On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 10:18:53 -0800, "PrecisionMachinisT"
wrote:
"alphonso" wrote in message
...
When my shop was inside the city limits, I got a letter from the city
about
an "abandoned, junk vehicle" in the parking lot by the shop. Police came
out after I asked city hall what they were complaining about. Pointed to
my ugly shop truck. When I directed the cop's attention to the current
license and inspection, he offered an apology. I moved my shop out of the
city a few months later.

Just an update...

The letter has NOT been sent--but I did have a nice chat with Mr. Trejo this
morning, he actually seems to be a fairly nice man...

Tentatively scheduled him to visit with me here on this friday in order to
verify compliance and will add more info as the situation continues to
develop.

FWIW, the complaining party is a Ms. Donna Hendryx, a local real estate
agent--what she was doing upon my property in the first place is still a
complete mystery to me, I am rather secluded and access is via a long
private drive in the county....the officer informed me she had filed a total
of 3 complaints on that same day.

She either owns, is the listing agent for, or plans to list a
property in your immediate area. So of course she's going to get all
the sloppy yards cleaned up (at no cost to her or her clients, of
course, and the city will do all the legwork and take the blame)
before she tries parading potential buyers to that house for the hard
sell.

Do some sleuthing, and you might be able to bust her at her own
game. As in, "Gee... Did you pull building permits on all the work
you just did on that house?"

-- Bruce --

--
Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.

In article ,
Nick Hull wrote:

In article ,
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote:

"alphonso" wrote in message
...
When my shop was inside the city limits, I got a letter from the city
about
an "abandoned, junk vehicle" in the parking lot by the shop. Police came
out after I asked city hall what they were complaining about. Pointed to
my ugly shop truck. When I directed the cop's attention to the current
license and inspection, he offered an apology. I moved my shop out of the
city a few months later.

My brother was driving his normal work truck when suddenly he was
acosted and awarded 1st place in The Ugliest Truck in America; the
others withdrew at first sight, they knew they didn't have a chance.

Hmmmm.

Where did this contest take place? I'd like to enter my 1990 E350 Ford
Van. The old gal's a little hard to wake up on -10F mornings. That
445c.i. diesel cranks over a few times before one or two cylinders kick
off, but once it's shaken all the loose rust off, it settles down and
hums like a good lover.

So far the old girl hasn't left me along the road wondering what
happened. So she's maybe a little work-worn, but she's reliable. As long
as I keep the oil and filters changed, she gets up and takes me to work
or wherever with no complaints.

Maybe it's all that expensive diesel fuel I feed her?

I think she'd be proud to win or at least get an Honorable Mention.

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 08:40:23 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Bruce
L. Bergman quickly quoth:

She either owns, is the listing agent for, or plans to list a
property in your immediate area. So of course she's going to get all
the sloppy yards cleaned up (at no cost to her or her clients, of
course, and the city will do all the legwork and take the blame)
before she tries parading potential buyers to that house for the hard
sell.

Don't you just hate people like that? I wonder if a word with her real
estate boss might be helpful. (S)He might not know about her attacks
on all the local folks and might not be happy with it. Perhaps an
anonymous note from a post office across town?


Do some sleuthing, and you might be able to bust her at her own
game. As in, "Gee... Did you pull building permits on all the work
you just did on that house?"

Let's say the lot in question is right next door. I wonder how a nice
sign would go over, such as "Talk to me before you purchase a home
from that slippery Donna Hendryx wench." (Just kidding.


--
The Smart Person learns from his mistakes.
The Wise Person learns from the mistakes of others.
And then there are all the rest of us...
-----------------------------------------------------
www.diversify.com -- Wisearse Website Design

In article ,
jim rozen wrote:

In article , Nick Hull
says...

I disagree; a lawyer is more likely to bankrupt you and betray you.
Better to read the law yourself until you know more about it than either
a lawyer or a bureaucrat.

I wouldn't take out my own appendix, and I wouldn't
represent myself in court.

It's been said that the man who represents himself has a fool for a
client. Better that than having a fool for a lawyer. The decent
lawyers are usually too busy to take your case. \\

--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

In article , Nick Hull
says...

I wouldn't take out my own appendix, and I wouldn't
represent myself in court.

It's been said that the man who represents himself has a fool for a
client. Better that than having a fool for a lawyer. The decent
lawyers are usually too busy to take your case. \\

You have to understand of course I'm biased here. My wife had
a law practice for many years, and apparently the absolute *worst*
situations she had to untangle were the ones where the person
"tried to do it himself" first.

For the few times I've had to deal with legal matters, my
attorney has been worth the price I paid to help put her through
law school.

:^)

The most recent event was when I was ticketed for flashing my lights
to warn oncoming drivers of a speed trap.

She knew exactly how to research the case, and how to write the
motion to get the charge dismissed. Which it was. There was no
WAY I could have done what she did.

I class lawyers mostly in the same catagory as plumbers, electricians,
masons, and so on. They have special training and experience which
makes paying *them* for their skills cost-effective as opposed to learning
to do exactly what they do and how they do it. Of course a lay person
with some smarts can learn a great deal of what they know, which makes
it easy to communicate with them effectively.

Costs:

$10 per hour

$20 per hour, if you watch

$30 per hour, if you help

$100 per hour, if you tried to do it yourself and screwed it up and
then called me....


Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

Would be inneresting to file a trespassing complaint against this wretch.
Your proof?
Her complaint!
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"alphonso" wrote in message
...
When my shop was inside the city limits, I got a letter from the city
about
an "abandoned, junk vehicle" in the parking lot by the shop. Police came
out after I asked city hall what they were complaining about. Pointed to
my ugly shop truck. When I directed the cop's attention to the current
license and inspection, he offered an apology. I moved my shop out of
the
city a few months later.


