official letters from the RWQCB stating their plan was not going to work. Yet not once did they reveal any of that to the public before the vote to form the CSD happened.
"Cheaper,Better,Faster" LIE!
And you think they should be praised for "trying"?
LOL!
...just more blame and complain... if you really want to blame someone/thing, then move to the last group of failures and look straight at the CSD5 and their bald-faced lies to the community...
...bottomline, the County has the project and is moving forward inspite of the same tired old retoric from the same old parade of fools that this community is now laughing at...!!!!!
Mike Green - wasn't the Lisa Board praised for trying? $100 out of town - LIE! What information were they using to make that statement? Some old Ripley stuff? A pond out of town with a Step system? Not only was that NOT possible at that price, and the Lisa board KNEW THAT, but they lost control of the project altogether AND bankrupted the District! You can't vilify the Solutions Group then praise the Lisa Board for doing the same thing.
The spin now is "Great! It is out of town," never minding the blowback which is not mentioned. OR as they are wont to do now, they say that the County project will be cheaper - then when it suits their purposes - like the upcoming 218 - they say it will cost between $250-350 a month, clearly NOT cheaper! Can't have it both ways!
Interesting that information from the Water Board back then was not discovered by the "activists" as it is now. Now the letter barely makes it out of the Water Board office before one of the "activists" has a copy. Is that because no one was interested then - or that they really wanted a pond with Step, so to uncover a bad thing about the unreality of that just couldn't be looked for?
A is not B is not C
Not praising the solution group dose not equate to praise to the recall CSD.
Reading comprehension is a skill, and a reminder of what constitutes a logical fallacy is helpful.
I did not praise anyone, I laughed at your premise that the solution group deserved praise.
ROTFLMAO!
...or there never was such a letter...??? only spin by those who have never wanted any sewer in Los Osos...!!!
Mike, you are a sad individual. All the ??? and !!! and ...!!! just shows irrational thinking. What in the hell are you still fighting this fight for? I'm sure most of this town is resigned to this travesty being foisted on us. I know I am. It all seems to be out of our hands now and yet you're still throwing around B.S. like no sewer people, obstructionist, etc. Never was such a letter? Are you serious? And Sewertoons, take those 1100 houses out of the equation and the is no sewer. I can guarantee had the Internet and blogs been around back then in its current form, we would have known not to be bamboosled by the Solutions group.
Sincerely, M
Sad...???? Hardly..!!! Why are you so afraid of me...??? Because you are afraid I really represent a quiet majority of your neighbors who just want a sewer and to hell with all the posturing and meaningless parades....
I am very happy and loudly laughing at the fools who continue to blame and complain... Why should I back off this silly blog when it's so much fun holding a large mirror to your faces to expose your games and oh those tears because you haven't been able to stop the sewer... It's coming and I am enjoying watching and listening to you fools...!!!!
I do so hope you actually live long and in the PZ and that you grumble at the extrodinarily high sewer bill caused by obstruction of the legal sewer Plan we had in hand... By the time the County actually completes the project the cost will be much greater than had we completed the Tri-W facility...
Tri-W is dead and yet here you are still talking about it. At least I know i've moved along further than you have. Your joy at our plight shows me you will not be a part of this sewer. I know who you represent.
Sincerely, M
Toons .... Sorry, but repeating your very own words shouldn't be considered "name calling" should it?
Neither you nor I said it (PZ) was an appropriate line.
On Nov 17, 2010 you commented "People living on an acre or more are dealing with their waste in an appropriate way".
That was your reply to my comments about leach lines underwater along Willow Creek and who should pay.
My reply to you was "Hmmmm, so using your logic that is "appropriate".
So, go have a dirty grey goose martini and lighten up bit.
Spectator has decided NOT to protest the County and force another 218 vote. He will deal with his renters through a contractional relationship. This sewer has been a long time coming and will be of great benefit to the property owners of Los Osos who can afford it.
We will see if the county can take care of the affordability issues for those who claim they can't.
Mike is correct!
So Mike Green, you agree that the Lisa board deserves the praise it gets for moving it out of town?? Maybe as you are not here, you don't hear the talk on how that justifies the project now being out of town. I'm not saying we need to praise the Solutions Group, just that if you condemn them for "lying to the public" you also need to condemn the Lisa board for doing exactly the same thing.
