Saturday, July 16, 2016

How Come Everything Associated with Port Angeles Seems to Go Worng???

As many of you readers may have noticed, there's been a persistent (though not quite trollish - yet) voice here lately, pushing the "Everything's fine!" party line for Port Angeles. This person's position is, put simply, the fact that a small handful of businesses have done or are doing well, is a sign that all is well in Port Angeles. Full stop. The New Age of Prosperity is upon you, Port Angeles!

Others, however, take a little more of a  long-term and skeptical point of view.

So, with those two worldviews in mind, what are we to make of this article?

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/port-angeles-tribe-say-elwha-water-plant-never-worked-still-doesnt/

Is this yet more bad news (and bad publicity) for the Little City That Couldn't? Or is this the kind of Federal SNAFU that could be expected from a project of this scale? Is this the City's bold attempt to shake the Feds down for a few more dollars? Or, is this the forward and vigilant City Council trying to protect their ever-more-burdened ratepayers?


And if it all ends in tears...Will they be potable?

32 comments:

  1. Given we are talking about a region that has learned to live off grants and handouts, color me suspicious.

    You don't get millions more of "free money", unless you ask for it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You know that old saying about so and so doesn't want a hand-out, they want a hand up?

    Well, Port Angeles just wants the hand-out. Now, and forever.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm going to guess that the takeaway from this for most people in the Puget Sound area is that Port Angeles is a place so screwed up, they can't even produce clean water, not even after spending tens of millions of dollars to do so. You can't buy publicity like that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Does anyone realize how tenuous is our water supply? Does anyone realize the Elwha is our only source and it must be at or above 200 gpm in order for our Ranney Well to pull water. Does anyone realize we got perilously close to a dry out last year at 220 gpm? Then the rains came early and we dodged a very serious bullet. Have you heard anyone discussing back up water supplies for the town? Has anyone looked at the snow pack, or lack of it, on the mountains?

    Yall ain't seen shit--yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are mixed up on units of measure, if not more.

      The Ranney well was rated at 6.6 million gallons per day in 2014 by an independent firm. That's 76 gallons per second, about 10 cfs.

      The Elwha River flows dropped to around 200 cfs last year, not 200 gpm. That's about 90,000 gpm, or 1500 gallons per second. That's about 20 times what the city CAN pull from the Ranney at all, and more than seven times what you say the Ranney needs to work right. And that was with it being about as dry as it has ever gotten around here, and no lakes up there. Perilously close, my ass.

      Delete
    2. Well, this is a bit misleading.

      As you are obviously informed, you know that Ecology will not allow the City to pump the Elwha down to 10 cfs, because there are Federal and State laws protecting endangered fish in the river. Since you know the cut-off number, why did you omit this?

      Also, Deer Park Rd area DID run out of water last year. Or, more correctly, it's traditional source did, and the PUD had to spend a lot of money (a million or more?) to run a new emergency pumping system up the road, to keep around 500 houses from running dry.

      Why did you omit this?

      Yes, I know the OP diverted to speaking about the Elwha River, but they did start with "Does anyone realize how tenuous is our water supply?", and they are correct. Even earlier this year, before the hot dry weather of this Spring changed, the rivers on the West End were lower that last year! If it had continued like last year, we would be having a different conversation.

      Let's realize we rely on the weather patterns for our water, and we all know those patterns are changing. Even if some won't admit it.

      Delete
    3. Umm ... everybody relies on weather for water. Everybody. That's 4th grade stuff. That I did not mention it does not imply that I deny it.

      And yes, I only spoke of the Elwha. This thread was about the City's water supply, if you'll recall CK's post. I replied to a specific comment, not to CK.

      So in context my remarks are accurate, and not misleading at all. But keep trying if you like.

      Delete
    4. Oh, come now. "Umm ... everybody relies on weather for water. Everybody. That's 4th grade stuff. That I did not mention it does not imply that I deny it." THAT is really lame. I'm disappointed in your reply. I didn't think you'd stoop that low.

      Without making a page long explanation of how it works here, I'm hoping a few words like "diminishing snow pack" and "we rely on snow pack" " drier region climate because of Climate Change" might remind everyone else about what you're evading.

      And, you evaded the whole topic about how Ecology and EPA will not allow the City to pump all the water out of the Elwha. There is a "minimum flow" requirement.

      Back for more, later.

      Delete
    5. Here is yet another nonsensical response from someone (Anon 7:51) trying to convince everyone everything in Port Angeles is just Honky Donky Okay.

      "And yes, I only spoke of the Elwha. This thread was about the City's water supply, if you'll recall CK's post. I replied to a specific comment, not to CK." Hunh?

      So the thread is about the vulnerability of Port Angeles' water supply, which comes from a lot of different sources, and this guy is trying to tell us everything is all great, nothing to worry about here, folks, based on ignoring the facts of the situation?

      After flat out dodging the specifics like the fact the city cannot pump all the water out of the Elwha, or that Fairview (Deer Park area) did in fact run out of water last year, or that the weather patterns are in fact changing here on the Peninsula, we are told ".. in context my remarks are accurate.."

      Ooookayy.

      Delete
    6. OK, so you don't get the context thing. There's still not a word I've said here that isn't true. But keep trying if you like.

      Delete
  5. Since this story was in the Seattle paper a couple of days earlier, and on this blog yesterday, naturally it's in the Peninsula Daily News today.

    Isn't it funny how the source closest to local news is so often the last to cover local news? Almost like, gee, they weren't planning on covering it at all, until they were kind of forced to by the fact other outlets are talking about it...