Just an update...

The letter has NOT been sent--but I did have a nice chat with Mr. Trejo
this
morning, he actually seems to be a fairly nice man...

Tentatively scheduled him to visit with me here on this friday in order to
verify compliance and will add more info as the situation continues to
develop.

FWIW, the complaining party is a Ms. Donna Hendryx, a local real estate
agent--what she was doing upon my property in the first place is still a
complete mystery to me, I am rather secluded and access is via a long
private drive in the county....the officer informed me she had filed a
total
of 3 complaints on that same day.

--

SVL

So I guess you won't be up for joining my latest non-profit endeavor, The
International Consortium for the Neutering of All Lawyers?
Well, almost all--ahma need a lawyer to draw up the papers.
So your brother could be granted an exception--if he does the work pro
boner, of course.
Unless you want him neutered....

In the poorer states, I'd save them money by omitting the anaesthesia.
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Emmo" wrote in message
...
My experience is that the bureaucrats are happy to leave well enough
alone,
as long as you help them defend against the complainant - in your case
some
real estate woman.

My sincere suggestion is to go back and edit out all of the angry,
insulting, abrasive comments from your letter, and make it as plain and
straightforward as you can. Write it as if Mr Trejo was on your side,
which
I think he probably is. Then print it out and have it ready to hand to
him
when he comes out to visit.

When he visits, ask him how long he has lived in the area, see if he has
any
interest in old cars or trucks, show off your favorite lathe or tractor,
and
in general, be a nice guy. You will come off as the nice, reasonable,
old
timer vs. the shrill, bitchy, nagging, complaining busybody.

Make this guy your friend against the intruding yuppie lady. It's nice
to
be nice...


Emmo,

All good advice, and FWIW I have already forwarded a copy to my brother
who
is an attorney in order that he may edit my draft...and already I have
recieved an edited copy back--perhaps this evening I may also post it if I
find time.

Thanks for your level-headed response--it comes much appreciated.


--


SVL

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 15:20:49 -0500, "Proctologically Violated©®"
wrote:

Would be inneresting to file a trespassing complaint against this wretch.
Your proof?
Her complaint!

"No Trespassing" signs would have needed to have been posted
in advance I think. Then proof that they were & to code ....
--
Cliff

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================== =======
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================== =======

Larry Jaques wrote:

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================== =======
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================== =======








































































































Bottom posting is so much better.... the futher to the bottom the
better.


John

"John" wrote in message
...
Larry Jaques wrote:

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================== =======
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================== =======








































































































Bottom posting is so much better.... the futher to the bottom the
better.


John





































































































































































Hey, if you're going to do it to satisfy the anal, do it right.

Right?

Steve

If I am following a thread in a newsgroup, I prefer to read top posted
responses because as soon as you open the message, the latest response is
right in front of you, and you don't have to scroll down to the bottom of
the message to read it.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================== =======
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================== =======

The jury is still out on this one. Many of us don't see any sense having to
scroll through pages of text we already read on the previous post. It's a
kindness to put any reply on the top!!!! It's the fools and fidiots who get
it backward and add a one liner at the end of a long post.


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================== =======
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================== =======

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...
Dear Mr. Trejo.

I am writing this letter in response to a complaint I recently received
from
your office wherein you claim to have discovered items present upon my
property located at 1629 Cloverdale Road that are supposedly in violation
of
State and County guidelines pertaining to solid waste storage and disposal
as mandated per WAC 173-350 and Cowlitz County Code Title 15-30



One summer I spent every spare moment rebuilding a 1936 John Deere BR
tractor with intent to show it at a nearby collectors show. A day or two
after the show I received a letter from the city that they had received a
complaint that I was running a business out of my garage repairing vehicles,
and no details were given except that an inspector would be out to check
things over. I called the city to see what the deal was and as it happened
the inspector showed up the day before we were to leave, while I was at
work. In my drive was my in-laws motor home, with a trailer attached with my
tractor on it. This was told to me by the inspector with a chuckle! He told
me not to worry about it was he knew what I had been up to. He asked me
about the tractor, the work I had done to it and so forth, just chit-chat.
He even asked me how the show went and said he had seen me there and had
taken some
pictures of my tractor.
For those interested,
http://myweb.cableone.net/goo1959/jd.htm#A
Greg

PrecisionMachinisT wrote:

"Kirk Gordon" wrote in message
...
Dear Mr. Lockwood,

Thank you very much for your recent letter regarding compliance with
County guidlines pertaining to solid waste storage and removal. (Case
#SW 05-107)

In accordance with your suggestions, I have carefully reviewed a
number of the applicable county statutes and ordinances. Also, in order
to address your concerns in the most comprehensive manner possible, I
have consulted with officials in several state offices, including the
Department of Motor Vehicles, and with representatives of the US
Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Homeland Security,
the Department Of Transportation, and the US Customs service, among
others.

As you explained, the alleged violations on your property are not
exactly what they might appear to a casual or uninformed observer.
Specifically:

A. According to the State Department of Motor Vehicles and the US
Department of Transportation, a motor vehicle is defined as "a vehicle
with a motor." Since your truck does not currently qualify as such, you
are quite correct in your assertion that the orginal complaint was
improper. However, in its current state, the truck may qualify,
according to EPA definitions, as a "solid materials retention site."
This qualification typically applies to any collection of "metals,
plastics, textiles, or any combination thereof, exceeding a gross mass
of 100 Kg, and stored in proximity to residential or commercial
buildings, public gathering areas, or industrial sites which lack the
licenses appropriate for such storage." Since you've made it clear that
you understand both the letter and the intent of the applicable codes
and regulations, I've assured the local office of the EPA that you will
be sending copies of your licences, quality control manuals for solid
matter storage and disposal, and also the appropriate certifications and
credentials for your firm's safety and environmental affairs officers,
at your earliest convenience. For your reference, the EPA case number
is 05-122C-90096. The case file will be considered unresolved, pending
investigation, until your documents have been received.