M, just when was the PZ created? I983? And that is when we were supposed to get busy for a sewer to clean up the nitrates? And the homes went in AFTER the PZ was created? So had they not been built how does that mean — "And Sewertoons, take those 1100 houses out of the equation and the is no sewer." Please explain that logic.
FOG, I was referring to your "Never lost for words and using her intellectual fuzzy logic in the narrow sense, again."
I did not address your leach lines on Willow Creek. But you could educate me. How many, and are they really UNDER the creek? Sound like a wrong thing to me if lots of homes.
I'll throw an Alon quote in here from an old Cal Coast News blog. I believe that he is correct when he says,
"Willow Creek does;
1. Not recharge the aquifer.
2. Not receive even 10 percent of the Septic Field/pits output of the Prohibition zone."
I guess the point of complaining now is non-productive.
I prefer Absolute, but I just got home from Ralphs with a bottle of cheesy white, so I'm going for that. (Not the whole bottle mind you.) Skål!
"Toons:
"So Mike Green, you agree that the Lisa board deserves the praise it gets for moving it out of town?? Maybe as you are not here, you don't hear the talk on how that justifies the project now being out of town. I'm not saying we need to praise the Solutions Group, just that if you condemn them for "lying to the public" you also need to condemn the Lisa board for doing exactly the same thing."
I don't think there is much of any "praise" deserved on any side of this issue.
It's been one big clusterf##k since the beginning, and I'm quite pleased to be out of it.
Have a nice day.
OK fair enough. I hope that you do too. Hard not to be sucked into the other (and more palatable) aspects of this place.
Recently a Santa Barbara friend visited. When we showed him Hollister Peak, Montana de Oro, Sweet Springs, the Elfin Forest, and the gorgeous views to be had almost anywhere you stand, walk, or hike in this enchanted town he declared, "No wonder they want you out of here!!"
Toons ........ "complaining is no-productive"
Yes, Whining & Complaining ARGHHH.
Don't let the person's complaining get to you. Just think of yourself as a brick wall. Rubber balls bounce off brick walls.
So, you believe Willow Creek does not recharge the aquifer (which aquifer) because Alon said so!
Whilst I'm sure Alon knows one hell a lot more about our basin aquifer than I, perhaps you could offer this complainer something more substantial.
It would be most productive and interesting for folk to know just why miles of creek-bed that must produce a few "floatables" at wet times, somehow doesn't at least leach to the upper aquifer.
I am not sure, but hasn’t there been or is there looming a bankruptcy decision? Sitz Sez?
Those wise rental unit owners will negotiate with their rentees in advance, in order to assure stability in their future income stream.
The market will eventually punish those rental unit owners who try to pass through more of the sewer costs then IT can bear.
Some will become trapped. The market is determined in part by the rentals in the surrounding islands. Fixed and limited income Individuals who have a spare unit/ room not rented before, and have the ability/necessity to rent out a room, may end up doing so , driving up supply in that sector. But I defer to those with actual experience.
Given that cursory review of the ordinance, I suspect the uncertainty of detail (by the County) is reflective of the wisdom of flexibility. It is also indicative of ducks not currently being in a row.
The simplest pass- through “utilities” cost calculation for a landlord is to reach for the “Monthly” sewer services bill and identify those operations and maintenance charges, and the variable(?) volume charges. Then there is the cost of living in a sewered community. The consumption of sewer services is economically linked by this ordinance to water use. As I currently understand it this is a very (too) loose linkage.
In an ideal world the infrastructure improvements would translate into an increase (partial) of individual home owner equity. The operations and maintenance charges would have a variable component structured to economically incentivize conservation. The more directly linked “monthly” charges are to consumption, the more affective the communication, and the aggregate conservation takes place as an end result of individual economics.
So will a sudden decrease in flushes per capita decrease Sewer funding? That is a possible outcome of the direct water conservation, it (loss of income due to conservation) was discussed for water when the CSD determined water rate structure.
Forgive me all, for going soooo far off topic.
