What's the Trib's Definition of "Several?"

When it comes to the history of the Los Osos sewer, everyone seems to have it wrong, except SewerWatch, of course.

From State Water Boards, to county officials, even Wikipedia, no one can seem to get it right, especially the Tribune.

For example, in today's story, Trib reporter, Sona Patel, writes, "After several failed attempts to build a sewer by the town’s services district...".

Huh?

What's Patel's definition of "several?"

I count only two "failed attempts":

1) The Solution Group's "better, cheaper, faster" ponding project that formed the LOCSD in 1998, and then failed in late 2000, one month AFTER my first New Times cover story was published, where I showed that the Solution Group's project was failing dramatically (and the Trib, of course, never reported, like I did, that the project that got the LOCSD formed in the first place failed.)

That's one "failed attempt."

and;

2) The failed Solution Group-turned-LOCSD Director's (that were now scrambling to save face over the embarrassment of the "better, cheaper, faster" fiasco) public-park-in-the-middle-of-town-on-ESHA-that-included-an-industrial-sewer-plant project -- an extremely unpopular project that was called "bait and switchy" by a member of the California Coastal Commission, and relied on an unsupported, and therefore illegal, Statement of Overriding Considerations that overrode the entire environmental review process for no reason whatsoever, from late 2000 to 2005.

That's only two "failed attempts" by the "town’s services district," and last I checked, two is just a "couple," never "several."

Now, granted, the Solution Group is also responsible for the demise of a third wastewater project for Los Osos -- the county's 1998 ready-to-go project, when Solution Group-turned-LOCSD Directors officially dumped the county's ready-to-go project in March of 1999 in favor of their "better, cheaper, faster" project, that would fail two years later -- but that third "attempt" wasn't "by the town’s services district," they just trashed it.

[MEMO to Trib editorial staff: Two is never "several."]

Jeeze... the next thing you know, the Trib will be writing an editorial supporting the mid-town, environmentally sensitive Tri-W location because they were told by the pre-recall CSD Board that there's no other feasible location.

Oh, wait. That already happened... just days before a crucial election on the matter.

###