You should also be aware that the local fire department will recieve
a copy of all entries to the EPA file. Given the tone of your letter,
however, I'm sure that your fire-fighting equipment, training of
personnel, and emergency preparedness plans, are all in good order, and
have been properly registered and approved in advance. As soon as the
local fire officials have verified your registrations and certificates,
they'll be able to perform the legally mandated on-site inspections.

Also, just to be as helpful as I can, I would respectfully suggest
that you contact your accountant or tax advisor, to discuss the
possibility that the repairs you're making to the truck might affect its
value as an item of taxable personal property, its status as a
depreciable piece of industrial equipment, or both.

The repairs to the truck, of course, fall under the jurisdiction of
the State Department of Licenses and Inspections, which, if I understand
their guidlines correctly, requires that repairs exceeding certain
levels of cost, complexity, or duration, be performed only by a licenced
automotive technician. Since the removal and replacement of an engine
seems clearly to be a very major repair, I've asked an acquaintance at
L&I to look up your license, and to confirm that it's current and in
good standing. That way, it won't be necessary for them to open a case
file or investigate a violation that I'm sure you'd never be guilty of.

The only other matter concerning the truck will be for the regional
office of the EPA to verify, probably with an on-site inspection that
won't take more than two or three days, that you've followed all
applicable rules and guidelines for collection, storage, and/or disposal
of potentially hazzardous materials produced by your disassembly of the
truck, and your removal of its motor. The materials in question will
include, but not be limited to: motor oil, transmission fluid,
refrigerants from the air conditioning system if the truck is so
equipped, anti-freeze or other ethanol-based coolant additives,
nonbiodegradable plastic and rubber parts, any solvents or chemicals
used for cleaning the parts of the truck or engine, cloth or paper
products which may have been used in conjunction with the solvents or
cleaners, and any rainwater which may have come into contact with, mixed
with, or disolved, any of the above, and which was not collected in
approved catch-basins designed and licensed for that purpose and
operated according to EPA guidelines.

I'm sure, based on your letter to me, that you routinely take all
necessary precautions. The EPA inspectors, when they arrive at your
facility, will very likely be able to save you a great deal of time and
effort if you simply present to them all the applicable permits,
receipts for fees, and certifications from disposal contractors that you
might employ.

B. Unlike your truck, the tires might actually be a problem. If you'll
please refer to page 14 of this letter...

Or you could just clean up your damned yard, Mr. Lockwood. You
really, REALLY don't want to **** me off right before the holidays.

Sincerely,
J. M. Trejo


Thanks Kirk...

Always appreciate when you can set aside a couple minutes or so to do some
writing for us...here's to hoping work is keeping you exactly as busy as you
like and that everything else is well with your world.

===

Interestingly enough, I've decided to fully cooperate with
authoritys...really seems a nice enough guy...just that as his public duty
he needs the matter resolved, and so...us working together likely being the
very best course of action--in reality this in effect makes me out as the
"good guy", and the complaining party to be the "troublemaker"...

Probly gonna conduct a records search to see if the woman that is
registering these complaint is in the habit of routinely causing the waste
of taxpayer funds with her frivolous claims...this way the agency will at
least be better able to logically deal with it should the trend continue.

--

SVL

Are you saying that she is a piece of envoiomental waste?



John

"Greg O" wrote in message
...
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...
Dear Mr. Trejo.

I am writing this letter in response to a complaint I recently received
from
your office wherein you claim to have discovered items present upon my
property located at 1629 Cloverdale Road that are supposedly in
violation
of
State and County guidelines pertaining to solid waste storage and
disposal
as mandated per WAC 173-350 and Cowlitz County Code Title 15-30



One summer I spent every spare moment rebuilding a 1936 John Deere BR
tractor with intent to show it at a nearby collectors show. A day or two
after the show I received a letter from the city that they had received a
complaint that I was running a business out of my garage repairing
vehicles,
and no details were given except that an inspector would be out to check
things over. I called the city to see what the deal was and as it happened
the inspector showed up the day before we were to leave, while I was at
work. In my drive was my in-laws motor home, with a trailer attached with
my
tractor on it. This was told to me by the inspector with a chuckle! He
told
me not to worry about it was he knew what I had been up to. He asked me
about the tractor, the work I had done to it and so forth, just chit-chat.
He even asked me how the show went and said he had seen me there and had
taken some
pictures of my tractor.
For those interested,
http://myweb.cableone.net/goo1959/jd.htm#A
Greg


Nice restoration work, Greg.

I'm scared that with the current average experience level of our local code
local enforcement personell , I would probly get cited because it has no
tires and so therefore is not roadworthy.

I have 8 acres here, adjoining me to the south is an 11 acre tract that's
being subdivided, and to the north are another 12 acres that have already
sold--the real estate market is just going plain nutz.in my area....maybe
time for me to move on to greener pastures, I spose..

The wife and I have actually kinda been considering maybe picking up and
moving up nearer to Harold's place--went up as far as the Toledo / Winlock
area and looked around a few weeks ago.....sadly, didn't find anything.

