This paid announcement was scanned from the October 23rd edition of The Daily Breeze.
It is going to become more important to ponder about this issue as time goes by and we all have opportunities to gather together and ponder out loud with others that do seem to listen---how refreshing.
According to an individual who works with the Sanitation Districts and has gathered information about where folks want to see the major construction at ground level, approximately 99% of the people who have shared their opinions have indicated that Terminal Island is the preferred site for the ground-level site and the giant hole in the ground for access to the tunnel area.
SPECIAL NOTE*
The first comment to this blog comes from Mr. Russell Jeans. Mr. Jeans is NOT the source of any of the information I have written on this post.
As I have written in previous posts about this issue, I think a new Outfall System is needed and I would support one being accessed at ground level on Terminal Island where one of the proposed sites is located.
I will Email Mr. Jeans with my source's name.
http://www.clearwaterprogram.org/clearwater/ is the URL for the Clearwater Program.
For an organization that truly deals with sewage in the area, it is the one organization I have found to be the best by far, in informing the public, being really willing to work with OUR community and all other impacted communities, and ready to demonstrate real responsibility, reasonableness, and everyone seems responsible in their jobs and their willingness to include everyone in all the processes.
1 comment:
I need to offer clarification here. As noted elsewhere, Mark and I have known each other since we were kids. Also, noted elsewhere I am an employee of the Sanitation Districts and a lead operator at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant. I have never spoken with Mark regarding the Clearwater Program, let alone anything else regarding my employment or employer.
I think the remarks recorded by Mark that were given to him by another employee are probably recorded correctly as Mark understood them. I also think those remarks were careless and baseless. I would have immediately questioned how many were there in the population of that survey and how he arrived at 99%.
I have spoken with only one person about the consideration of a new outfall and that was with Jerry Gusha at Williams' Bookstore. I only explained the reasons the Districts' may desire a new outfall, as I was personally active in a couple events that have helped lead to that consideration.
Jerry told me about an early meeting offered by the Districts to the community in which it sounded like the Department Engineer of the Wastewater Department made a presentation in which there were several negative comments made. I explained to Jerry several of the issues involved and, as a consequence, he felt he had a better understanding of those issues.
My knowledge of the issues clearly suggests to me that there may be a real need for a new outfall. But, as to the best choice of those options discussed I have no better knowledge or anyway to determine which choice may be better than anyone else in the general public.
I have no personal preference at this time. This post I am making, so nobody makes more of it than what it is, is only for clarification. And to make sure anyone who reads this and knows me may conclude that I am not the employee that Mark is referring.
Also, I am not writing it because I may fear retribution at work. Nor, am I writing it out of concern that I may in someway be adversely impacted if I don't make a complete denial.
The Districts is a good employer and a good member of the communities it serves. I am proud to work there and of the work they do. Anyone may ask me about anything in that regard at any time.
Russell Jeans
Post a Comment