Friday Round-Up: Back to 2005
Posted on 03. Apr, 2009 by Aaron in Uncategorized
On Monday, I saw former CSD board member Lisa Schicker at the Farmer’s Market in Los Osos. She appeared in good spirits as she shook the hands of her remaining supporters. I have to admit, I was agitated after seeing her. I tried not to scoff or to leave the impression that I was dismayed, but deep down inside, I felt a sense of betrayal. I couldn’t possibly imagine shaking her hand and smile sincerely after what she and the other board members did.
I’ve talked about my disappointment before, but after discovering that the Coastal Commission expressed preference for the Tri-W (mid-town) site, I felt that she and the post-recall board took their base astray by endorsing AB2701 and being a part of the bill’s constructive process without ever taking progressive initiatives to build a wastewater project in their power.
In 2005, I joined them and their supporters in an effort to build a sustainable, affordable wastewater solution out of town instead of the project that sounded environmentally and economically disastrous in theory only to have the same project basically come right back to the same location. Every individual on that board, the post-recall board, thought that they were doing was best in their viewpoint, but that’s a cynical euphemism for running on their own mission, their own agenda.
Because the board did not deliver on their campaign promises, many members of the community gathered to swoon at the County’s feet, looking for answers out of desperation and exasperation, but then the tone gradually became fixated on looking out for the needs of the county more than the community, looking out for number one more than the 5,000 homeowners affected by the design and construction of what many see to be a much-needed wastewater project. It’s the NIMBY principle. While that attitude is something I don’t think is going to make friends and mend fences, it’s understandable.
Some portray the County process as being a critical success and exceedingly fair. The County’s presentation has been the most comprehensive assessment of a Los Osos wastewater treatment facility to date along with a plethora of personalized analysis. But some may portray the process as flawed and biased and that, too, is a reasonable assessment. I’ve found that the County harnessed the power of people’s exasperation by going with the project that is the fastest to get off the ground without working with STEP/STEG manufacturers and proponents to address the flaws in their system.
Unlike most of the sewer-savvy community, the County did not have any conflicting interests. County engineers endorsed gravity collection as the best solution for Los Osos while briefly citing STEP/STEG’s flaws, but it’s been part of the plan since the Board of Supervisors accepted responsibility for the design, construction and temporary operation of the wastewater treatment project, leaving one to wonder whether the alternatives ever had a fighting chance and whether Carollo really vetted the alternatives that could have been viable solutions. We may be left at the wondering stage, but it may be best to leave it at that.
Ideally, we could have our septic tanks tested for confirmation of excessive pollution discharge, we could look at every new technology that’s available, we could sue the water board, but it all costs money… lots of money, time and tears. The window of opportunity to go through all the legal motions and remedies closed after AB2701 was chaptered into law. However, I believe that there are ways of seeking affordability. For instance, if it comes to gravity at mid-town, there are chances that we could get federal stimulus money in order to reduce the monthly costs even more. Personally, I’ve always felt that the County should push to have everyone in the district pay for the sewer and lower the monthly costs that way.
In any event, it appears that the clock is turning back to 2005 and many of those that supported the recall — while some had good intentions — did not unite behind a specific solution for Los Osos and we, the taxpayers, have been paying the price for it. What we’re seeing now is the by-product of inaction and confusion. The process is undoubtedly imperfect and contentious, but this is what happened when our district and the proponents of the post-recall board failed to show results.
The problem with the County opposition is that they do not have a united front. Everyone is going a different direction, trying to find loopholes and insignificant nuances without looking at the bigger picture. I’ve been critical of the opposition’s handling of the LOWWP since the recall. It is my belief that we would definitely have a sustainable, affordable, green project if that was the goal all along. I commend the Los Osos Sustainability Group for trying to fight for that goal, but if they arrived on the scene sooner (and by soon, I mean about a decade earlier), their words, thoughts and ideas would hold more weight.
No matter how popularly accepted the County process is, the County can never heal the wounds that citizens of Los Osos have given to each other for 30 years. It’s easy to say, “Just get over it,” but it’s harder to actually do that yourself.
Because of the process, I have seen the best in people in terms of their pleasantly extensive knowledge of the subject. I have also seen the absolute worst in people as they evoke vast misconceptions, falsehoods, threats of Joey Racano-style civil disobedience (“I’m going to tie myself to the Tri-W fence if the sewer is built here!”), lawsuits etc. After a while, it becomes a giant headache.
And finally, I’m going to lay my cards on the table…
I am not in favor of a gravity system, but I am also concerned about the STEP/STEG system. Conceding to the fact that I am not a wastewater expert, I decided that I will not advocate for any system. I believe the process has been technically sound, but politics has played a part in making the process seem more jaded and biased.