Harold, if your reading this--appreciate if you could keep an eye open and
let me know if you happen to see any place that might look promising...maybe
someplace south / southwest of you, 2~5 acres--prefererably fairly flat and
ideally having some small amount of year-round running water...though flat
land with some of the acreage having mildly wet, sandy or clay type soil is
okay too ( for geo source heating purposes )

--

SVL

While I normally bottom post, I'm suggesting that John & George have a case.
One reason I suggest they do is that when I click on a post to respond, I
find my cursor at the top of the post, ready to accept my response. Why
would it be there if that isn't where I should be typing?

Still, aside from this particular post, you'll find my responses at the
end------with the unnecessary information typically clipped.

Harold

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
news:Nuednfc8J968OwrenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
snip----

Harold, if your reading this--appreciate if you could keep an eye open and
let me know if you happen to see any place that might look
promising...maybe
someplace south / southwest of you, 2~5 acres--prefererably fairly flat
and
ideally having some small amount of year-round running water...though flat
land with some of the acreage having mildly wet, sandy or clay type soil
is
okay too ( for geo source heating purposes )

--

SVL

I'll keep my eyes open. Have you given any thought to land in the general
Onalaska area? I don't get south or west much, so it's a lot easier to
keep watch near by. I don't have a favorite real estate agent, but I may
be able to check with one and see what's available in the Winlock/Toledo
area. . I'll let you know if I hear anything of substance. You're likely
looking at a 5 acre minimum purchase. They're making it hard to build on
anything less, thanks to the state and controlled development. There are
some exceptions.

Harold

Nuthin a little back-dating wouldn't cure.

--
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
"Cliff" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 15:20:49 -0500, "Proctologically Violated©®"
wrote:

Would be inneresting to file a trespassing complaint against this wretch.
Your proof?
Her complaint!

"No Trespassing" signs would have needed to have been posted
in advance I think. Then proof that they were & to code ....
--
Cliff

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
news:Nuednfc8J968OwrenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@scnresearch. com...
snip----

Harold, if your reading this--appreciate if you could keep an eye open
and
let me know if you happen to see any place that might look
promising...maybe
someplace south / southwest of you, 2~5 acres--prefererably fairly flat
and
ideally having some small amount of year-round running water...though
flat
land with some of the acreage having mildly wet, sandy or clay type soil
is
okay too ( for geo source heating purposes )

--

SVL

I'll keep my eyes open. Have you given any thought to land in the
general
Onalaska area? I don't get south or west much, so it's a lot easier to
keep watch near by. I don't have a favorite real estate agent, but I
may
be able to check with one and see what's available in the Winlock/Toledo
area. . I'll let you know if I hear anything of substance. You're
likely
looking at a 5 acre minimum purchase. They're making it hard to build on
anything less, thanks to the state and controlled development. There are
some exceptions.


Thanks, Harold--it's much appreciated....

And no, we haven't looked around up as far as Onalaska yet--last time I was
in that area was several years ago...been looking at the elevations and
whatnot using Google Earth, but really I need to get up there and have a
drive around--along Highway 12 anywhere to the west of Mayfield Reservoir,
else someplace along SR 508 just might do it.

--

SVL

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

snip----

I'll keep my eyes open. Have you given any thought to land in the
general
Onalaska area? I don't get south or west much, so it's a lot easier
to
keep watch near by. I don't have a favorite real estate agent, but I
may
be able to check with one and see what's available in the Winlock/Toledo
area. . I'll let you know if I hear anything of substance. You're
likely
looking at a 5 acre minimum purchase. They're making it hard to build
on
anything less, thanks to the state and controlled development. There
are
some exceptions.


Thanks, Harold--it's much appreciated....

And no, we haven't looked around up as far as Onalaska yet--last time I
was
in that area was several years ago...been looking at the elevations and
whatnot using Google Earth, but really I need to get up there and have a
drive around--along Highway 12 anywhere to the west of Mayfield Reservoir,
else someplace along SR 508 just might do it.

--

SVL


That's much closer to home, and in general pretty nice property. Sadly,
property values have escalated seriously in the past couple years, so the
killer bargains are gone now. I'm still speechless that we paid only
$17,500 for our 5-1/2 acres with an approved septic system. Best surprise
of all was when we found out the standing alder alone was worth more than we
paid for the land.

I think you're more likely to find a good buy along 508 than along 12, but
I'll check anything that comes available. Just tonight a neighbor made
mention that he might sell off some of his land, but it's way too soon to
know anything.

Are you sure you want a stream? It's not always a good thing, for they
force you to stay away from it now----it can render property valueless in
some ways because you can't develop it. If you do, you missed a great
chance right across from me. 5 acre lots that sold for about $25,000 a few
years ago. A nice stream runs through most of them. We're high and dry,
but on a slight slope that leads to that stream.

Secluded? View? Wooded? Logged? State your choices so I don't drive you
nuts with the wrong package.

Harold

"John" wrote in message
...
PrecisionMachinisT wrote:

"Kirk Gordon" wrote in message
...
Dear Mr. Lockwood,

Thank you very much for your recent letter regarding compliance
with
County guidlines pertaining to solid waste storage and removal. (Case
#SW 05-107)

In accordance with your suggestions, I have carefully reviewed a
number of the applicable county statutes and ordinances. Also, in
order
to address your concerns in the most comprehensive manner possible, I
have consulted with officials in several state offices, including the
Department of Motor Vehicles, and with representatives of the US
Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Homeland Security,
the Department Of Transportation, and the US Customs service, among
others.

