Why Is Montgomery, Watson, Harza Even Close to Getting a Third Chance to Fail in Los Osos?

This is kind of fun...

Warren Jensen, from the SLO County Counsel's office, is in the process of putting together a report that deals with former Los Osos CSD Director, Lisa Schicker's complaints about how the engineering firm, Montgomery, Watson, Harza has made the short lists as a contractor to build both the collection system and the treatment facility for the Los Osos wastewater project proposed by county officials.

And, while I was noticing how Schicker's approach to the subject involved several very interesting legal matters surrounding MWH's... um... checkered past in Los Osos, like back-dated contracts, etc., I also noticed how it wasn't really touching on what I thought was even a better argument -- MWH's competency, or, more accurately, incompetency as an engineering firm.

So, the day before she spoke at the Supes meeting for last month's "Los Osos Update," I sent Schicker an e-mail that read, in part, "For me, at least, a HUGE strike against MWH is that they developed the Tri-W embarrassment."

And in that e-mail, I included, what I think is one of the best quotes in the entire community survey that county offcials recently conducted to get a feel for Los Ososans' views on the wastewater project:

"Only (9-percent) of (Prohibition Zone) respondents chose the mid-town (Tri-W) location..."
-- Los Osos Wastewater Project Community Advisory Survey, March 27, 2009

Then, I coupled that amazing quote, with another amazing quote (that I originally dug out of the Tri-W Facilities Report when I was researching one of my New Times cover stories, Three Blocks Upwind of Downtown):

"The size and location of the other sites did not provide an opportunity to create a community amenity. The sites on the outskirts of town could not deliver a community use area that was readily accessible to the majority of residents..."

In other words, according to the recent community survey, MWH wasted six years, and a boatload of cash, developing a "sewer-park" in the middle of Los Osos for no other reason than so residents could easily get to the park in the sewer plant, and, it turns out, as I've been reporting forever, almost no one wanted a park in their sewer plant to begin with, obviously.

The next day, I tuned into the Supes meeting, and heard Schicker say, among her other very interesting arguments, "Plus, they (MWH) built a project that no one wanted to begin with."

When I heard that, I grinned, and took a long chug of beer. (To give you an idea of how nerdy I am, I actually have my own little "sewer parties," where I (just me, of course... trust me, no one else I know is interested) sit at my beautiful outdoor bar, with beer and snacks, and turn on KCBX to listen to the monthly sewer update. Nerdy? Oh yeah. A heck-of-a-lot-a fun? You bet!)

The next day, Schicker e-mailed me and wrote, "I managed to also get in your very good point about how no one even wanted the mwh project - what a waste of dough!"

At that meeting, I also noticed how Supervisor Gibson said that county councel, Warren Jensen, was going to put together a report dealing with Schicker's complaints.

This is great.

So, I hatched a plan. I was going to force Jensen's hand at addressing MWH's seven years of incompetency in that report.

And, I sent him this e-mail:

- - -

Hello Mr. Jensen,

I heard you say at the Supervisors' meeting last Tuesday that you will be creating a report to address Lisa Schicker's formal complaint involving, among other things, the competency of the engineering firm Montgomery, Hatson, Harza, to build both the treatment facility and the collection system for the proposed Los Osos wastewater system.

In her complaint, Mrs. Schicker writes: "MWH is a firm that has already made millions in Los Osos from this illegal contract, for a project that no one wanted (see your recent survey results)"

I would like to add some relevant information to that very important point.

The survey results she is referring to, is this:

"Only (9-percent) of (Prohibition Zone) respondents chose the mid-town (Tri-W) location..."
-- Los Osos Wastewater Project Community Advisory Survey, March 27, 2009

To that quote, I would like to add two other relevant quotes.

As you may know, MWH was also the firm that was selected to design the LOCSD's previous project, that included a proposed treatment facility at the "mid-town" Tri-W site.

In the 2001 Facilities Report for that project, created by MWH, it reads:

"The size and location of the other sites (other than Tri-W) did not provide an opportunity to create a community amenity. The sites on the outskirts of town could not deliver a community use area that was readily accessible to the majority of residents..."

