Sewer Pipe Fun

I'd like to feature a sewer pipe artist today, Christian and this 3-D model to play with is called "Slime and Sewer!" Enjoy!

Slime and Sewer by Christian on Sketchfab

You can see more of his work here:
https://sketchfab.com/models/79d3426bd4a84ccca687f9f9590cb0e2

Nate's Amazing Tattoo!

Our brave neighbors are doing their own lateral and have the kind of mind that can first 1) Find the clean-out, 2) Know how to cut concrete, 3) Know how to plan projects like this! Anyway, they decided to call in a contractor to bring in equipment to lift up the 4" concrete in the driveway and to dig the trench. To do this alone would be backbreaking - the back being more likely to break than the big concrete  chunks. The little Kubota trencher, or do you call it an excavator? was just the right size for the job. The operator was, much like our beloved sewer crews, rather balletic in operating this thing on a narrow driveway. It must take years of practice to so delicately maneuver a contraption like this. Naturally, I was fascinated to watch yet another step in our sewer work. The trench came out beautifully!

Anyway, he was super friendly and, when not working, didn't mind my asking about his tattoo. I have never seen anything like it and I'll be only a handful of you (and his friends, of course) have either. Take a look (and click on the image to make it bigger):

WOW!! Amazing!!! It is of a skull toilet bowl with crossed wrenches right behind it!! Rather perfect for Los Osos, I'd say!! Anyway, you can ask him about it, there is quite a touching story to this tattoo! His business is called "I am a Plumber Looking for Work." His name is Nate Gunderlock and here is his business card:

For those of you who might want to get some tattoo work done, the artist is Kris at Main Street Tattoo in Templeton.

LOCSD Candidate's Forum 2016 Sewer Reference

Thursday night at the only LOCSD candidate's forum of this election season, a former director is running to be on the board again. While introducing herself, she reiterated her unsubstantiated LOCSD bankruptcy story—that it was not at all her fault. It is unclear as to why she even went to this topic, as maybe five people read this blog where I write about it. This is the only place that I know where this is even being mentioned these days, so is this opinion more widely held than I thought, that she needed to defend her version at the forum? I do post comments on the Tribune though......Have a look at the Nick Wilson article about the forum:
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/politics-government/election/article109796382.html

Well, anyway, time to move ahead with eyes firmly on the rearview mirror. Julie Tacker appears to want us to follow that unsettling path toward dissolution and we need to watch what she is up to. We have been down this gritty road before, I was there, so I know how hard attempting dissolution can be. We were not successful, despite the many weeks of work and lots and lots of money. Ms. Tacker is sowing the seeds for another attempt however, and it is yet another means of wrenching apart the community just as it was coming together after the 30-year sewer war. She wants dissolution to be on the next ballot. That is just SO WRONG.

Ms. Tacker came on the scene in 2002 and was one of the founders to initiated a campaign to reject the sewer project that we had then, which included filing lawsuits and appeals to state commissions and boards. She managed to get herself elected to the LOCSD in 2004 (she ran in 2002 and didn't win). Below is an image off of the "Concerned Citizens of Los Osos" website. She says she stepped down from being its President when elected. 

What she didn't step down from was the path to bankruptcy. I will post a chart below that shows how the cost for a sewer was upped year after year due to legitimate claims and then obstruction. The chart ends at mid-2005, before the recall election and the illegal Measure B. Note CCLO, Ms. Tacker's cause on the chart.

(Click on the image to increase the size.)

What happened to change public opinion was the slow dripping of anti-sewer opinions, each by itself meaning nothing, but over time, the tiny drips worked up to a concretion of resistance that froze the Mid-Town project in 2005. The bankruptcy soon followed. This dissolution idea has now begun its own drip. Do we sit here and watch it or do we stop it? This forum and the reporting of it is the first time the idea has landed in a very visible place: it only had a mention at a LOCSD meeting, and on Facebook, and that online crackpot rag, CalCoastNews. It has now has the legitimacy of The Tribune.