As you explained, the alleged violations on your property are not
exactly what they might appear to a casual or uninformed observer.
Specifically:

A. According to the State Department of Motor Vehicles and the US
Department of Transportation, a motor vehicle is defined as "a vehicle
with a motor." Since your truck does not currently qualify as such,
you
are quite correct in your assertion that the orginal complaint was
improper. However, in its current state, the truck may qualify,
according to EPA definitions, as a "solid materials retention site."
This qualification typically applies to any collection of "metals,
plastics, textiles, or any combination thereof, exceeding a gross mass
of 100 Kg, and stored in proximity to residential or commercial
buildings, public gathering areas, or industrial sites which lack the
licenses appropriate for such storage." Since you've made it clear
that
you understand both the letter and the intent of the applicable codes
and regulations, I've assured the local office of the EPA that you
will
be sending copies of your licences, quality control manuals for solid
matter storage and disposal, and also the appropriate certifications
and
credentials for your firm's safety and environmental affairs officers,
at your earliest convenience. For your reference, the EPA case number
is 05-122C-90096. The case file will be considered unresolved,
pending
investigation, until your documents have been received.

You should also be aware that the local fire department will
recieve
a copy of all entries to the EPA file. Given the tone of your letter,
however, I'm sure that your fire-fighting equipment, training of
personnel, and emergency preparedness plans, are all in good order,
and
have been properly registered and approved in advance. As soon as the
local fire officials have verified your registrations and
certificates,
they'll be able to perform the legally mandated on-site inspections.

Also, just to be as helpful as I can, I would respectfully suggest
that you contact your accountant or tax advisor, to discuss the
possibility that the repairs you're making to the truck might affect
its
value as an item of taxable personal property, its status as a
depreciable piece of industrial equipment, or both.

The repairs to the truck, of course, fall under the jurisdiction
of
the State Department of Licenses and Inspections, which, if I
understand
their guidlines correctly, requires that repairs exceeding certain
levels of cost, complexity, or duration, be performed only by a
licenced
automotive technician. Since the removal and replacement of an engine
seems clearly to be a very major repair, I've asked an acquaintance at
L&I to look up your license, and to confirm that it's current and in
good standing. That way, it won't be necessary for them to open a
case
file or investigate a violation that I'm sure you'd never be guilty
of.

The only other matter concerning the truck will be for the
regional
office of the EPA to verify, probably with an on-site inspection that
won't take more than two or three days, that you've followed all
applicable rules and guidelines for collection, storage, and/or
disposal
of potentially hazzardous materials produced by your disassembly of
the
truck, and your removal of its motor. The materials in question will
include, but not be limited to: motor oil, transmission fluid,
refrigerants from the air conditioning system if the truck is so
equipped, anti-freeze or other ethanol-based coolant additives,
nonbiodegradable plastic and rubber parts, any solvents or chemicals
used for cleaning the parts of the truck or engine, cloth or paper
products which may have been used in conjunction with the solvents or
cleaners, and any rainwater which may have come into contact with,
mixed
with, or disolved, any of the above, and which was not collected in
approved catch-basins designed and licensed for that purpose and
operated according to EPA guidelines.

I'm sure, based on your letter to me, that you routinely take all
necessary precautions. The EPA inspectors, when they arrive at your
facility, will very likely be able to save you a great deal of time
and
effort if you simply present to them all the applicable permits,
receipts for fees, and certifications from disposal contractors that
you
might employ.

B. Unlike your truck, the tires might actually be a problem. If
you'll
please refer to page 14 of this letter...

Or you could just clean up your damned yard, Mr. Lockwood. You
really, REALLY don't want to **** me off right before the holidays.

Sincerely,
J. M. Trejo


Thanks Kirk...

Always appreciate when you can set aside a couple minutes or so to do
some
writing for us...here's to hoping work is keeping you exactly as busy as
you
like and that everything else is well with your world.

===

Interestingly enough, I've decided to fully cooperate with
authoritys...really seems a nice enough guy...just that as his public
duty
he needs the matter resolved, and so...us working together likely being
the
very best course of action--in reality this in effect makes me out as
the
"good guy", and the complaining party to be the "troublemaker"...

Probly gonna conduct a records search to see if the woman that is
registering these complaint is in the habit of routinely causing the
waste
of taxpayer funds with her frivolous claims...this way the agency will
at
least be better able to logically deal with it should the trend
continue.

--

SVL

Are you saying that she is a piece of envoiomental waste?


Oh, man--I heard some stories I could tell about her, ( small town--long
time local wench )...definately a real piece of work, that one is.

--

SVL

I agree.
If everyone clipped the messages they are responding to, eliminating all
the stuff that irrelevant to their reply, then I don't mind scrolling
past it. But if I'm already familiar with a thread, and involved in it,
I don't need to see all the threaded posts that precede it.
When you are having a conversation with someone, do you insist that
the other parties repeat everything said so far on the subject, then
tell you their reply?
I'm all for convention and such, but not everything in life is linear.

John Busby wrote:
If I am following a thread in a newsgroup, I prefer to read top posted
responses because as soon as you open the message, the latest response is
right in front of you, and you don't have to scroll down to the bottom of
the message to read it.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:


A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================ =========
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================ =========

George Willer wrote:
The jury is still out on this one. Many of us don't see any sense having to
scroll through pages of text we already read on the previous post. It's a
kindness to put any reply on the top!!!! It's the fools and fidiots who get
it backward and add a one liner at the end of a long post.

No kidding! Really ****es me off to scroll past pages and pages of
quoted text just to find

LMAO!!!

....at the end.


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 23:00:58 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Lew
Hartswick quickly quoth:


A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?