Is it my job to rewrite the process and/or sue the County to adhere to my personal wants and needs? No. Is it important to be critical of the process? Absolutely. We need to be. We can be critical without filibustering a potentially promising process.
47 Responses to “Friday Round-Up: Back to 2005”
Leave a Reply
- Maria Kelly: Los Osos Water Witch Bitches Again
- Los Osos Animosity
- Los Osos: Getting Stronger When Focused
- Pitiful Criticism of Schicker in New Times
- Friday Round-Up: Back to 2005
- Robert: Aaron is right on the money. Los Osos is getting s...
- susan: Type your comment here......
- Julie: Excellent points Aaron. The Trib just wants to se...
- Liza Klump: I don't think LAPD, Ventura PD or even Simi PD wou...
- David Duggan: 54950. The people of this State do not yield their...
News From The ROCK
- 'Reclamator' Man Sues Everybody
- COASTAL COMMISSION HAS MORE ‘SUBSTANTIAL ISSUES’ WITH SEWER PROJECT THAN COUNTY ADMITS
- County’s Omissions, Gaps and Lies Force Coastal Commission Hearing on Unresolved Sewer Issues
- COUNTY’S SEWER PROJECT TIMELINE DELAYED MONTHS
- ARE YOU HAVING SEWER PROBLEMS???
- ‘PROHIBITION ZONE’ FEVER GRIPS MALIBU
- The Freestyle Magic of Tokyo Joe’s Sushi
Anonymous
03. Apr, 2009
Aaron
I expect that your opinions will change with experience. When MWH’s bid is accepted with no cap on costs, the flaws in the project will be exposed. We will be unable to do anything at this point, but suck up the additional expenses needed to remedy these flaws. This is the plan. You may not understand now, but I will plan on costs far above the initial bid.
Paavo is not a friend of LO. Paavo only cares about Paavo. He works for MWH. He has had his sticky fingers in this project for a long time. When you are a bit older you will learn to look beyond the sincere words and to sense the lies.
The people who have lived through the past manipulation and deceit have been labeled as obstructionists by political forces spreading hate and divisiveness throughout our community. The behavior-based marketing succeeds again and even you now believe their carefully designed version of history. And once again the promised fair and honest process has been derailed.
Aaron
03. Apr, 2009
Hi Anonymous,
Just a few things.
I’m aware of what MWH is capable of and where Paavo Ogren’s allegiance lies. Trust me, I’ve worked on The ROCK. The research is there.
I completely understand where you’re coming from and I agree fundamentally with what you’re saying. I feel that it’s come down to diplomatic strategy now.
I think you picked up on a sense of hopelessness in my post; raising the white flag of surrender. I know a few people have already replied with a “Huh?” but I’m going for a balance of objectivity here — and it is heartbreaking.
Keep in mind one thing and that’s the fact that I never told people to stop fighting. We can make it work.
Sewertoons
04. Apr, 2009
Hi Aaron,
Thought I’d come up here to answer and say thank-you for your very thoughtful and rational Friday Round-Up and your very balanced posting on the other thread, too. I appreciate them both. I disagree with the Paavo part though. For just a moment step into his shoes and see what he faces. And it is a good exercise to step into anyone else in the County’s shoes to see their perspective. I run into an interesting range of opinions there. I will be happy to e-mail you later, but I will start here.
Well, I politely wish to add more to the step/steg discussion. I think the County’s problem with it is the easement issue. Step/steg works. I thought the County did too good of a job in evaluating it – because I don’t want that thing in my yard – it came off sounding like a very good system to me. Sure, the main physical problem appears to be the leakage in the connection the house – but that is pretty minor. They really didn’t show any flaws in how the thing works. But I think there are people who absolutely will not allow, under any circumstances, an easement onto their property. Other than eminent domain, and the County would really rather not go there, there is no way to make a person to do it. The court process would hold up the entire WWTF. I also fear with a lot of the shoddy construction around here, yes, I am raising my house’s hand, and some of the older houses, there would be a lot of cost issues for people to upgrade their electrical connections. Driveway replacement is another major expense. I can’t cite the reference, and it is not a reason given in the April 7 BOS LO Update, but putting it in the roadway to avoid the easement issue is not feasible in some streets that are simply too narrow.
I was, (in 2005 and 2006 – before my personal dissolution of the CSD involvement), willing to go along with the “new” board because I realized the job needed to get done – even if it wasn’t going to be what I wanted – gravity. But when their bungling became so apparent, I said ENOUGH and wanted them out and the CSD done with before the costs went up. It didn’t seem like this town had enough responsible grown-ups to have one. (I do NOT feel that way now.)