Ms. Tacker, the hypocrisy of running for a seat on a board that you wish to destroy is pretty amazing. It is getting a seat on that same board you nearly demolished in 2006. I guess if it wasn't killed off the first time, you try again, is that it? I can't help but think you have motives to do this beyond your claim of "saving money." That didn't work so well the last time, did it?

When A Sewer Hook-Up Affects Your Water Bill

$$$$$$$$$$

It was brought to my attention yesterday by a savvy County employee that the sewer service charge is determined by your water bill in January and February. That is when we are supposed to get rain, so outdoor watering would be minimal to nonexistent, all your water use would be from inside the house, hence, it will be going to the sewer plant and subject to a charge to clean it up and pump it. 

So, if you are repurposing your tank and are doing the trenching during those months, you will be filling your tank and adding the bleach to disinfect it. Whether your tank is 800 gallons or 1200 gallons, that is a lot of water, and that will be on your water bill as "indoor use" water, even though it is not. 

When doing their trenching, some have reported that a tanker truck will come with water to fill the tank and then pump it back out again after doing the bleach process. These "tanker truck" customers will not have a water bill that is actually from their water purveyor, so this won't count as "sewer use."

Think about this before scheduling your trenching then. If you can get cheap, outside water that doesn't come from your home's water service, your sewer bill won't reflect the increased water use!

Sludge Next Week On BOS Agenda

No kidding, I'm not talking about the contents of some of the usual public speaker's screeds! This is about sludge land applications!

The Los Osos Habitat Conservation EIR (part of the sewer project) is also on the agenda! I'll put in links to the relevant documents when they become available.

Tuesday, October 25, 2016
CONSENT AGENDA - REVIEW AND APPROVAL

Items: Set for Hearing:

1. Introduction of an amendment to Title 8, Section 8.13.030 of the San Luis ObispoCounty Code, to extend the expiration date from March 31, 2018 to March 31, 2021 forOrdinance 3258: Moratorium on the Land Application of Treated SewageSludge/Biosolids; and find that the project is exempt from Section 21000 et seq. of theCalifornia Public Resources Code (CEQA). Hearing date set for November 8, 2016. AllDistricts. 

Consent Agenda - Planning & Building Items: 

8. Request to approve a contract amendment with Rincon Consultants Inc. in the amount of$67,975 to prepare the Los Osos Habitat Conservation Plan Environmental ImpactReport/Environmental Impact Statement. District 2. 

Julie's Revisionist History......Again.

I am stepping into the sewer on my sewer blog to correct the misstatements of a certain retread political candidate for the LOCSD. Once again Julie Tacker is making, no, faking history to put herself in a more favorable light. This image is off her campaign Facebook page - click to see a larger image and to read the text:

Misstatement #1 - "...which District 2 County Supervisor wouldn't move the sewer in 2003 when the permits were before them?"

Nooooo. That is NOT what was before them. YOU, Ms. Tacker, were before them—on the topic of the Coastal Development Permit; you were stating that the EIR was faulty. There was no "moving the sewer" mentioned. If "moving it" was the intent, it would take an incredible amount of work to do so, actually YEARS of work, not just a meeting in front of the Board. Never mind the additional cost.

Here is a copy-and-paste right off of the minutes of the October 21, 2003 Board of Supervisor's meeting (and BTW, the EIR was certified on March 1, 2001, so as the objections and lawsuits mounted, we can already see how this was upping the cost of the project: 2001 - $81.6 million; 2003 - $93 million):

This is the time set for hearing to consider an appeal by Julie Tacker for Concerned Citizens of Los Osos and Al Barrow for Citizens for Affordable and Safe Environment of the Planning Commission’s approval of the Planning Commission’s approval of the Los Osos wastewater project, a request by the Los Osos Community Services District to construct and operate a community wastewater project to include a collection system, treatment facility plant, effluent disposal system, harvest well system and all related infrastructure, located in the community of Los Osos; 2nd District. 

Ms. Nancy Orton: Project Manager for the County, presents the staff report; outlines the location of the project; addresses the issues of the appeal; comments on drawings of the proposed sewer site; corrects Conditions #73 and #74, the beginning of the paragraph, to read: “Prior to Approving Sewer Hookups for New Construction.”; recommends adoption of the resolution upholding the Planning Commission’s recommendation and deny both appeals.