But I too am tired, and becoming more comfortable as a spectator.
Bev,
At least someone, your friend from out of town agrees with me.
It's nothing more than a "land grab" and they had to push a major public works project in order to do it.
Thank you Spectator for not protesting this 218. You are extremely smart and your wise choice should help influence those not sure of what to do.
Hi FOG,
OK, brick wall I can do. We both do need to keep our cool and TRY to NOT get carried away with our frustrations about all of this.
I just pulled out my binder with all the ISJ stuff in it. We had hoped a draft basin plan would have been out at the end of Dec., but it looks like spring now. I suspect there will be a LOT more info about all of this in that.
However, as time permits today, I will comb through what I have and see what is in there.
I suspect Alon didn't comment on this due to politeness which is commendable. I may have taken his quote of of context. We are all after the truth here, Alon knows more about this than I do, so when his energy is restored I hope he comes back.
Meanwhile I have a final project to work on in a class that I am taking. I will check back in when I can.
One can only wonder WHY a stranger in this land would "volunteer" (actually she said "declared") to Bev. De Witt-Moylan "No wonder they want you out of here!!"
Could it be because of the negative view of the world so publicly held by a retired judge who apparently only saw the negative side of life...???
It is curious that someone from Santa Barbara with it's large scale sewer could "declare" anything negative about Los Osos...unless given that impression from someone who apparently couldn't afford the affluence of SB and settled for a sand pile with not much of a Pacific view...and NO SEWER...
Curious, but we've come to expect that from Bev... negativity and indignation with a touch of sobery... just more hand wringing Bev...
Mike (Richard),
Are you just trying to keep Bev off this blog?
She only made an innocent comment for goodness sake!
Why do you like picking on women so?
...don't like them?
GRO... do YOU have reading comprehension...???
It figures that YOU can't read, no where do I or anyone else, say we were trying to keep Bev off this blog and certainly NOT "out of here"...!!!!
For a supposedly educated ex-judge, she simply shows a very negative attitude everywhere she pops up... Is that because she only judged the scum of the earth and can not really see the positive beauty all around her...???? WHY would some visitor "declare" ..."No wonder they want you out of here!!" Just what the hell kind of statement was that....??? It sure doesn't sound very positive...actually sounds contrived or phoney at best...!!! Perhaps Bev is wishing she would have settled in Santa Barbara with their working gravity
sewer...????
Perhaps it's just YOU with the negative outlook...!!!!!!! I'm sure that's not the first time you've been told that....!!!!
Cont---The creek bed(s) bottom is lined with clay, the best recharge areas for both aquifers identified are Los Osos (and possibly some Willow creek) BANKS. The context of recharge and the context of pollution are similar but different. The affect of having leach lines near the creek would be bacterial pollution at the creek mouth during wet weather and nitrates above background appearing in the wells nearest the creeks (dependant on depth of drilling, as you say “Which aquifer”). It remains that this project will not significantly alter pollution to the Bay. Perhaps if the basinwide approach was taken some somewhat significant affect could had been generated.
Ito lake is a lake because it too is lined with clay. Given that the creeks are the terminal ends of the “Perched” groundwater overflow they do collect from areas further away (In PZ) but they are also downhill of the “upper aquifer” – sorry Fog, getting confused as to what “upper aquifer” means- so I’ll end here.-Written before the raiders scored their first touchdown. Character limit at 1500?
word verification; nessciti
Thanks toons I like when You and others play nice, and fog and “M” do have good questions and statements. I’m tired , but still around. Funny; that I was bringing the context in, while you posted. I do hope that you don’t take what I say as gospel. Trust but verify, after all the drainage and roads comments are your responsibility. I have training coming in and I also have direct context for a lot of why people see things certain ways from what went on in the last 5 years. But the data is out there, so as long as a person doesn’t sole source their inputs…
So to recap-some pollution is not going to be addressed which is unfair, and some costs are not going to be fairly distributed which is unfair. The current and final outcome of an expensive project that does not maximize the physical recharge of the aquifer is criminal, IMO. And to quote Mike Green out of context “"praise" (Un)-deserved on any side of this issue.”
Thank you Toons and Alon.
