On behalf of the Los Osos Community Services District, I would like to correct errors made in the article titled â€œThree Blocks Upwind of Downtownâ€? by Ron Crawford printed in the Sept. 23-29 edition of New Times, and object to the vulgar language used by Mr. Crawford.
INACCURATE INFORMATION: â€œTaxpayers have already said that they donâ€™t want to pay for a park.â€?
FACT: Measure E-97, cited by Mr. Crawford as the election taxpayers rejected funding for a new park, was for recreational activities and a swimming pool, not a park.
INACCURATE INFORMATION: â€œThe park that Los Osos doesnâ€™t want to pay for, and is dictated by the central location the community doesnâ€™t want, is also dictating the type of sewer â€” a more expensive type that would be needed without the park.â€?
FACT: Studies completed in response to the Coastal Commission showed that wastewater treatment facilities located outside of town without amenities would likely cost more than the proposed project.
INACCURATE INFORMATION: â€œOther than being pigeonholed as the only suitable site due to its location for the park, the controversial Tri-W Site was also chosen because it toped a list of seven potential sites following an evaluation of all the sites.â€?
FACT: The Tri-W site was one of four centrally located sites, and it was not controversial when it was proposed. The Tri-W site scored the highest of the seven sites because it had a willing seller and fewer negatives than other sites.
INACCURATE INFORMATION: â€œBut when the criteria used to rank the sites is examined, thereâ€™s substantial weight given to something called community acceptance, and a large portion of that criteria is open space, access, and aesthetic factors.â€?
FACT: Mr. Crawford is correct that the District Board intentionally included open space, access, and aesthetic factors in the ranking criteria. These amenities continue to be important values for Los Osos and are appropriate factors in deciding between sites.
INACCURATE INFORMATION: â€œEven with the park amenities all over the cover of the facilities report â€¦ even with the park element dictating the location and the type of sewer, apparently it was never going to be included after all.â€?
FACT: Mr. Crawford fails to acknowledge that the Wastewater Treatment Site Plan included the off-leash dog park, the multi-purpose play fields, and the trails that were the communityâ€™s highest priority for park amenities in the workshops that LOCSD held to get community input on design.
INACCURATE INFORMATION: â€œIncidentally, the State Revolving Fund thatâ€™s going to be used to help pay for this mess does not cover park facilities.â€?
FACT: The State Revolving Fund will pay for park facilities as long as they are a requirement of a
permit. Since the Coastal Commission agreed to add the omitted amenities
as a condition of approval, these
amenities are now
The LOCSD remains committed to providing the community with the best information available on all aspects of issues affecting Los Osos. Â³