Ms. Julie Tacker: Appellant (Concerned Citizens of Los Osos), states she is representing 108 concerned citizens; believes the EIR is not complete for the proposal before the Board; urges the Board to delay or deny this request until this EIR has been completed; gives a video tape presentation of her appeal which outlines her concerns to the Tri-W site; no study being done on the impacts to the downtown businesses; concerns regarding sludge, septage, water, hydrology, drainage, ESHA (Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas), SSMP (Septic System Management Plan), economics, assessment and the conditions of approval.

Chairperson Ryan: speaks to his history with the project and in support of the LOCSD. Matter is fully discussed and thereafter, on motion of Supervisor Bianchi, secondedby Supervisor Pinard and on the following roll call vote: 

AYES: Supervisors Bianchi, Pinard, Achadjian, Chairperson Ryan  

NOES: None

ABSENT: Supervisor Ovitt 

the Board denies both appeals, Conditions #73 and #74 are amended to change the first sentence to read: “Prior to Approving Sewer Hookups for New Construction.” and RESOLUTION NO. 2003-366, resolution affirming the decision of the Planning Commission and conditionally approving the application of Los Osos Community Services District for Development Plan/Coastal Development Permit D020283D, adopted as amended.

EVERY ONE PRESENT VOTED AGAINST YOU! You are picking on Bianchi because she called it like it is: "If I lived in Los Osos, I would vote for almost anyone but Julie Tacker. She was, is, and probably always will be, a political disaster." (I'm sure she is tough enough to take the taunts from a, pardon the expression, lightweight like you.)

Misstatement #2 - "...had Bianchi and that board voted to deny the Tri-W  permits the sewer would have been out of town, contracts wouldn't have been let and a nasty bankruptcy wouldn't have ensued."

Well, let's just pick that one apart! You readers all know by now that Measure B, which stopped the sewer until it was proven in court to be invalid, was won by a slender 19 votes in 2005. What evidence was there to show there were enough votes to pass it in 2003 (not that it had been even DRAFTED then), and how else would the "community will" to move it be demonstrated if not by a vote? Look how many years it took to get to the point of selecting a location with the County's project behind the cemetery? You just assumed some magic wand could provide the location, the EIR, and the permits I guess.

You know Julie, that your board wouldn't even ALLOW a 218 vote in 2005 which would have demonstrated the community's will, you were so afraid that it would not pass, and that the sewer would then continue at Tri-W. It was put to your board by the State Water Board and you refused to do it. Don't claim it was the cost of holding a vote - how do you think there would be ANY money for ANY sewer without a VOTE? A vote this time that would involve property owners ONLY - not a "Measure-B-anyone-can-vote" type of vote?

The contracts had to be let for the project that was going to be built - you know, that one with the $134 million dollar SRF loan tied to it that your board threw away. The Water Board was serious with their threats of fines in 2003. They were serious in 2005 as you finally found out. Remember those CDOs that we can thank YOU for?

(And remember the $20 million bonds sold in 2002 to buy the property, design the project, and to pay for the permits. Those were flipped off by your board too - but not flipped off of our tax bills - they are still right on there every year.)

Setting all of that aside, let's get right on to the bankruptcy. First point, you poked a stick in the eye of the Water Board for not ASKING PERMISSION to stop the project. That was in the contract for the SRF $134 million loan. That lack of understanding ensured that your board would NOT get anymore payments from the state. Then you all went right off budget in October as soon as you were in office by hiring a new attorney, and new general manager ($450,000/year)—while you were paying the old GM and the old attorney to do nothing—AND you paid $75,000 to get rid of the public information officer. But that is small potatoes when you hired another attorney for $1.5 million! 

Where did you think the money would come from to pay for all of that? Well, we know where you found it - you took our tax money that we had paid for our bond payments, forcing the bond reserves to be spent that were to have been the last payment. Naturally, the lender raised a big stink about that, and we are STILL paying that money back! Our fire tax money had been spent too, so the CSD reserves were spent to cover us to keep our fire service.