Most informative explanation, with the clay layer so close to the surface in that area of the basin.
You're sure right Alon, some pollution is not going to be addressed.
With respect to the renter. I would think it to be almost certain that the basic fee will be passed on by the landlords, unless of course some rental control is given thought and adopted.
Thanks Alon, I do agree. You know a ton more about this than I, I'm glad that you came back. I have found very little on Willow Creek in my very small search this afternoon.
This is all that I found:
EIR
5_July2005SeaWaterIntrusionAssessment.pdf
Flow in the perched aquifer drains to Willow Creek and issues from seeps in the Oaks Preserve and along the banks of Los OsosCreek.
-------------------------------------
Los Osos Wastewater Project
Environmental Report April 2010
P 66
Groundwater in the perched aquifer rises in Willow Creek
and reportedly emerges as seeps in the Oaks Preserve and along the banks in the
lower reach of Los Osos Creek. See Exhibit 3.6-1, Los Osos Surface Water Features.
P 68
The Bayridge leach field would provide subsurface flows to Willow Creek to support existing willow riparian stands. New monitoring wells along with existing wells in the community will be used to track the movement and behavior of percolated water to maximize the efficiency
of the site.
---------------------------------------------
Perhaps if recycled water is put back into the ground at Willow Creek, the dirty stuff will be flushed out or diluted.
We need to look at the big picture. Is this project perfect? No. Should we stop this project to look for a better project? No.
FOG, you are welcome!
*****Wow! We are acting like grown-ups! :-) *********
Reposted from much earlier- My comment came about as Sarah Wan was being told by LOSG members that Willow Creek needed MORE Environmental mitigation due to a stated loss of 400-450 acre feet(?). wrong. The actual “Willow creek” labeled data was a catch all for all creeks including Los Osos Creek which is longer and joined into by willow creek. The outcome at that point COULD had been a direction by CCC for project waters to be sent down the creek for the wrong reason, wrong creek, or wrong location in the creek for recharge. Fortunately I think we are past that. I’d love to review ALL my assumptions, (10% could be 15%) but the EIR web –site is down right now. “Although Willow Creek is outside of the wastewater service area, so existing septic tanks and leach fields would remain, the Bayridge leach field would offset any losses of flow from nearby newly collected areas” –from the more recent NEPA documents, and available in project documents online.
Actually the two main clay layers " aquitards" are close to the surface in the east but the clay in the creek bottoms is "freshly" layed and thinner. there is a recharge zone on both sides of LO Creek. A picture would work best, since that was how I "got it"
My 6:35 posting described it a little better but disappeared, Fog. (you got the information from the second half)
And Mike; That’s unnecessary; I know you didn’t lose any sleep worrying about YOUR CDO notice.
Don’t fall for the misogyny troll’s baiting, though- Projection GRO’s old, (written earlier today and still true)
Pay attention; Person A is not Person B
As in “A”= “A retired Judge” and “B”=”Bev”
There is a lesson here for you, Mike while visions of ghosts of Christmases past dance in your head appreciate that some of your neighbors came to a different perspective. It’s a moccasin thing.
Shucks, dead link.
Xmas '06 scroll to
http://calhounscannon.blogspot.com/2006/12/blog-post.html
Sunday, December 24, 2006
. . . While Visions of Sugarplums Danced In Their Heads . . .
Fogswamp sez:"So, you believe Willow Creek does not recharge the aquifer (which aquifer) because Alon said so!"
Ah, but doesn't Willow Creek go into the Bay and haven't we been told over and over again that Los Osos septics are POLLUTING THE BAY? Or does Willow Creek flow uphill towards SLO?
Mike sez:"For a supposedly educated ex-judge,"
Bev is an ex-judge? This is reason 2,300,987 why I caution the reader about "Mike," and keep reminding them that Mike makes stuff up.
Alon sez:"It remains that this project will not significantly alter pollution to the Bay."
Gee, remember when folks were shrieking that Eeek! we're polluting the Bay and we'll all die like dogs?
And sez:" Perhaps if the basinwide approach was taken some somewhat significant affect could had been generated."