The County seems to be caught between a rock and a hard place – they prefer out of town, but major regulators want more studies and all kinds of conditions. In-town has been poisoned no matter how many of the time-eating problems and conditions it would address. Don’t know what will happen. I’m only 99% certain it will be tertiary wherever it goes, tho.
If you get a chance, view Mark Hutchinson’s presentation to LOCAC on Channel 20. It was really excellent in its clarity – if not brevity, due to the complexity of the subject matter!
See you at the WRAC tomorrow?
Anonymous
04. Apr, 2009
Sewertoons
When the Ripley Team gave a presentation at the community center years ago, I asked team members about the concerns you mentioned, and was given very real possible resolutions for every problem. You see, this team was creative, easily able to think outside the box, something that terrifies the county, Corrollo, and MWH. So instead of using this project to move into the future, we are being dragged into the past.
The world is moving on whether on not we climb on board. We will suffer for our choices.
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
I guess that the problem is that all the experts who have already rendered an opinion are “biased” so we shouldn’t hire them … but there are no experts left who haven’t already been hired by one group or another to study Los Osos.
Richard LeGros
04. Apr, 2009
Having been through the process before, I can say with certainty that the County will never get a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission for the Turri Road WWRP. Never.
At this time, I do not have any idea how long the County will continue down the dead-on-arrival Turri Road project; or what the final project will look like.
The agencies from which the County needs to acquire permits have made it very clear that they will condition (sandbag) the project with features not yet incorporated into the County’s WWTP; hence we can expect atleast four years of delay along with drastically rising costs.
For example, the CCC has stated that they expect the County to incorporate ALL of the conditions of the prior project. To name just a few big ticket items, the County must include a Habitate Conservation Plan; and a method of balancing the upper aquifer on both sides of the inferred fault in order to maintain existing wetlands. Also, the USFW and th CCC concur that the County’s project may not use Broderson for project mitigation and expect greater than 1:1 ratio of mitigation.
Will the County end back at Tri-W. Maybe; but not as long as the County holds to the false belief that the community (read a majority of the property owners who pay for the project) will reject it.
To be blunt, Los Osos is screwed; and there is nothing we can do about it.
Expect that there will not be an operational project before 2016.
Expect costs to be between $300 to $400 per month; maybe higher if the WWTP is the vehicle to pay off the LOCSD bankruptcy.
For those that decide to stay in Los Osos, better start planning now to figure out a way to pay for the project.
For those that are not willing or able to pay the costs, you have a window of atleast 5 years to plan your move.
I do mean to sound bleak; nor am I being an alarmist. I am being realististic.
-R
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
Richard,
You seem to be saying that Ron should start two new series of articles, one on why the County should know, in advance, that their proposed location is DOA and one on the multiple ways the post-recall board mistakes have ruined the lives of many in Los Osos.
Anonymous
04. Apr, 2009
Richard – Thank you for your informative comments. When do you think the actual asessments (monthly payments will start)
Richard LeGros
04. Apr, 2009
Hi Anon above,
You already are paying $256 per year ($21.34 per month) on your property taxes for the 2002 assessment bond for the old project; and have been since Decemeber, 2003. You will continue to pay on that bond until 2032.
You will start paying on bonds the County sells sometimes in 2010; the exact dollar amount to be determined by the dollar amount of bonds sold; but paying $250 to $420per year ($23 to $35 per month) would not be unreasonable to plan for.
However, after they sell all voter-approved donds totaling $125,000,000, at current 30 year rates you would be looking at +/-$1600 per year ($134 per month).
As for paying monthly costs for a County’s project for Operations, Maintence and Replacement and monthly costs for a new State SRF loan, I do not expect such payments to start unitl after 2016(after the County Project is built and operational).
My guestimate of what the final cost of the County’s project (assuming they do not change their policies and restart the Tri-W project ASAP) will be $225,000,000 to $275,000,000.
-R
Richard LeGros
04. Apr, 2009
Hi Sharkinlet,
Those are great (and current) feature stories for a journalist to undertake.
Those stories could be taken up by Ron…
…Oh!, I forgot…Ron is not a journalist.
Never mind.
-R
Aaron
04. Apr, 2009
I did not make it to the WRAC. However, I’ve been watching the presentation on TV this morning.
One thing has been on my mind lately: is it possible for manufacturers of STEP/STEG to remedy the downsides, the flaws as presented in the tech memos? Is there a way to seek a compromise?
People say, “Gravity has x amount of problems,” and, “STEP/STEG will always have x amount of flaws,” but there has been no discussion on the County’s end to suggest workarounds. The discussion has always been left at, “This is the way things are whether you like it or not.”
As far as Paavo is concerned, I know he was once interim GM of the Los Osos CSD at one point so it’s hard not to say that he has some sort of vested interest in the previous project. Secondly, as I’ve stated before, Paavo has answered the same questions differently so his reliability is questionable.