    The PDN continues to be more of a source of embarrassment than enlightenment. Read it online for free, if you must, but please, don't buy it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Stop telling us this on this blog, tell the damn advertisers. They are the only ones who can make them improve. Hello Swains, Price Ford, Wilder Auto, Realtors, you are promoting an inferior product that is keeping readers in the dark about important things happening and affecting our lives. Have them become a first class news property or quit supporting pablum. Pepsi Cola has a policy. If one person writes a letter to the company they figure there are 5,000 who feel the same way. A few letters, phone calls or emails to the major advertisers will do wonders for the local newspaper. Otherwise swill your pablum and quit whining about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Harshly, but correctly, stated. Ads are the lifeblood of the newspaper. Start bleeding them dry, and they HAVE to notice.

      Delete
    2. I noticed on the on-line version (no, I stopped buying that piece of shit paper years ago) that Delta Dental is a prominent advertiser.

      Of course.

      Delete
    3. I canceled my subscription well over a year ago but just finally got around to (proudly) removing the PDN orange box from my mailbox post. It felt like needed closure since the parent company never responded to any of my emails to them begging them to make changes and win me back as a customer.

      Delete
  7. The city doesn't want it. The tribe doesn't want it. The park doesn't want it. Veolia Water is still operating it. Nippon's water rights are coming up soon. I can see Veolia making a deal for both of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BINGO! Gold Star! You've been paying attention all along...

      Delete
    2. Why haven't you posted negatively about the tribe?

      Delete
    3. Okay. The tribe sucks.

      There, I've "posted negatively" about the tribe.

      The tribe that has zero control over actions the City of Port Angeles takes, and has no influence over the citizens of Port Angeles.

      Now, back to the real conversation...

      Delete
  8. There is nothing wrong with the quality of the drinking water Port Angeles sells to its residents and customers (before it gets treated with fluoride,anyway). Just read the glowing annual water quality reports that Port Angeles prepares and shares according to state health laws.
    So, it appears to me that the city's part of this dust-up is all about trying to, again, shake down the feds.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The water report gives results for treated water. That's after removing solids to acceptable turbidity standards and disinfection. The expensive and dubious component is getting the raw water to meet the standards-that's the city's concern. Those big pumps and flocculation tanks by the river are not cheap to run, nor is the process at the transfer station facility. Tour the new facilities provided by the NPS and compare them to the old system associated with the Raney well. Night and day difference.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The point is that even with a "defective" Elwha Water Treatment Plant (EWTP) the new PAWTP has been fully and consistently able to process Elwha/Ranney water to meet drinking water standards.
      Cry me a river. The city received around $30 million in cash from the feds to cover extra operating costs for this extravagantly overbuilt facility. PAWTP's output capability is three times the amount of water that PA sells to its customers.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for bringing this topic back on course. The City is obviously knows well how to turn any situation into "Oh, poor Port Angeles is in terrible shape, and needs a handout". And, here we are again. Different day, same tune.

      It reminds me about how they say "Don't feed the wildlife, because they will forget how to find their normal food". Port Angeles has been looking for grants and handouts as a way to survive, for so long now, that it forgot what a normal town functions like.

      Delete
    3. @9:20, you get the meme award! PA has indeed forgotten how a real town operates. A real town that operates without constant vigilance for the next grant or subsidy, and having divvied it up in the back room even before the application is drafted. But no matter, that's just a little deal you make with the devil when you sell the soul of your own town.

      Delete
  10. Truth be told the city manger is the chief of operations. This hasn't gone to council. Do you recognize you seek McKeen's head for your platter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are many good reasons to seek McKeen's head, or at least his firing/resignation.

      But not so long as the current lame council would be the ones to choose his replacement.

      Delete
  11. And so....
    Did the city take the dams down?
    Did the city design and build the treatment plant?
    Did the council have anything to do with this or is this a staff recommendation?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Could it be that the city does not want to be burdened with a treatment plant design chosen by the NPS that uses a patented process (Actiflo by Veolia) which requires expensive flocculation materials forever?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're thinking that the City could think that deeply...Which may be overthinking, or overestimating, on your part. Long-range is not their strong suit.

      Delete
    2. Hold on there CK, let's encourage @9:28 to delve into the finer details. Since we don't get any real analysis of any issue at council level, let's do it right here on your blog.

      Please @9:28, lay out the parameters of the matter. You seem to have knowledge of the NPS cost factors, but what about the costs associated with rehabbing Ranney?

      As we all know, water will become more of an issue, any public discussion at all about it is valuable.

      Delete
  13. An earlier article also summarized the litany of issues associated with the water treatment plants. I'd say the National Park Service's choice of URS Corporation to design a system which must use proprietary Veolia products and equipment is at the core of the issue, not the City's reluctance to take over the facilities. http://o.seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2020826864_elwhaplantxml.html

    ReplyDelete
  14. And, at last night's city council meeting the voice that fell from the heavens, no wait, that was just Collins phoning it in (instead of his usual faxing it in)said something about "Waste Management" as a cost cutting measure (when they were discussing the budget).

    If this means finally falling under the steamroller and allow WM to take over the city's garbage, this is BAD.

    First WM is a horrible, corrupt company (google WM and crooks). It is said to have mob ties (? people say that repeatedly, that WM=we're the mob). They force cities to pass all kinds of crazy laws that limit what dumpsters can be used in the town (monopolize the industry), they make it so that the city is hobbled by them and bound by them (tighter than a slave in an S&M demonstration) and then they charge very, very high rates, and since they are a monopoly, while lowering the wages of the employees.

    Collins must be looking for a fat kickback, because that is also what they do. CA-CHING. He (and the other fat grubby, wrinkled, open hands on the council) needs to snatch the last of the breadcrumbs, get what they can get while they're still at the trough.

    All ABOARD!! Get on the Gravy Train.

    Hello Delta Dental? Hello Waste Management?

    ReplyDelete