So where did our $450,000 water reserves go? MIA. That was never paid back.  It was written off by General Manager Kivley in 2015. No wonder you went after her with a vengeance - she knew what your board did!

Anyway, your rewriting of history is always rather amazing to read. Thanks for the opportunity to set the record straight—again.

BOS Tuesday! Sewer Rules And Regs!

Tuesday, October 18, after 1:30 p.m., the BOS will be considering an ordinance to establish all the rules and regulations governing our sewer!

The link to all of the relevant info is here:
http://agenda.slocounty.ca.gov/agenda/sanluisobispo/Proposal.html?select=6527

It will be fun to see what the complaints are; as we know, some people just can't help themselves! Some of them might be the same people who want to dissolve the CSD! Yes, how much sense does that make!?? (Well, I suppose if you think about it - it consolidates all of their complaint targets into one place, the County, and that will save them some time!!)

Not Sewer, But Water!

I am breaking with tradition to post a non-sewer item, but it is about our water basin, which of course, our septic discharges have damaged greatly. Now, with our almost brand new plant returning water down to the aquifers from Broderson, they will, eventually, become less contaminated from the nitrates and salt water due to the dilution and push back from clean water. Which brings me in a roundabout way to the Basin Management Committee.

What is that you ask? Well, it is a state mandated entity which will manage our water basin. The basins in the entire state must comply. Our committee is comprised of a representative of each of our three water purveyors in town, the CSD Water Department, Golden State Water (which was once Cal Cities) and S&T Mutual, plus a representative of the County: they have one well in our community park, so qualify to serve, and in fact they have become suddenly, HUGELY important in the basin's management.

It came as a big surprise that our basin, that has been studied and talked about endlessly for years, did not quality in its boundary delineations to the state's satisfaction. They denied the science that was presented. So in order to be an approved entity to qualify for loans or grants, the "basin" will have to be expanded to include a lot of area never studied much, nor do many of the residents know that they have suddenly been included.

You have seen the sign on the right side of the road driving back from San Luis Obispo into Los Osos: "Morro Bay Watershed Keep Clean." That is approximately where the state thinks the basin starts, and it is based on old reports from 30 or more years ago. So all the land then, between this sign and our basin must be brought under the umbrella of the Basin Management Committee—something our water purveyors alone are not in any way equipped to do—but the County is. So below is a notice posted and presumably sent to all of these unsuspecting new basin folks. Yes, we do know that there is water out there, we see farm irrigation and houses, but are we really the same basin? The issue will be vetted again during the next round of basin boundary changes. But in the mean time......

Please click image for larger size. If I get the color original, I will replace this black & white version. 

I am bummed to miss this, but it is my Pilates night and I am turning into jello I have missed so many sessions.

San Salvador Sanitation

I spent some time Sunday visiting the replica ship the San Salvador over in Morro Bay (1542 is when is the real San Salvador cruised past here). It was quite awesome and would have been worth it at twice the price (only $7.00!). It was really very beautiful and being so new, it did not yet have that dirt-stained "lived in look."

The upper decks were open to the tour and there were three areas where the sixty men on board the real San Salvador slept. We did not get to see below decks where most of the crew bunked, but the officers had an upper deck area where they had stacked, curtained bunks, and the captain - Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, had his own private room. Naturally, this being a sewer blog, I wondered about sanitation aboard ship. 

Note the chamber pot, and this was in Cabrillo's cabin. Well, I guess it beats the outdoor accommodation I saw at the Lane Victory some years back when I went on a cruise to Catalina. I wrote about that here:

http://losewersaga.blogspot.com/2014/01/alfresco-potty-at-sea.html

At least Cabrillo got some privacy. I did not ask what the others used, or where. I got stuck on the chamber pot thing and the logistics of using one of those. Toilet paper wasn't common in the western world, and I doubt they had corncobs on board ship. I might find the time to research this Cabrillo issue further, but you can read a bit about toilet paper here in the mean time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_paper

http://encyclopedia.toiletpaperworld.com/toilet-paper-history/complete-historical-timeline

Septic Tank Re-Use News!

