Pipe Colors Explained

DigLosOsos has a new posting on pipe colors. You can view it here:

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/11/30/pipe-colors/

Too bad such pretty colors will be buried underground!

What Won't Happen In Los Osos

It's been a while for some new sewer news on the home front, so here is a bit of sewer entertainment from Mexico City to tide us over. We will never encounter scenes like these, but just think, a tank of similar if less diverse stuff, sits right now in your very own front or back yard Los Osians! As for me, I will be happy to see the tank pumped one last time. And I'm keeping any skulls if there are any in there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goh8k4Zxbh4

The Tiny Bit More PZLDF That Means A LOT

Off the the 2nd District Appellate Court's website:

11/16/2012

Petition for rehearing denied.

This means PZLDF must pay up those pesky and expensive costs the Water Board incurred litigating this hopeless case that PZLDF mounted against them . Can PZLDF pull another trick out of the battered old hat to avoid paying? The next stop up the court food chain is the California Supreme Court. We'll see.

Dig Los Osos Has A New Post

It's all about safety. You can read about it here:

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/11/16/tips-for-your-safety/

More PZLDF "News"

Right off the 2nd District Appellate Court's website:

11/15/2012

Letter sent to:

    CA Supreme Crt and courtesy copy to all counsel; Purs. to CRC Rule 8.1120, we enclose herewith copy of request for publication of the opinion in the above matter, along with a copy of the opinion. We do not recommend publication as the opinion does not, in our view, meet the required standards.

So....the request by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board who wanted this case to be published and the court in Ventura thinks it shouldn't be but sent it on, is now going to the California Supreme Court for an opinion as to whether or not it can be.

This move should now give those in this now 501 (c) 3-less PZLDF group lots of time to figure out how to pay for this. Good luck. You might consider suing the person who talked you into this scheme maybe?

And it will require the Water Board to spend more of its time and more money of the citizens of California to pay for this—until the final bill is due, which it will be.............eventually.

Arghhhhhh....PZLDF Arises From The Dead, Yesterday. UGH.

UPDATE TO FOOTNOTE:

It wasn't clear until today, November 15, but it was the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board who asked Deputy Helen G. Arens to publish the case, the appellate court did not change its mind to request that it be published.

Original Story:

PZLDF just filed a rehearing petition. Is this a ploy to keep things in play so they don't have to pay? Who knows!

See for yourself here:

http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=1974927&doc_no=

Footnote, the Deputy Attorney General handling the case, Helen G. Arens filed a request to publish the opinion given by the court in this case. That means:

 "Published opinions of courts are also collectively referred to as case law, which is one of the major sources of law in common law legal systems."

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_opinion

That would end anymore forward motion on this sad, sorry thing I think.

The poor, poor people who signed on to this dead end. I feel really bad for them when the bill for this comes.

Correcting Incorrect Assertions About PZLDF Case

The RAZOR ONLINE has written an article on the apparent demise of the PZLDF case. But the Razor got some things wrong.

"It’s unclear what the basis of the appeal actually was because the appeal document is not public record."
RAZOR

The appeal document is in the public record, it is just not online. I asked the court in Ventura (where the PZLDF case was heard) as to how to get a copy of that document and the answer was: to come to Ventura and ask to see a copy (no, they will not make a copy for you) or hire a service that does this - which is: they to come to the courthouse with a portable copy machine, request the document and make a copy for you for a price.

"One could speculate that CCW’s attorney Shaunna Sullivan wanted to move the case out of the area in hopes that the appellate judges would be further removed from local politics and biases."
RAZOR

One could, but that isn't how it works:

The vast majority of cases in the California courts begin in one of the 58 superior, or trial, courts — located in each of the state's 58 counties. (Which is the court the case was in before it went to the court of appeals.)

The next level of judicial authority within the state's judicial branch resides with the Courts of Appeal. Most of the cases that come before the Courts of Appeal involve the review of a superior court decision that is being contested by a party to the case. The Legislature has divided the state geographically into six appellate districts, each containing a Court of Appeal.

Source: http://www.courts.ca.gov/2113.htm

"At the tail-end of the opinion, the judge specifically stated that the costs to the respondents (CCRWQCB) shall not be published. "
RAZOR

That isn't what "not publishing" refers to. It refers to the case itself, being published or not published.

"An opinion that is not ordered published shall not be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action or proceeding except as provided: when the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or when the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary action or proceeding because it states reasons for a decision affecting the same defendant or respondent in another such action or proceeding. January 1, 1974 Division 3 Rules for Publication of Appellate Opinions Rule 977 Citation of Unpublished Opinions Prohibited; Exceptions (www.nonpublication.com)" (From the California part.)