Is this something from Jeopardy? :-)
...lew...

Nah, it's a simple demonstration to (and demonization of) those
fidiots known as top-posters.

Life's too short to suffer fools and top-posters.


================================================ =========
The Titanic. The Hindenburg. + http://www.diversify.com
The Clintons. + Website & Graphic Design
================================================ =========

Harold,

Reasonable clipping makes bottom posts less irritating. Too bad not many
have enough consideration to do it. Top posting causes less irritation. I
wonder why more don't have enough consideration to put their silly one
liners at the top?

Plonking helps eliminate the worst offenders.

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...
While I normally bottom post, I'm suggesting that John & George have a
case.
One reason I suggest they do is that when I click on a post to respond, I
find my cursor at the top of the post, ready to accept my response. Why
would it be there if that isn't where I should be typing?

Still, aside from this particular post, you'll find my responses at the
end------with the unnecessary information typically clipped.

Harold

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 01:45:07 GMT, John Busby wrote:
If I am following a thread in a newsgroup, I prefer to read top posted
responses because as soon as you open the message, the latest response is
right in front of you, and you don't have to scroll down to the bottom of
the message to read it.

Then your argument is with people who are too lazy to trim old content,
rather than people who put it in a normal place.

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 09:08:07 -0600, Rex B wrote:
I agree.
If everyone clipped the messages they are responding to, eliminating all
the stuff that irrelevant to their reply, then I don't mind scrolling
past it. But if I'm already familiar with a thread, and involved in it,
I don't need to see all the threaded posts that precede it.

Then trim it out. As I have done, and you, lazily, did not.

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

snip----

I'll keep my eyes open. Have you given any thought to land in the
general
Onalaska area? I don't get south or west much, so it's a lot easier
to
keep watch near by. I don't have a favorite real estate agent, but
I
may
be able to check with one and see what's available in the
Winlock/Toledo
area. . I'll let you know if I hear anything of substance. You're
likely
looking at a 5 acre minimum purchase. They're making it hard to build
on
anything less, thanks to the state and controlled development. There
are
some exceptions.


Thanks, Harold--it's much appreciated....

And no, we haven't looked around up as far as Onalaska yet--last time I
was
in that area was several years ago...been looking at the elevations and
whatnot using Google Earth, but really I need to get up there and have a
drive around--along Highway 12 anywhere to the west of Mayfield
Reservoir,
else someplace along SR 508 just might do it.

--

SVL


That's much closer to home, and in general pretty nice property. Sadly,
property values have escalated seriously in the past couple years, so the
killer bargains are gone now. I'm still speechless that we paid only
$17,500 for our 5-1/2 acres with an approved septic system. Best surprise
of all was when we found out the standing alder alone was worth more than
we
paid for the land.

I think you're more likely to find a good buy along 508 than along 12, but
I'll check anything that comes available. Just tonight a neighbor made
mention that he might sell off some of his land, but it's way too soon to
know anything.

Are you sure you want a stream? It's not always a good thing, for they
force you to stay away from it now----it can render property valueless in
some ways because you can't develop it. If you do, you missed a great
chance right across from me. 5 acre lots that sold for about $25,000 a
few
years ago. A nice stream runs through most of them. We're high and dry,
but on a slight slope that leads to that stream.

Secluded? View? Wooded? Logged? State your choices so I don't drive
you
nuts with the wrong package.



Harold, don't worry much about it right now--it's still a bit too
early.....but thinking of heading up that way pretty soon, and I'll try and
give you a jingle when I do.

--

SVL

I find that there is so much BS that the whole conversation can be clipped,
and just a reply inserted.

As in this case, is there anyone out there who doesn't know what I'm saying,
or what I'm responding to?

I didn't think so.

HTH

Steve

Nick Hull wrote:
In article ,
jim rozen wrote:


In article , George Willer says...


Don't be so sure they will win. I've had a number of run-ins with those
pricks and won every time. His only problem may be that they'll find
something else to hassle him over. I don't think it's a good idea to give
them a hard time when they're right, but they can only enforce the laws as
written.

Dare I say it, it might make sense to talk to a local attorney.

1) the lawyer will know what the law *is* and if he is or is not
in compliance.

2) the lawyere will probably know the local personalities involved and
how best to navigate the situation.

3) obtaining council will be viewed by the city as his being serious
about the matter, and make him seem less like 'low hanging fruit' for
a code enforcement officer who is just trying to rack up brownie
points.


I disagree; a lawyer is more likely to bankrupt you and betray you.
Better to read the law yourself until you know more about it than either
a lawyer or a bureaucrat. It's not as hard as you may think, the
bureaucrats are too lazy to actually read the law, and there are few
decent honest lawyers. Lest lawyers think I am badmouthing them, there
are few decent honest bankers, politicians, clergy, bureaucrats etc.
Used car salesmen are usually better.


That reminds me of the old saying: “He who represents himself has a
fool for a lawyer”.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

SteveB wrote:
I find that there is so much BS that the whole conversation can be clipped,
and just a reply inserted.

As in this case, is there anyone out there who doesn't know what I'm saying,
or what I'm responding to?

Yeah, You are obviously talking about "Taking On City Hall", as the
subject indicates.

This thread needs to either die or get renamed.

PrecisionMachinisT wrote:
Dear Mr. Trejo.

I am writing this letter in response to a complaint I recently received from
your office wherein you claim to have discovered items present upon my
property located at 1629 Cloverdale Road that are supposedly in violation of
State and County guidelines pertaining to solid waste storage and disposal
as mandated per WAC 173-350 and Cowlitz County Code Title 15-30

( REF : Your case # SW 05-107 )


Your letter specifically lists exactly 4 items as being in violation, with
those
items consisting of the following :

(A) An "abandoned truck with no motor",

(B) "Tires",

(C) "Wood Pallets", and;

(D) "A piece of heavy machinery".