Furthermore, in the (now expired) Coastal Development Permit, issued by the California Costal Commission in 2004, it reads:

"... other alternatives (to the Tri-W site) were rejected (by the Los Osos CSD) on the basis that they did not accomplish project objectives for centrally located community amenities." [Note: I was also the first to dig that amazing quote out of the development permit.]

Here's my question:

In your report, considering those two quotes above, coupled with the recent community survey results, will you be addressing Mrs. Schicker's point regarding why MWH was selected to both of the short lists to build the project, considering that the firm spent five years (2000 - 2005) developing a sewer plant in the middle of Los Osos for the sole reason that the people of Los Osos could easily get to the public park in the sewer plant (designed by MWH), even though, it turns out, more than 90-percent of Prohibition Zone residents, according to the recent community survey, don't want a mid-town "sewer-park" to begin with?

If not, then please consider this e-mail a request to have that specific point -- why was MWH selected to the short lists of contractors by SLO County officials, after displaying apparent gross (and very, very expensive) incompetency in the handling of the previous LOCSD project -- by designing a sewer-park-plant in the middle of town so residents could easily access the "sewer-park," that almost no one wanted.

Considering MWH's previous extremely costly failures in Los Osos (they also, according to the 2000 Oswald report, spent two years [1999 - 2000] developing a "70-acre Resource Park" sewer plant that also failed), their selection to the short lists doesn't appear to make sense.

I'm looking forward to reading your report.

- - -

Then, in a follow-up e-mail to Jensen, I wrote:

- - -

Hello Mr. Jensen...

How's your Lisa Schicker/Montgomery, Watson, Harza report coming along, and, when will it be released?

And, like I mentioned in a previous e-mail to you, please address in your report why MWH made the LOWWP short lists after they were responsible for two colossal sewer project failures, over a seven year span, in Los Osos.

I'm not clear on why they are even close to getting a third chance to fail in Los Osos. That doesn't seem to make much sense.

- - -

He replied, "Due to other pressing matters, I have had to defer completion of the report on Los Osos issues raised by Lisa Schicker and others. I hope to complete the report before the June 2 meeting of the Board of Supervisors."

Montgomery, Watson (as they were known back in 2000) was the "project manager" of the "better, cheaper, faster," "70-acre Resource Park" sewer plant for Los Osos, that was proposed by the initial LOCSD Board of Directors, and it failed. (That was the subject of my first New Times cover story involving the Los Osos sewer story, Problems With the Solution, where I showed how that project was on the verge of failing, and one month after that story was published, that project officially failed.)

Then, Montgomery, Watson, Harza, spent five years, and cashed millions of dollars worth of Los Osos taxpayers' checks, developing an 11-acre "sewer-park" in the middle of town, for the sole reason that residents could easily get to the park... in their sewer plant, when almost none of those residents, it turns out, wanted a park in their sewer plant to begin with, obviously. (And, that was the exact subject of my second New Times cover story involving the Los Osos sewer story, Three Blocks Upwind of Downtown.)

Ummm... Montgomery, Watson, Harza? To quote a certain television billionaire, "You're fired!"

That June 2 report should be very, very interesting... especially if Jensen addresses why MWH is even close to getting a third chance to fail in Los Osos.

###

David Edge Lives in Los Osos

As county Supervisors consider terminating the employment contract of long-time SLO County Administrator, David Edge, on Tuesday, I think it's important to note that he lives in Los Osos.

In fact, that's why, when the Supes discuss the Los Osos wastwater project, Edge recuses himself from those discussions, because of a possible conflict of interest.

So, because he recuses himself from those discussions, no one (at least no one from the media) knows where he aligns on the Los Osos wastewater controversy.

And, I've always been curious about that.

I've corresponded with Edge many times (he's actually excellent at returning e-mails... one of the best in county government), and I've watched him in action for years, and he's a very bright guy, so, I've always wondered what he must think about the Los Osos CSD's former sewer project -- the "Tri-W" project -- that was proposed to be built in the middle of Edge's "little 'burgh" for the sole reason that the residents could easily get to a small, yet, expensive park that the 2000 - 2005 LOCSD had included in their proposed sewer plant.