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/LegalEthics/Nonpublication/Arguments/PublicationRules.htm

You can read more than you would ever want to know about that here:

http://lawweb.usc.edu/why/students/orgs/ilj/assets/docs/14-1%20Wasby.pdf

"There is no question that taxpayers and the district are shouldering the burden of those costs, as shared by the LOCSD."
RAZOR

No, the costs are to be paid by PZLDF or CCW, and the names of those people who are unfortunately on that case are on the superior court document. The District is not involved.

County Releases LO Water Recycling Baseline GW Quality Monitoring Report

You can find it at this link:

http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PW/LOWWP/Baseline+Groundwater+Quality+Monitoring.pdf

Looks like 16 of the 25 wells had total Nitrogen levels over 10 mg/l. Hmmm, hardly the one point above legal levels as asserted by some (assuming 10 mg/l average statewide allowed, but our level must be 7 mg/l or below). 8 wells had 7 mg/l or below, so approximately 2/3rds of the wells are over the limit.

On page 7 under "CONCLUSIONS" of the report, we find this,

"The average NO3-N concentration for the 25 wells sampled is 13.4 mg/l (median value 14.4 mg/l). The greatest concentrations of NO3-N are reported at wells in Baywood Park and south of Los Osos Valley Road. Individual fluctuations in NO3-N concentrations across the network, when averaged together, showed a 2.3 mg/l increase between October 2006 and August 2012. The number of monitoring network wells with water quality in excess of the NO3-N drinking water standard of 10 mg/l is presently 16 out of 25 wells tested."

It appears that things are getting worse, not better as some have asserted. Well, we have our baseline now and once the sewer is up and running let's see where these numbers go. I think we can forget all about the urban legends of decaying underground forests and cows in the valley to account for the nitrates.

Dig Los Osos Is Digging

See the latest update on where they are digging - LOVR between Ravenna and Pine!

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/10/31/work-on-los-osos-valley-road/

LO on BOS Agenda, November 6, 2012

Board Business Continued:

20. Request for approval to proceed with the Water Recycling Facility project through the design-bid-build process and approval of a sole source agreement for Professional Engineering Services with Carollo Engineers (Clerk's File) in the amount of $3,382,504 for the Los Osos Wastewater Project Water Recycling Facility, Los Osos, CA. District 2.

Link to relevant documents will be posted when available.

Relevant documents posted on 10-31-12 and can be accessed off this page:

http://agenda.slocounty.ca.gov/agenda/sanluisobispo/Proposal.html?select=1592

Dig Los Osos - New Post on Surveys and Potholes

Read today's info from Dig Los Osos here:

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/10/26/surveys-and-potholes-for-your-safety/

PZLDF Case Fizzles Out

Just got a court notification that the long-time-ongoing-seemingly-neverending PZLDF case, or "Citizens for Clean Water v. Regional Water Quality Control Board" case number B231945 has finally ended as a "voluntary dismissal."

You can read what I got at this link:
http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/disposition.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=1974927&q=319766&f=558848379

Case: B231945, 2nd District, Division 6

Disposition date (YYYY-MM-DD):        2012-10-25
Disposition description:            Affirmed in full
Disposition status as of 2012-10-25:    Final 
Notes:  
AFF/17p/YGP 

A definition from http://definitions.uslegal.com/v/voluntary-dismissal/ says,
"Voluntary dismissal refers to the termination of a suit at the request of the plaintiff in a suit. The plaintiff is the party who initially filed a law suit with the court. In a voluntary dismissal, the plaintiff voluntarily withdraws the action or claim it brought before the court."

Reading the brief, it was clear, even though it is not to be published, PZLDF basically has no case. Whatever hopes there were to eliminate the Prohibition Zone, AKA the circumscribed area drawn for necessary sewer-hood, and the hope that it could be broken, thereby meaning we don't need to get a sewer—d-a-s-h-e-d.

Read the legal stuff here:

http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/B231945.PDF

Last tidbit—PZLDF must pay the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board's costs.

Rebates and the Wastewater Project's Water Conservation Program

As most of you know, a condition of hooking up to the wastewater project is to retrofit your home (if needed) with low-flow toilets, showerheads and aerators (some of us have already done this). The County has posted the Powerpoint from Tuesday's meeting where the plan was approved by the Supes. Visit the County's webpage to see what is coming up. Most will have a licensed plumber do the work for them which includes the inspection to determine what work is needed. Then the plumber's certification will accompany your rebate form to get your money back. This amount could cover the entire cost of the fixtures and the work, but this could depend on how fancy of a low-flow toilet that you want:

http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/PW/LOWWP/LOWWP.htm

See what the rebate application looks like here:

http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/PW/LOWWP/WC+rebate+form.pdf

It you have already done the work to your house, there is another rebate amount that you might want to look into, which could include clothes washers or on-demand hot water devices.