Ah, sadder words could not have been written . . . except for these, also by Alon:" So to recap-some pollution is not going to be addressed which is unfair, and some costs are not going to be fairly distributed which is unfair. The current and final outcome of an expensive project that does not maximize the physical recharge of the aquifer is criminal, IMO. And to quote Mike Green out of context “"praise" (Un)-deserved on any side of this issue.” Amen.
Mike (Richard),
Oh, so you'd like me to be "positive" while I'm being robbed by the County...
...okay...
Ann, FOGs topic on Willow Creek was about the leach fields, not what is in the creek itself.
As for "basinwide approach," please educate yourself on water law. You seem to think that the County can monitor wells on private property or tell private property owners what they can pump. No, the County can't.
GRO, you don't live or own property here - just how is it that you are being robbed?
Sorry I for some unknown reason keep blending Bev with Martha... both are negative hand-wringers, but this one was my mistake...
It is still incredulous that some visitor would volunteer the declaration supposedly made... I guess Bev must have lead the conversation that direction or just fabricated the comment... just another typical negative comment from someone who has tried to keep a sewer out of Los Osos...!!!
Lynette,
Okay. I don't live in Los Osos. You know it all, you're the expert on everything.
How can I argue with you?!
Ha. Ha.
Toonces sez:"Ann, FOGs topic on Willow Creek was about the leach fields, not what is in the creek itself."
Are you saying that leach fields do not leach into the creek basin and hence into the bay? I know in heavy rain, some of those folks back yards and leach pits/fields are under water and water tends to run
downhill.
Mike sez;"Sorry I for some unknown reason keep blending Bev with Martha... both are negative hand-wringers, but this one was my mistake..."
Either you don't know Bev from a hole in the wall (she's one of the least negative people I know) or, once again, YOU'RE MAKING STUFF UP. Jeeze, Mike. Clockwork. Just like clockwork.
Ann, what I did say about Willow Creek is that I could hardly find any reference to it other than a need to keep the water level up for riparian habitat. Where did you find data to support that the houses on Willow Creek HAVE leach fields/pits under the stream and where is the the data of their pollution? That would be a good place to direct this discussion. Are they 8-12+ houses per acre too?
Do you know of any group that is lobbying to include more of Los Osos in a mandate for a sewer (not this one)?
Someone in the neighborhood brought me what the 218 protesters are handing out door to door. Apparently they took the trouble to FILL IN YOUR APN NUMBER ON THE PROTEST POSTCARD that came along with their blurb on why you should protest!!!! (Needless to say, with a painted sign on the house that says Tornatzky, they did not deliver one here.)
All you need is a signature and a stamp.
Nowhere on here do I see any information about the possible fallout of this 218 NOT passing. Or that if there is another one, that they won't ask you to protest that one too for some other silly reason. Or thatIFthere is a miscalculation that it can be fixed before we need to pay anything on the service charge in 2014. Naturally they barely advertise who they are, just a name and an address to their office.
I hope people are not dumb enough to fall for this.
In real time; Gail just concluded, Linde is speaking, and Al who just one hour ago was sculling the Bay, is up on deck for the next BOS public Comments. We will know on the fourteenth.
If the R&C 218 fails, which I doubt, it will be in very minor part due to the County not anticipating issues in the "Work in progress". (Jon A. pointed out some of the ones I am in agreement with), and the level of organization and coordination achived by the "218 opposition" (for lack of a better, less loaded word).
The pre- filling of APN's is an indication of current good organization. Early in the process, forms went out that did not have an APN blank.
Given the pre-printing, The county will have to check if the names of owners actually match the APN number. You are right about the "what if" 2nd cycle, especially given "never say Never" since the thing most "wrong" remains $$$.
As for "dumb"- You and I and others have lived through the Los Osos Vietnam. There are a certain critical number of 218 eligable voters who do not have the background to assess their "Up or Down" decision.
All that, so that I can quote myself-"The lesson of Vietnam is that no one learned the lesson of Vietnam".
Here's an idea. What about if the County picked up the tab for the un-developed properties and then collected from them once permits were issued for them to be developed? Seeing as the County dropped the ball throughhout this fiasco, this would be one way for the County to rectify the situation. It makes so much sense i'm surprised nobody has thought of it before.