We met with a very informative lateral contractor Wednesday as we are now in our "phase" to be hooked up. We are not among those able bodied and talented enough to dig our own trench, so we are having this work done for us. Sad to say, we don't even know where the pipe is that comes out of the house. The kitchen is on one side of the house and the bathrooms are on the other. They are as far apart as it is possible to be. Where is that pipe—in the middle? Another mystery that we will leave to the professionals to solve!

I will give some background on what I have have heard about saving your septic tank prior to this meeting and then I'll report what I heard on that topic from the lateral contractor. It isn't at all what I expected to hear.

The thrust from the "Enviro" people and the County has been to repurpose your septic tank when possible. Use it to direct rainwater off the roof, into a downspout and into ground via your tank - if holes are punched the bottom or if no holes, via your leach field. Or save it for later, just clean and seal. They have also said that is not always possible to save if the tank is in some strange place or is damaged. (Yes, there have been, in the lateral diggings, actual redwood septic tanks found. These will NOT be suitable for re-purposing!) All the details can be found in this online booklet, and there are a lot of details:
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PW/LOWWP/WC+Septic+System+Decommissioning+and+Reuse+Plan.pdf

Most tanks however, are reinforced concrete tanks of varying ages. Sewer followers, do you remember back in the day when Ripley first surfaced as a possible Step/Steg contractor for the entire PZ? He recommended that ALL tanks be replaced! (100%!!!) And then of course, as he tried to make the project cheaper and cheaper, that percentage went down and down and down. But I digress. Concrete tanks last on average 25-30 years. The last houses in the PZ part of town were built in 1987, making the youngest ORIGINAL tanks from that era 29 years old! So....this is where the information that I had never heard before comes in.

A lot of tanks are on their last legs. Water will rust the steel reinforcement of your concrete tank. Sulfuric acid and sewer gas will degrade the concrete. Concrete tanks as young as 5 years old can begin to crumble. A man was walking in his yard a few blocks from my house stepped on top of the tank and FELL IN, the top gave way. The contractor said on the repurposing, that it wasn't a question of IF the lid will cave, but WHEN it will cave. The permit you have for your tank is no longer the same as it is no longer a septic tank, just a tank to hold water and that the County will not inspect these for safety or compliance of anything. The agreement on decommissioning the tank is between you and the contractor, and he or she will be responsible. So now I see what the contractor reluctance has been to re-purpose the tank and the preference is to fill it with approved material. There is then no danger of your falling into the tank if the thing decomposes.

Because the legality of letting a homeowner get use of any of the recycled water from the plant is tied up in some state level "policy discussion," unchanging that law could take years. I have no faith in any time soon being able to fill our septic tank with that recycled water to keep things alive by watering our plants much as the septic tank does now, or by putting a pump down there to use that water via electrical pumping means. Our downspout goes into a pipe in the ground already to some unknown leach field.

If you do not repurpose, legally, the contractor is supposed to bring in a compactor and compact the material placed into the tank. The tank top will be cut off and will fall into the bottom - the top is to be left open. If the bottom is good and not punched with holes, the tank will hold moisture in the sandy stuff in there (when it rains.....OK, IF it rains....), and eventually tree roots will find their way in. I really don't want my lemon tree that I have never watered to croak, so I will have to water it for a few years to keep it going until it finds that pot of moist sand to quench its thirst. It has been sucking up septage I guess, as I sure don't water it. Lots of lemons year 'round too. Yes I eat them. I'm not sure what gets transmitted to lemons via transpiration, but far I have not come down with:

• Campylobacteriosis
• Giardia
• Solmonella
• Cryptosporidium
• E. Coli
• Hepatitis A
• Shigella

Here is a fun link I forgot to find on the County's lateral page to see your tank location. We have two! I wonder what that means?

http://gis.slocounty.ca.gov/Html5Viewer2_5_1/Index.html?configBase=/Geocortex/Essentials/REST/sites/PW_Public/viewers/PW_Viewer/virtualdirectory/Resources/Config/Default&layerTheme=5&Extent=-13454203.629,4205219.1621,-13449015.4657,4209289.4339