["The size and location of the other sites did not provide an opportunity to create a community amenity. The sites on the outskirts of town could not deliver a community use area that was readily accessible to the majority of residents..."
-- Tri-W Facilities Report, 2001 (As first reported in New Times, Three Blocks Upwind of Downtown, September, 2004)]

However, as a recent county survey revealed, almost no one from Los Osos wanted a mid-town "sewer park" to begin with.

["Only (9-percent) of (Prohibition Zone) respondents chose the mid-town (Tri-W) location..."
-- Los Osos Wastewater Project Community Advisory Survey, March 27, 2009]

So, think about that situation for a moment... it's very interesting: Edge's local government, the LOCSD, spent nearly six years and some $25 million developing a mid-town sewer-park, and, it turns out, almost no one wanted a park in their sewer plant to begin with, naturally.

And, because Edge is smart, and also SLO County's chief administrator, he knows better than just about everyone the ins-and-outs of local government, so, what must he think about the fact that the LOCSD -- Edge's own local government agency -- wasted six years and some $25 million of HIS money developing a sewer-plant-park in the middle of his town for the sole reason that the town's residents could easily get to the park in their sewer plant, yet almost no one wanted a park in their sewer plant to begin with?

It's a fascinating question, but, currently, Edge can't address it, because of his position with SLO County government.

It gets weirder.

The Supervisor that is leading the recommendation to consider the termination of Edge's employment contract, is 2nd District Supervisor, Bruce Gibson, who represents Los Osos, and, as I recently reported, Gibson's appointment to the SLO County Parks Commission, is Pandora Nash-Karner.

Nash-Karner, is also a former LOCSD vice-president, and is the chief proponent/architect of the mid-town sewer-plant-park that no one wanted.

She was also a financial donor to, and public endorser of, Bruce Gibson's campaign for Supervisor throughout 2006.

So, you can see how this all starts to get a bit twisted, right?

Out of the blue, for reasons unknown, Edge, a resident of Los Osos, is placed on paid administrative leave, and Gibson, who is close friends with the person most responsible for the former, and wildly unpopular, mid-town "Tri-W" sewer project, writes a letter to his fellow Supervisors asking them to consider the termination of Edge's employment contract.

In Gibson's letter, it reads, "No further statement of reasons for termination is needed."

Now, what starts to become an extremely relevant question, is, "What is Edge's take on Nash-Karner's wildly unpopular, failed, mid-town "sewer-park?"

State legislation handed control of the Los Osos wastewater project to SLO County officials back in 2006, and, after three years of analysis, the project development process is entering a crucial period, that will produce a final project selection, right when Edge's job is on the line, for reasons unknown.

The only document I can provide that links Nash-Karner and Edge, comes from September 2005, when, immediately following a bitter election loss, where the majority of Los Osos voters rejected her mid-town "sewer-park" by recalling three pro-Tri-W project CSD Directors, Nash-Karner, in full-on panic mode, just hours after the polls closed, sent Edge (among other officials) this e-mail:

- - -
Subject: Can we transfer the project this week?

Gentlemen,

Granted, it's late, but could the LOCSD transfer the sewer project to the county BEFORE the current CSD-3 leave office? Contracts have been signed, the project is underway, we are in violation of the clean water act - can an emergency agency be prepared to include transferring the project?

Please...is there any way to salvage the project??????????????????

Pandora
- - -

Edge responded:

- - -
on 9/28/05 7:46 AM, dedge@co.slo.ca.us wrote:

Hi Pandora - I understand your distress however the CSD remains the responsible local agency for the project. That means the district board could contract with the county (or other willing agency I guess) to do the project in the same manner that they contracted with a private company - however, assuming yesterday's results are certified, the new board could equally well vote to take back the project when seated. In other words "other agency options" aren't realistically on the table unless and until the CSD goes out of existence or gives up its wastewater authority.