The letter was accompanied with photographs of the above mentioned items
that are being considered by your office to be in violation.

For convienience, I will hereinafter address these issues separately, as
being items ( A ) through ( D ) below.



Please refer to item (A):

The truck mentioned above, while admittedly not presently in operable
condition, is currently in the process of being repaired.

In fact, fairly recently and at a considerable expense, I have overhauled a
replacement engine in order to install into said truck when it becomes
convenient for me to do so at some point in the future. As such, this truck
should by no stretch of the imagination be considered to be "abandoned".

Furthermore, please note that "Junk Vehicles" are specifically addressed
under Cowlitz County
Code Title 10, beginning at Section 27, Para 010.

Most notably, under Title 10 section 27 Para 040, "three or more" "junk
vehicles" must be accumulated upon a premises in order to constitute a
violation.of the County Code.

Bearing into mind the above mentioned code, the inoperable truck does not in
my opinion constitute a violation and so no further action on my part is
planned at this point in time concerning it's ultimate disposition.

Still, if your office continues to allege this truck to be in violation of
the WAC, County, or any other applicable codes, then I would expect you to
provide me with the specific code citation by title, section and paragraph
in any further correspondance, and then at that point in time I might
revisit my decision.

Also, as it would be readily apparent the Cowlitz County Code as it is
currently written conflicts with the applicable Washington Administrative
Code, I suggest the County would be well advised to conduct a review and
possible revision of the applicable code in order to bring it into
compliance with the state guidelines as they apply to this particular
situation or any other similar situations that may arise in the future.




Please refer to item (B)

Upon inspecting the area this morning, I did note there to be tires upon the
premises. In fact, I found exactly two tires; both of which are in
completely servicable condition. Indeed, both of these tires are in "as new"
condition.

Upon reviewing WAC 173-350-100 ( "Definitions' ), I note that "waste tires"
are very specifically described. I dare suggest your office should actually
take the time to review and make itself more familiar with the applicable
code as it pertains to waste tires before making claims as to any code
violations regarding the legal handling and /or storage and disposal of
tires in any quantity or condition.

However, considering that one of the tires and several other items belonging
to the truck mentioned in (A ) above are currently being stored upon a
wooden pallet and generally contribute to an overall appearance of clutter,
the pallet containing these items has been moved to be closer to the truck,
this in accordance with the community desire and in order that the general
area will not appear to be quite as cluttered as it had before.

At this time, I have no further action planned concerning these two tires.

However, (and as before), if your office continues to believe that the
presence of these tires somehow constitutes a code violation and can cite
the specific code as to the exact Title, Section and Paragraph that these
two tires supposedly violate, then I would gladly revisit my decision above
as it regards properly storing and/or disposing of them. Perhaps I might
even decide to move them inside, where they would no longer be in the view
of passersby or code enforcement personnel whom apparently have nothing
better to do while on duty other than to waste the public funds in making
false and uninformed claims as to what constitutes "waste tires" and the
proper storage and disposal thereof.



Please refer to item (C)

Wood pallets come in a variety of sizes, and are routinely used in the
course of my business for the shipping and recieving of products to our
customers. As I can't possibly know in advance what size of pallet might be
required for any given shipment, it is then logical and reasonable to expect
that some quantity of wooden pallets will of necessity accumulate upon the
premises.

Often, these pallets are not neatly stacked, and sometimes they might even
be held in storage for a long enough period of time for them to deteriorate
somewhat due to outside weather conditions, even to the point of their being
un-usable for their intended purpose .

Disposal of any deteriorated or unusable pallets has in the past consisted
of my eventually sawing them into managable sized pieces, and then burning
them in our home fireplace as a winter heating fuel.

Sorting of pallets usually takes place several times per year, in fact, any
useable pallets have just recently been neatly stacked and those deemed as
unservicable have been removed from the area for incineration.

Still, please bear in mind that some quantity of wooden pallets will
inevitably always be present upon the property; and so as before, if the
outdoor storage of some quantity of wooden pallets for shipping purposes or
for eventual use as firewood somehow constitutes a code violation then I
would appreciate if you could please specifically cite the applicable law by
Title, Section and Paragraph.




And finally, please refer to item (D)

The item of "heavy machinery" is actually a farming implement. More
specifically, it is a post hole auger that attaches to my tractor; and it is
in completely servicable condition and it also happens to be a fairly
valuable piece of equipment.

As such, I am left rather bewhildered, and as you could well imagine, I most
certainly find your referring to the item as being a "solid waste violation"
to be extremely bizarre.

Following your line of reasoning, I would suggest then that the county road
shop just up the road from here currently has an approximately one acre site
that is simply chock full of solid waste that is currently being improperly
handled and so I should expect that immediate action will be taken on your
part in order to force the agency into properly disposing of and / or
storing any and all of the heavy machinery and /or equipment that is laying
scattered about the premises, this regardless it's of actual value and
notwithstanding the question of whether said heavy machinery it is in
servicable condition or otherwise.

However, in the spirit of compliance, I have covered the above mentioned
post hole auger with a plastic tarp and am planning to perhaps take a look
at it in another few months in order to make sure that it hasn't somehow
magically transformed itself into raw sewage, anthrax virus, radioactive
materials; or anything else that might in actaulity comprise"waste" in some
way, shape, or form.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any further concerns or questions
regarding this matter. Otherwise I shall consider the case closed.