There is more money if you do this early rather than later.

This below is a copy and paste off the County's website, which identifies the go-to place for questions on this or your lateral or other concerns:

Office Hours 

The County of San Luis Obispo will be hosting office hours at 2025 10th Street, Los Osos.

Representatives from the County will be available to help residents and businesses review lateral plans for their property, discuss costs, and answer any other questions regarding the Los Osos Wastewater Collection System Project.

Office Hours
2025 10th Street, Los Osos
Tuesday 1:00 pm – 4:00 pm
Thursday 9:00 am – 12:00 pm

These hours are subject to change as the project progresses, so please regularly check back for updated hours.

Sewer Land Acquisition!

SLO County Subdivision Review Board agenda 11-5-12, from the Consent Calendar:

e.

The applicant (COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO) proposes to acquire approximately 24.5 acres of land from JOHN GIACOMAZZI AND JANET KLINE for the purpose of constructing the Los Osos wastewater treatment plant.  This request is to confirm that the future creation of a public lot (PL12-0047) of approximately 24.5 acres by conveyance to the County of San Luis Obispo does not require a parcel map pursuant to the provisions of Government Code section 66428(a).  The proposed project is within the Agriculture land use category and is located at 2198 Los Osos Valley Road, approximately 0.5 miles east of the community of Los Osos.  The site is in the Estero planning area.  This project is exempt under CEQA. County File No: SUB2011-00052 Assessor Parcel Numbers: 067-011-021,-022 Supervisorial District: 2 Date Filed: May 29, 2012

Supes Pass LO Water Resolution

Voting five to zero in the affirmative, the Supes approved a water conservation implementation plan this afternoon for the Los Osos sewer project. The few Los Osos citizens and interested parties still left, who have disparaged the County's sewer plan for years and attend the BOS meetings regularly to voice that disapproval, went away disappointed once again. They wanted delay and didn't get it.

It was carefully explained to Supervisor Mecham by John Waddell (County engineer in charge of the wastewater project) that the idea pressed by one of the disparagers, to make the payments go directly to plumbers rather than to the homeowners for the retrofits, would be problematic and Mr. Mecham got it. The reasons were prevailing wages, public contract costs, administrative costs and if damages occurred in the home, who would be responsible. Possible conflicts between property owners and renters need to be avoided. Rebate checks to owners will be issued within two weeks, so plumbing bills could be paid with the rebates before the bills are due.

Turnkey solutions have been discussed by vendors and the County where a public/private agreement could be made to handle all of the points outlined in the conservation program, from using local "green certified" plumbers, licensed and insured to install toilets, to doing the water audits and marketing the necessary steps to the community. No decisions have been made.

The program will be outlined by the County with the necessary steps for homeowners to be able to hook up to the sewer. The main idea is to get water conservation going as soon as possible with dollar incentives to retrofit early, as early as 2013. The program will be under review and open to adjustments if any components of it are not living up to expectations. The County will be back before the BOS before November of 2013 with a progress report.

What is required by the CDP (Coastal Development Permit) for this plan is:
1. Recycle cleaned water to schools and other users.
2. A conservation plan.
3. Monitoring of the plan.
4. Adaptive management for change if parts of the plan are not fulfilling requirements.

Another step completed by the County and I could not be more thrilled! You can access the video of the meeting here http://slocounty.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=1372 and you will find the this hearing at about the 2 hour and 18 minute part into the video.

Dig Los Osos Has Office Hours in LO!

Dig Los Osos has a new posting today! Read it here!

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/10/19/office-hours-in-los-osos/

Dig Los Osos Has a New Posting

Check it out here:

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/10/16/setting-up-the-staging-area/

BOS October 23, 2012 - L.O. Water Conservation Plan

On the agenda:

Board Business:

17. Submittal of a resolution approving the Water Conservation Implementation Plan for the Los Osos Wastewater Project, Los Osos, CA. District 2.

This plan has been adjusted from the original.

Go here to find the list of relevant documents and their links:

http://agenda.slocounty.ca.gov/agenda/sanluisobispo/Proposal.html?select=1544

PZLDF Cause from October 10, 2012

The 2nd Appellate District shows that the cause was argued and submitted. Who knows what happens next....

http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=1974927&q=230386&f=558848379

The due date for the court's opinion to be filed is 1/7/2013, so we know WHEN it will happen anyway.

http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/scheduledActions.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=1974927&div=6&doc_no=B231945

Latest News From Dig Los Osos

Check out what is going to be under construction on this updated (today!) page:

http://www.diglososos.com/2012/10/11/check-traffic-update-page/