David
- - -

Nash-Karner then replied with this astonishing e-mail:

- - -
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 08:45:21
Subject: Re: Can we transfer the project this week?
From: "Pandora Nash-Karner"
To: "David Edge"

Thank (sic) David,

I hope the CSD gets fined out of existence fast enough to save the contractors and the low-interest loan!

Pandora
- - -

Uhg.

Is Edge's possible termination related to his position on the Los Osos wastewater project? I have no idea, and unlike other on-line "news sources," I'm not going to speculate, or use some shaky anonymous source to guess at a possible reason why Edge is on paid administrative leave, but I will say that, considering the fact that Edge lives in Los Osos, and is obviously very clear on what happened with Nash-Karner's botched sewer systems (plural -- the "better, cheaper, faster" project that Nash-Karner used to form the LOCSD in the first place in 1998, also failed... in late 2000), I find the timing of all of this to be very interesting, and, IF Edge's contract is terminated on Tuesday, SewerWatch will immediately contact him, and ask him what his views are involving Bruce Gibson's Parks Commissioner's failed sewer projects, and how Nash-Karner also "hoped" that Edge's local government would be "fined out of existence."

###

"The Morph Lie" -- A 9-year-and-counting Cover-Up

[Note: Local radio talk show host, Dave Congalton, recently invited Los Osos residents Linde Owen, and Piper Reilly on his show to discuss the Los Osos sewer situation. The following e-mail is in response to that show.]

- - -
Hello Dave,

After listening to your show yesterday... wanna hear something very interesting? (And, if anyone's going to "get" this, it's you, due to your long history with the story -- an essential ingredient for understanding Los Osos.)

I can show, using nothing but excellent, primary sources, how the entire town of Los Osos is the victim of a cover-up.

This story is so awesome, and I'm the only one that touches it.

Here's the cover-up (and, Dave, I know that you know these details... so, you are going to see this):

Remember the mid-town ponding system that was the basis for forming the LOCSD in the first place, in 1998?

That project failed in late 2000. (In fact, the collapse of that project was the focus of my FIRST New Times cover story on this subject, in July 2000, when Steve Moss was running things, as he was when he published my SECOND New Times cover story on this subject, in 2004.)

Ever since that "better, cheaper, faster" project failed -- in late 2000 -- the people behind that project have done everything and anything in their power, including lying, as elected officials (documented), to the California Coastal Commission, to cover-up the fact that their project failed in 2000.

Think about it, Dave. It makes perfect sense.

That failed "better, cheaper, faster" project was solely responsible for forming the LOCSD in the first place, in 1998, AND it was solely responsible for tanking the County's then-"ready-to-go" project.

I don't know if you remember that, but the county had a sewer project "ready to go" in 1998, estimated at HALF the cost of today's project. THAT project was dumped in the trash in early 1999 by the newly formed LOCSD Board, in favor of their "better, cheaper, faster" project, and then THAT project failed in late 2000.

In other words, the LOCSD was formed for no reason whatsoever, AND it caused the demise of a "ready to go" sewer project. (As I've also first reported, two other attempts to form a CSD in Los Osos failed in the 90s. It wasn't until "better, cheaper, faster" came along, did it pass.)

Often, I'll hear the word "morphed" to describe what happened between the failed "better, cheaper, faster" project, and the SECOND project the LOCSD proposed at the Tri-W site. (On your show last night, Linde Owen even used the "morphed" word to describe that transition) but the use of that word to describe that transition is completely inaccurate.

In fact, that word -- "morphed" -- originates from the 2001 - 2005 LOCSD, and it's actually part of their strategy, and it's an extremely important component of their cover-up.

They tried to make it seem like the "better, cheaper, faster" project that was solely responsible for forming the LOCSD in the first place, AND responsible for the trashing of the County's project, was STILL in play after it failed -- that it had just "morphed" into the second Tri-W project, through some "design changes."

But that's not what happened at all.

The "better, cheaper, faster" project failed outright, and their second project was a COMPLETELY different project, almost to the point of the exact opposite of the plan that formed the LOCSD, and the ONLY way they were able to retain the second project at the Tri-W site, in an effort to make it appear that their first project was still on the table, was to lie to the County of SLO AND to the Coastal Commission.