Sincerely, M
M, firstly the County is broke. Secondly, can you imagine the Supes (other than our Supe) explaining to their constituents how $27 million (like there is that much) that WAS going to go to THEIR districts, is now going to pay for undeveloped lots in LO?
Do YOU want to pay for the Naci pipeline? Sheesh. Why are you so special that you are entitled to what belongs to a citizen of Pismo?
Alon, thanks for the report. I hope a lot of people watch the BOS. Seeing who speaks ought to clue them as to whether or not to protest the 218.
M, why don't you blame the no-sewer people who stalled having one for 30 years for this high cost? Start with Bud Laurent perhaps?
It's nice that the "protest the 218" folks (read Step proponents) decided to give an average cost to the on-lot costs for the gravity laterals.
It is interesting that they made no such estimates for the on-lot STEP costs (read-"out of pocket" pay with your credit card or a bank loan) which would have topped these costs by a mile. I kept wanting them to address that concern but they never did.
Sewertoons, I blame all the agency's that have had their hand in this. There are no "no sewer people". There are however, individuals and groups that have had there own agenda to profit from a sewer. You say the County is broke, yet us 4500 property owners can afford 27 million? I am frankly quite tired of you laying blame entirely on us 4500 property owners in the PZ. I am even more tired of your rhetoric.
Sincerely, M
M, my advice to you is don't read what I write.
There are no-sewer people; they are the ones that claim no one has proved that we are polluting, therefore we don't need one.
I am not blaming the 4500, but the people who have obstructed a sewer, be they citizens or elected officials, which has driven this cost up so high.
I have to say that I almost agree with a point M just made... "What about if the County picked up the tab for the un-developed properties and then collected from them once permits were issued for them to be developed?"
Actually, that is done in most water line projects in rural areas... In reality, the property owners wanting to connect, pay the whole tab and then as infill properties want to connect, they pay for the original installation (at today's $$$ per installed foot across the front of their property) AND any street crossing and connect charges... The original property owners who paid are then reimbursed... I'm sure there are legal reasons why the County can't play banker with this sewer... I'm also sure this has already been discussed in the engineering & financing of the project... It just seems that the vocal mob nitpiking every step are probably the reason the County is playing close to the vest...
This is a huge public works project, not some simple septic tank management scheme... Too bad the parade can't hold their breath for a year and let the County do it's job...
But hey, I am still for a small scale treatment system (one that would actually pass all the permit requirements and hold down construction in LO), you guys are much smarter than any one you disagree with, but you got your sewer out of town... ka-ching...
"…the vocal mob nitpiking every step are probably the reason the County is playing close to the vest..."
Hi Mike, yes, that and the fact that the County is the only real hope of the CSD emerging from this bankruptcy. The County already is poised to buy the trash franchise - but I think it will have to pony up even more if this is going to work. They are already in the hole for the pre-CSD project and they have been treated horribly by the sewer-nuts. I am just now paused on watching today's BOS parade of 218 protesters.
You know there is something in the old adage, "don't bite the hand that feeds you." I think LO has gnawed off that hand up to the elbow. But I have only been here 5 years.
Toons .... You blurted out "where did you find the data that ...houses along Willow Creek Have leach/pits under the stream"?
Your statement speaks volumes of your knowledge of the area along Willow Creek during the wet season, or probably the dry season table level in said area.
FOG, where are you getting your data?
I just finished watching today's BOS comments. Clearly the 218 protest for some (most) speakers was to get Step back on the table.
Al said 2 different things - there were 2 lawsuits - one at the CCC and one against the rates & charges, and then he said, there will be lawsuits.
Toons You ask "where did you get your data?"
Well, iIt's common knowledge to most folk with an open mind and good eyesight during the wet season.
Do you need "data" to tell you it's raining, or the creek rises when it rains, or that water runs downhill when it rains?
I have drilled many fence post holes in that area in June and the water (table) came into the hole. We just dropped the post in and added a bag of dry cement. Nature took care of the rest.
"Well, iIt's common knowledge to most folk with an open mind and good eyesight during the wet season."
OK, how did the nitrate tests go with that water?
Post a Comment