As far as being in the County’s shoes, I would have conducted business very differently and would have not gone with Carollo. I would have consulted with independent engineers who would not have ties to previous LOWWP solutions just so the analysis is balanced.
I would also have a site that is organized using plain language. There would be sections based on each wastewater treatment and collection system and each page would be organized like a California sample ballot including the arguments for and against the system. I would make the process transparent by having community members publicize comments in the same style as the Blogger comments, but they would be moderated for quality assurance (you won’t see comments like, “I hate Gravity! I hate STEP/STEG!”).
I could go on and on, but I believe the County could have had a much more transparent, open-ended process that uses innovative thinking and technology to make their message more thorough and unbiased. Perhaps in the future, the County will know what to do — maybe once my generation comes into power.
Anonymous
04. Apr, 2009
Thanks Richard for the $$$ info. Finally, a clear answer about costs past and future!
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
I thought the county was after SRF money.
Lately there is stimulus money.
Are these funding avenues dependent upon a bond stength rating?
How does the county’s current budgetary shortfall issues impact upon its rating?
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
-However, the costs provided in the comment are incomplete regarding what is and is not included.
- Costs provided in the comment, although incomplete as to the details of what is and is not included, are consistent with the cost ranges referenced to “page 454” (page 7-47 table 7-7).
The “process” never included “significantly less expensive technology”, like small diameter grinder pump and vacuum.
When you “only” compare STEP/STEG to Gravity one can easily write: “there is no information specific to the Los Osos application”- because the company hired by the county never did any.
From Page 945 of the DEIR Response to Comments
AIRVAC, Dean K. Ouellette, January 30, 2009 (Letter P50)
Response to Comment P50-1
This comment and those following describe an alternative wastewater collection technology. While the comment and its attachments provide a good overview of the technology, the various statements regarding the superior nature of the system are necessarily generic. Although the technology appears to be a good fit in some installations, as described in the literature, there is no information specific to the Los Osos application. However, the project selection process through the Design/Build Request for Qualifications was specifically designed to elicit alternative technology proposals. However, the costs provided in the comment are incomplete regarding what is and is not included. Also see Topical Response 5, Alternative Collection Systems.
From Page 305 of the DEIR Response to Comments
ECOfluid, Mark Low, January 14, 2009 (Letter P07)
Response to Comment P07-1
The comment describes an alternative wastewater treatment technology; while the comment and attachments provide a good overview of the technology, the various statements regarding the superior nature of the system are necessarily generic and not fully supported. While the technology appears to be a good fit in some installations, as described in the literature, there is no information specific to the Los Osos application. However, the project selection process through the Design/Build Request for Qualifications mentioned in the comment was specifically designed to elicit alternative technology proposals. Costs provided in the comment, although incomplete as to the details of what is and is not included, are consistent with the cost ranges referenced to “page 454” (page 7-47 table 7-7).
Who thinks that any short listed Design/Build company would spend 2 minutes trying to convince the agency, who handed them a RFP asking for a gravity collection system and a BIO-Lac™ treatment for secondary water, to use any other technology? What would be the motivation?
If the county’s consulting engineer didn’t review, study and report on it, the winning bidder “probably” won’t offer it. Why would they?
Design Build?
We shall see.
Anonymous
04. Apr, 2009
Some very interesting questions presented at WRAC. Unfortunately Paavo preformed his usual dance around the issue, never really answering the question. He did seem to be sweating a bit more than usual.
The real question is whether the problems are sorted out before or after Paavo has commited us to his “politically preferred” project.
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
Mark,
The job of convincing the County and prospective bidders is yours. You appear to have failed in your job.
Why do you want government to now waste our time and money by revisiting your proposed “solution” which appears to have been incomplete?
Frankly, when you tell us that your solution is far better and cheaper than other possible choices, it makes me hesitant because you’ve lied to us before about the health of the aquifers in the Phoenix area and you’ve also been unable to convince any other reasonably sized town (read “more than 10,000″) to buy your services.
If you really had the ability to provide help as you say, you would have references from comparable communities. That you don’t shows you are a Pied Piper, with nothing of value to offer.
Sewertoons
04. Apr, 2009
The costs on vacuum were only kept down by the number of houses – two, three or four on a single vacuum pit. This would not go in the right of way, but on private property. I suspect most property owners would object, as the property value would be lessened on the “chosen” property. So without these cost savings – as described by the manufacturer – it does not save money.
The problems as “solved” by Ripley did not give him the confidence to do an RFQ for step apparently. He was in attendance at the WRAC meeting today. Disheartened no doubt by the WRAC’s not giving step a thumbs up. I guess all the big mouths who claimed that they could save money with their technology couldn’t put their money where their mouths were.