There was ZERO "morphing." There was no REAL reason whatsoever why the SECOND sewer plant had to stay at the Tri-W site.

I can show all of this, documented.

I've actually coined a phrase for the 2001 - 2005 LOCSD Board's strategy there: I call it, "the morph lie," and that strategy worked (well, until I caught onto it with my second New Times cover story, then it stopped working, as you can imagine).

If you're interested in reading-up on this subject (and I highly recommend it), I recently published a blog piece at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2009/01/tribune-is-suffering-from-memory-loss.html

At the top of that post, you'll see a Viewpoint I wrote that was published in the Sun Bulletin, below the Viewpoint, I actually answer the extremely interesting question that I pose in my piece, where I lay-out, air-tight-ly, my case for cover-up.

Dynamite stuff.

It's WHY Los Osos is "a mess."

Interestingly, Dan Blackburn's recent story about the backdated MWH contracts? The cover-up is WHY they did/do stuff like that.

Think it through... like I said, it makes perfect sense. (FINALLY, something makes sense on why there's such a mess in Los Osos)

So, to recap, I can show, using nothing but excellent, primary sources, how the town of Los Osos (and, by extension, the people of SLO County and California) is nothing more than the victim of a cover-up -- a deliberate 9-year-and-counting effort to cover-up the fact that the "better, cheaper, faster" project that formed the LOCSD and caused the demise of the County's project (at a cost of $6 million to COUNTY taxpayers), had failed in 2000.

No doubt about it.

Actually, there's nothing left to explain why the second project ALSO had to be built in the middle of Los Osos, other than to cover-up the fact that the first project had failed.

If you have ANY questions whatsoever on this, trust me, I can answer them, using nothing but primary sources.

Anyhoot, thought you might find all of this as interesting as I do.

It certainly does clear up why there's such a train wreck in Los Osos, huh?

Thanks,
Ron

P.S. King Harris was the editor at New Times when they published my second cover story. If you want to hear something else interesting, ask him about that story's impact.

- - -

Now, I want to do something that, shockingly, has never been done before... anywhere!

Here's what I'm going to do (and this will blow your mind, because you're going to see the cover-up in 2-seconds)... I'm going to take the graphic of the Solution Group/early LOCSD's "better, cheaper, faster" site plan from 1998 - 2000, a project that required "50 to 70 acres," was solely responsible for forming the LOCSD in the first place, AND tanking the county's "ready to go" project, and then I'm going to take the LOCSD's second Tri-W project, a project that required "5 - 7 acres" that was designed by the engineering firm, Montgomery, Watson, Harza, and I'm going to overlay the MWH project on top of the Solution Group/initial LOCSD's project... strap yourself in:

Here's the Solution Group/initial LOCSD's "better, cheaper, faster" ponding project site plan from 1998 - 2000:



Here's (one of) the Montgomery, Watson, Harza site plan(s) from 2000 - 2005:



Now, check this out -- an amazing SewerWatch exclusive -- here's the MWH "5 -7 acres" site plan (lower right corner) on top of the Solution Group/initial LOCSD's "better, cheaper, faster" ponding project "50 -70 acres" site plan:



THAT's what the Solution Group/1998 - 2005 LOCSD Board wants you to believe is a "morph"... to this day, they STILL have to call that a "morph," just a couple of simple "design changes," because once someone is locked into a cover-up, they have to commit to it. That's the nature of a cover-up.

Like I wrote to Congalton, "no doubt about it" -- there was absolutely no reason whatsoever why the second project -- a near-exact opposite of the first project -- had to ALSO be built in the middle of town... OTHER than to cover-up the fact that the first project had failed.

All of a sudden, things like why there's a civics train wreck in Los Osos, and why there are backdated contracts, and the recalled Directors' scorched earth policy of "fining out of existence," and attempting to dissolve the LOCSD, and personally suing individual post-recall Board members... start making perfect sense, for a change.

The people of Los Osos, SLO County, and California are merely the victims of a 9-year-and-counting cover-up by, well, to be frank, the Solution Group.

###