Kindest regards,

Samuel V. Lockwood


How successful you are is going to depend a lot on how your property is
zoned.

In my area a lot of properties 5 acres were rezoned from agricultural
to country residential. That brought them into a bunch of regulations
concerning equipment and refuse. In short everything needs to be in a
building or in some cases a fenced area that blocks the view from the
road or other houses. Same rule applies to commercial vehicles parked
in residential area.

If your area is being built up as residential you might be best off by
building a fenced area adjacent to your shop. Often if its not visible
from the road or other houses the required regulations are being met. A
fence may also be cheaper than a court case.

Be business like in your communications. If you annoy someone
sufficiently they have many perfectly legal ways to make your life
difficult.

You may want to check directly w/ this neighbor of Harold's, just to make
sure Harold isn't the reason he's moving. And mebbe track down the other
sellers in recent sales...
Some people, purely by dint of being themselves, can clear out a whole
municipality.
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

snip----

I'll keep my eyes open. Have you given any thought to land in the
general
Onalaska area? I don't get south or west much, so it's a lot
easier
to
keep watch near by. I don't have a favorite real estate agent, but
I
may
be able to check with one and see what's available in the
Winlock/Toledo
area. . I'll let you know if I hear anything of substance. You're
likely
looking at a 5 acre minimum purchase. They're making it hard to
build
on
anything less, thanks to the state and controlled development. There
are
some exceptions.


Thanks, Harold--it's much appreciated....

And no, we haven't looked around up as far as Onalaska yet--last time I
was
in that area was several years ago...been looking at the elevations and
whatnot using Google Earth, but really I need to get up there and have
a
drive around--along Highway 12 anywhere to the west of Mayfield
Reservoir,
else someplace along SR 508 just might do it.

--

SVL


That's much closer to home, and in general pretty nice property.
Sadly,
property values have escalated seriously in the past couple years, so the
killer bargains are gone now. I'm still speechless that we paid only
$17,500 for our 5-1/2 acres with an approved septic system. Best
surprise
of all was when we found out the standing alder alone was worth more than
we
paid for the land.

I think you're more likely to find a good buy along 508 than along 12,
but
I'll check anything that comes available. Just tonight a neighbor made
mention that he might sell off some of his land, but it's way too soon to
know anything.

Are you sure you want a stream? It's not always a good thing, for they
force you to stay away from it now----it can render property valueless in
some ways because you can't develop it. If you do, you missed a great
chance right across from me. 5 acre lots that sold for about $25,000 a
few
years ago. A nice stream runs through most of them. We're high and
dry,
but on a slight slope that leads to that stream.

Secluded? View? Wooded? Logged? State your choices so I don't drive
you
nuts with the wrong package.



Harold, don't worry much about it right now--it's still a bit too
early.....but thinking of heading up that way pretty soon, and I'll try
and
give you a jingle when I do.

--

SVL

"Proctologically Violated©®" wrote in message
news
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

"Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...

Secluded? View? Wooded? Logged? State your choices so I don't
drive
you
nuts with the wrong package.



Harold, don't worry much about it right now--it's still a bit too
early.....but thinking of heading up that way pretty soon, and I'll try
and
give you a jingle when I do.

You may want to check directly w/ this neighbor of Harold's, just to make
sure Harold isn't the reason he's moving. And mebbe track down the other
sellers in recent sales...
Some people, purely by dint of being themselves, can clear out a whole
municipality.


IF that's actually the case, ( which I seriously doubt ) well...then I'd be
quite honored if I were somehow able to help him out in furthering that
endeavor.

--

SVL

Rex B wrote:
When you are having a conversation with someone, do you insist that
the other parties repeat everything said so far on the subject, then
tell you their reply?
John Busby wrote:

The comparrison fails here because often more than one person is
responding to a post. Therefore it is nice to know what part or
which post is being answered.
I use Netscape and the threads are fine but with 3, 4, or a
dozen replying and sometimes to different parts of the post
it makes a LOT more sense to quote below the appropiate cliped
part of the original.
...lew...

Rex B wrote:

SteveB wrote:

I find that there is so much BS that the whole conversation can be
clipped, and just a reply inserted.

As in this case, is there anyone out there who doesn't know what I'm
saying, or what I'm responding to?


Yeah, You are obviously talking about "Taking On City Hall", as the
subject indicates.

This thread needs to either die or get renamed.

:-) :-) :-) :-)
...lew...

George Willer wrote:

The jury is still out on this one. Many of us don't see any sense having to
scroll through pages of text we already read on the previous post. It's a
kindness to put any reply on the top!!!! It's the fools and fidiots who get
it backward and add a one liner at the end of a long post.

I'll agre the "fools" that re-post the entire pages and pages of BS with
a one liner at the end are truly idiots but I still prefer to see what
is being replied to before I see the answer.
...lew...

Harold and Susan Vordos wrote:

While I normally bottom post, I'm suggesting that John & George have a case.
One reason I suggest they do is that when I click on a post to respond, I
find my cursor at the top of the post, ready to accept my response. Why
would it be there if that isn't where I should be typing?

Still, aside from this particular post, you'll find my responses at the
end------with the unnecessary information typically clipped.

Harold

Thats strange to me because my reader puts the cursor at the bottom and
I have to back up delete all the unnecessary garbage.
Different readers I guess.
...lew...

Rex B wrote:

No kidding! Really ****es me off to scroll past pages and pages of
quoted text just to find

LMAO!!!

...at the end.


Yes, and why didn't you delete all other gunk in your post?
:-)
...lew...