I have heard that we are at the very top of the list for SRF money.
Anonymous
04. Apr, 2009
Toons
People who have preferences and opinions that are different from yours are labeled as “big mouths.” That cracks me up coming from you!!!
Ed
04. Apr, 2009
Richard’s comments are interesting.
“Expect costs to be between $300 to $400 per month; maybe higher if the WWTP is the vehicle to pay off the LOCSD bankruptcy.
What I draw from this is that practically NO ONE in LO can afford the County’s project … not the poor, not the middle class, not even those who THOUGHT they were well enough off before, but now have to THINK again.
Not even Paavo knows how high costs will go … especially when you start with the most expensive project, a blank check and somebody else’s money. One thing for sure: costs will keep ramping up every year, year after year.
Will you be here?
How many of us can confidently say we will still be standing here … cool as a cucumber, not sweating dollar bills in 2014 or 2016? If many or any of us are still here at all. So get your tickets now for the reunion ball in 2020 … while tickets are cheap.
The County’s process is more punitive than curative, the chemo worse than the cancer … the solution worse than the pollution the megasewer will be built to allegedly eliminate … in 45 years … when birds finally stop flying, cows stop crying and plants stop dying. PZ homeowners are no less guilty or innocent than the birds, cows and plants. We in the PZ are only being taxed because we can’t fly and are more easily caught on the ground.
Why pay a $275 million plumbing bill to fix a problem of assumed but unknown proportions that might only cost $125 million to make go way? Fewer might have to leave if we actually knew, not guessed, at the actual size and scope of “the problem.” The County has failed to do the due diligence to support the “facts” that support their trail of broken promises leading back to Montgomery Watson Harza as the only game in town.
There’s got to be some real-time numerical relationship between project and people that presently does not exist in “the process.” There is no such cause-and-effect relationship of humans to dollars in play here. It certainly exists, whether the County ignores it or not. Especially since it’s the poor PZ’ers who have been unfairly targeted to pay the big property tax bill, while the general community enjoys the benefits.
“For those that decide to stay in Los Osos, better start planning now to figure out a way to pay for the project.
“For those that are not willing or able to pay the costs, you have a window of at least 5 years to plan your move.”
And don’t let the Los Osos Bear smack you on the butt on your way out of town!
Anonymous
04. Apr, 2009
At this point we are all concerned about the cost and need to make plans. As much as I enjoy and admire your commentary Ed, it isn’t going to make the costs go away. I’ve lived long enough to know that much. We are caught in an extremely unfortunate situation. At what point are we willing to compromise? We “newlyweds” bought our home here in 1992 and we were told the sewer and associated costs were coming. Seventeen years later we are still dealing with this! Let the county build it or else the costs will go up again. That is the reality of it. If you keep putting it off it will get worse. More people leaving. More gentrification. Most expensive sewer in the U.S. or in the whole world? Take your pick.
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
Ed,
Your outrage at Richard seems misplaced. He seems to be one of the few people in town who was wise enough to oppose the formation of the CSD and oppose the recall.
Did you oppose the recall?
Unless you can say that you actively campaigned against the recall, you are more to blame for any costs in excess of of $200/month than Richard is and you probably ought to apologize. At least he was able to achieve a cap on our monthly cost by getting a project to the construction stage.
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
Lynette,
Can you please point us to the County Low Pressure Collection Tech Memo that contains detailed the Vacuum collection information you are quoting from?
The one I linked up has the word Vacuum written only once in relation to STEP collection:
3.2 Similar to STEP Collection
• Limited dewatering is required in low-lying areas. This water may require treatment
or other special handling.
• Odors may be released at high points where vacuum/air release valves are required
and may require treatment.
Lynette,
Why wasn’t Vacuum Collection was not reviewed, studied or reported on in the County’s process?
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
Lynette,
Where are you getting your SRF Loan infrmation from?
It would be interesting if you and your source can actually predict the order in which funds are applied for and then dispersed.
Has the County applied for the funds yet?
MIKE thinks they will be selling bonds.
Then there is always the shovel ready stimulus money.
None of these changes the cost based on technology that was never reviewed, studied or reported.
The sad thing is that you are “good with it.”
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
Lynette,
Why wasn’t Vacuum Collection reviewed, studied or reported on in the County’s process?
Why are you trying to spin on it now all by yoursel with no county documentaion to back you up?
Why are you trying so hard to bury Los Osos?
When are we going to hear more about Mr. Dean “I forgot his last name”?
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
Mark,
I’m sorry … if you request ‘Toons provide documentation to back up her point of view, you should at least justify your claim that the Phoenix metro area doesn’t take more water out of their aquifer than they put back into it via various recharge methods.
Until you do that you have no right to demand anything from her or anyone else who actually lives in Los Osos.
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
Steve,
Phoenix is not in over draft and you know it.
Why can’t you admit that I am correct and you are not?
Of course you can continue in your rhetoric, it’s fun and good entertainment.
Just spin baby! But remember, Phoenix is not in over draft.
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
Mark,
Yet again you claim that the Phoenix area is not in overdraft but your state government claims otherwise.
Could you please clarify … are you a moron or an liar? Those of us who live in Los Osos aren’t really sure whether you are an idiot or a weasel.
Watershed Mark
04. Apr, 2009
BWAhahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Phoenix is NOT in over draft and that’s the truth!
Why not give them a call on Monday Steve.
Water is a very special world as you are beginning to find out.
Ed
04. Apr, 2009
Shark,
Whoa there on the “outrage” stuff! WHAT are you talking about? You are the only one who could possibly read it that way. I am giving Richard his props and agreeing with him on his assessment. Read again. You are attacking your own mouth with your own feet. Please stop when you get to your socks.
Ed
Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener)
04. Apr, 2009
Ed,
My bad. Apologies.
The don’t let the door hit you on the ass comment along with Mark’s idiot behavior sort of colored my attitude.
A re-read makes clear your point.
Ed
04. Apr, 2009
Shark,
No problem. That last line could be misconstrued as directed at Richard. It wasn’t.
To Anonymous Reader,
I would agree with you except that it already is “much worse” than it ever was, so it can only get much worse, which is why these are the last of the good old days.
The County isn’t going to brake for me, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be held accountable for how they fill in a blank check drawn at gunpoint. They want to fill it in for the highest amount. Why? That’s not consistent with what we know — and the BOS should know — about the economy … the new administration in Washington … and Los Osos’ recession inside of a recession.
If you’re concerned about costs and making plans, well so am I, obviously. Not one thing I write or say is going to cost you or your family one dime more, that I can guarantee. There are not too many people still working in the Department of Lost Causes these days.
What it will cost you, though, is what you’ll have to pay in the future for surrendering to the will of the County, no matter what it may cost you, not them. Even that attitude of yours will cost you. It’s an open invitation to jack up the price.
Try saying this on Tuesday: “Excuse me, Mr. Supervisor, but The Most Expensive Project isn’t exactly what we’re looking for today, the economy and all. Do you happen to have something in a beige or off white … that does the same job?”
All they can do is say “no,” tell you to shut up, that it’s a frequently heard assertion and unsubstantiated claim previously dismissed as hearsay, that your three minutes of public comment has been cut down to two or one — and we’re going to do whatever we’re going to do anyway…”
Believe me, they’ve already made up their minds, 5 to 0.
So don’t worry about me talking up the bill by talking about affordability when everyone knows affordabiity died of an overdose at the BOS.
Besides, like I said, nobody is listening to a word I say anyway.
Nobody.
Sewertoons
05. Apr, 2009
Anon. April 4, 2009 4:17 PM’
I I was referring to Ripley and Orenco and the AirVac guy, not members of the community. They were the ones who could have assembled teams and answered the RFQ. They didn’t. Much like wsm, who couldn’t even submit the information the County wanted to them.
Sewertoons
05. Apr, 2009
Ed, ALL of the projects are expensive. Cheap left the station back in 1983. I wasn’t here, but I guess we can thank Bud Laurent for that.
Re-bidding Tri-W with some competition seems like the cheapest plan now if we can get the water purveyors to deal with the tertiary water. We have the land for the plant. We have the collection system and the plant design – paid for – a smaller parcel could be bought out of town for spraying tertiary Title 22 water until the purveyors get their act together. Politically that is asking for trouble of course.
Shark, it is shameful how he has treated you. Thank you for explaining my position to him. I do have the information, it is available online, but as he is lazy – and deprived us of his wonderful technology due to his laziness – I decline to state where.
Ed
05. Apr, 2009
Toons,
Maybe “cheap” left the station long ago and “cheaper” not too long after that, but not CHEAPEST.
We will likely never know CHEAPEST.
The County has made sure of that. Couldn’t stand the competition, I guess.
The County outright lied to the community when they promised a co-equal analysis on a level playing field blah blah blah and all that baloney. Never happened.
What a waste of $7 million in hard taxpayer dollars when they knew back in June 2006 and all along it was going to be gravity. I’m not the one surprised.
I documented it all in The Rock back then, but others were talking faster and louder that the County would “do the right thing” in the end…
And it did or didn’t depending on who’s talking, right?
Those that fell for McPherson’s “Trust the County” campaign seem the most upset today. They believed her when she said, “Go to the BOS, tell them, they will listen to you.” And: “The best technology will rise to the top.” Meaning something other than gravity, when she knew all along it was going to be gtravity?
The County didn’t “do the right thing” at all by abandoning the cost competition they promised, and it may cost them. Eliminating STEP was the only way to guarantee corrupt MWH two seats at the head of the table, to feed the taxpayer-eating, corporate-government family the County has married into with Carollo and MWH.
No, CHEAPEST hasn’t left the station, and it NEVER WILL.
You have to arrive at the station before you can leave it, and the CHEAPEST train never even made it into the station. Sidetracked to fix the race.
Now you’re going to get a big crowd of angry STEPPERS at the BOS on Tuesday.
As for Tri-W, that’s the trip-wire right there. It’s the one and only cause that could possibly unite the various “opposition” tribes and subtribes usually content to fight each other all day long. Yup, that’s trouble all right, trouble with a capital “T” and that stands for Tri-W.
That’s when the lawyers will show up. You’ll recognize them. They’ll be the only ones smiling.
Anonymous
05. Apr, 2009
If the County has been paying any attention they would realize that going back to TRIW is can-o-worms with a major W. Toons and all of you folks…don’t go there. This community has voted over and over to get this project out of town. You want to see 2005 all over again? Maybe if you haven’t lived here very long you don’t know how deep it goes. If you want TRIW then you may spend your precious retirement years in court.
Anonymous
05. Apr, 2009
Sorry Ed, but i am a dreamer (but certainly not a Dreamer) Although I have no faith in Gibson, I think that some of the others are starting to see the light. Remember that they all appoint members to WRAC and the Planning Commission.
WRAC did not give the project a stamp of approval. Unfortunately the most negative comment came from a member who cited the survey as her reason for wanting only gravity evaluated. Since the public was only allowed to make comments directly related to the water, there was no immediate opportunity to educate her. The task force they are setting up can make sure that this occurs. And maybe Maria can also get an education, as she clearly displayed her ignorance with the tertiary issue.
The Planning Commission is going to be a tough sell for Paavo. They will not accept his lies at face value. They are going to want the truth. They take their job very seriously.
But the BOS could ignor the adice, and then we will get a another lawsuit. I wish we would just complete an honest process. Then we really could “just get it done”
Sewertoons
05. Apr, 2009
I’m not going “there.” Even if Tri-W is cheapest, I don’t think we are going there. Cheapest be damned when you have a position to defend!
Anon 6:38, the WRAC has very little time to get anything before the Planning Commission. The community said NO to step, so why should they waste their time on that? Think the Supes didn’t hear that? It isn’t a water issue at least according to the Peer Review. Both systems are equal. Paavo said to the WRAC, “you’d need to tie it to water issues.” Are you going to dis that report because you disagree with it?
PS, People I know that were adamant about out of town now are fine with Tri-W if it is cheaper and can be permitted again. Water stays over the basin and all. Oh, and Tri-W has been litigated to death. Not much left to go to court with. Just the time it takes to toss it out of court.
The Planning Commission saw all of the sites. One of the planners asked another planner “- what’s wrong with this site? – Isn’t it just political?”
Sewertoons
05. Apr, 2009
Ed, the price in 1983 was around $40! Isn’t THAT cheap enough?
Anonymous
05. Apr, 2009
Does anyone who is familiar with the results of the community survey know what the respondents said about location? It seems clear that people prefer gravity…what about the location?
Sewertoons
05. Apr, 2009
For theassessment group, the preferred location was out of town – 58% ranking it #1, 26% making it their #2 choice for a total of 84%. Edge of town got 26% rated first and 61% out of town #2, for a total of 87%.
The reply of theassessment group as to cost on the treatment technology – 54% want a lower cost overall as opposed to 27% want more energy efficiency, 6% wanted a plant that minimizes the visual impact, 6% a smaller footprint.
Anonymous
05. Apr, 2009
Well then there you have it. Gravity out of town. Just what most people wanted during the famous “October Compromise” of 2005.
Alon Perlman
06. Apr, 2009
I think it was at the same early pre-TAC meeting when I said “There is a worst choice than a Tri -W sewer in the middle of Town and that’s a Tri-W Sewer Sewer out of Town” Gee, I hate being right!
Yes, it may well had been that self same meeting with Pavo and Noel King sitting just behind the speakers podium that I said “I dont doubt that Paavo could run through 2 Million Dollars in research, and get us to Tri-W”
Gee, I hate being wrong.
(by about 4 Million, and the location)
To Anon
I’m not going to research past my memory banks but when the ripley proposal said that 95% of the tanks would have to be relocated?
I that is what happened – Wasn’t that the Nail in the Coffin? Or the Stake through the heart of the Vampire that passed through the bottom of the coffin and into the sands below? The County has commited to giving the community what it wants (provided that was also the path of least resistance (goodbye New Technology). Of course no one involved has refrained from telling the community what it should think. 400$? We have a consensus. remember, The costs do not include the add- ons. Such as TERTIERY-Nice to have? or ESSENTIAL.
There are some who hoped for a clean co-equal comparison; Gravity -Step-Plan “C”. But that would have been a dream fit for a dreamer. Racano? I don’t appove of some of his methods (Yep, Pa Kettle noir speaking), but he has more Environmental street cred than any 14 usual suspects combined.
As for Lisa,? You are wasting your time Aaron. She is innocent of an understanding of what has been wrought and why. Which is why she will always be seen by a large minority as an angel. I would rather discorse with a real CSD Director.
Well, enough of this episode of political suicide. In the flesh or in cyberspace, see ya around.
Anonymous
06. Apr, 2009
Sewertoons
Why don’t you ask Paavo what happened to the write-in votes for vacuum. Were they counted as gravity? They certainly were not mentioned in the results.
Richard LeGros
06. Apr, 2009
Hi Alon,
You Posted: “As for Lisa,? You are wasting your time Aaron. She is innocent of an understanding of what has been wrought and why. Which is why she will always be seen by a large minority as an angel. I would rather discorse with a real CSD Director.”
Hmmmm…that is a very nice way of saying that Lisa does not understand what she has done. Are you suggesting that her ‘innocence’ is a type of incompetence that somehow releases her of her responsibility for her behavior and actions as an elected governmental official? Do not forget that she willing took on those responsibilities upon taking the Oath of Office.
I ask this because you allude that you find talking to Lisa not akin to talking to a “real CSD Director”.
-R
Ed
06. Apr, 2009
Toons,
Why are you stuck in 1983? What does that prove? That things were cheaper back then?
When I was a kid, hot dogs cost a quarter? So?
“People I know that were adamant about out of town now are fine with Tri-W if it is cheaper and can be permitted again.”
What bull! Such a delusional statement tugs at the remaining threads of your tattered credibility.
You don’t seem to know what year you’re in, who you know, or where you are. You’ve been holding Gibson’s cold hand so long you don’t realize you’re holding on to a skeleton.
You need to get a grip on reality before you announce you are running for the CSD again, which you obviously are. Your ignorance will set a boil under the community you don’t even recognize is there.
Taking notes doesn’t make you any more of any expert or any more knowledgeable than, say, Maria, who has no business being on the CSD any more than you do. Los Osos deserves so much better, more intelligent leadership but keeps suffering with less and less, year after year.
I have to agree with Aaron about Lisa. She lives in a constant state of denial over the damage she did and in a perpetual world of fantasy over the good she imagined she did. Angels do no harm. Lisa failed to lead and gave us Gail. Angels don’t bring devils.
Sewertoons
06. Apr, 2009
Anon says:
“Why don’t you ask Paavo what happened to the write-in votes for vacuum. Were they counted as gravity? They certainly were not mentioned in the results.”
Public Works – Office hours are Monday to Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
General information phone number is (805) 781-5252
I am not trying to not do some calling, but don’t you call the County and report back here? It’s what I would have to do and I am a well-known fan of gravity, so the blog readers might not trust my answer and you are neutral! I’d be curious on that answer, too!
Sewertoons
06. Apr, 2009
Announcement! I don’t plan on running for the CSD again! So I am simply speaking as a citizen who has paid a LOT of attention to the issues. WYSWG.
I spoke to real people on the Tri-W issue. Cost is paramount. If it doesn’t cost out, fine. But I really think it is a no-go anyway because of politics. I am happy with Tri-W or Tonini, although I really like the absolute un-expandability of Tri-W, and the water doesn’t leave the basin. It really would put the pressure on the purveyors to come up with uses for the water that doesn’t go to Broderson. We could also buy a cheaper hunk of land out of town for tertiary spray fields or buy nothing and sell the tertiary water to the farmers or do an ag-exchange deal. Purveyors pay – costs spread to all water users.
The point I made about 1983 is that it just keeps getting more expensive.
At the last Bruce Gibson office hours he did not appear to be a skeleton – and you were at the one before – and he simply couldn’t have lost that much weight – and if you think he is politically dead, I think you are dead wrong!
Maria is doing a GREAT job and I can’t believe you are actually saying that. Her influence has helped bring up the tone of the CSD meetings and saved money on the new – cheaper – room arrangement. Last meeting I actually came away feeling good – there was a lot of laughter throughout the meeting on little silly things – it was really quite a turnaround. I didn’t need a Martini when I got home even! We actually have relevant community issues to talk about in the Water Ops meeting, thanks to Maria!
I absolutely agree with both you and Aaron on Lisa. She (and Julie) both did an incredible amount of harm.
Well, we disagree on most CSD things, but we still keep the tone civil – and interesting (I think)!