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

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 00:11:39 -0800, "PrecisionMachinisT"
wrote:

Kindest regards,

We once found a surveying error ... our property
line was actually right down the middle of *their* road.
Road was wrong ..... G.
--
Cliff

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

Hey Sam,
this is a good one - its a classic !

Your municipality reckons you are collecting piles of junk, and in
response to (probably complaints by neighbours) have decided that you
should clean it up. They wouldnt initiate this action themselves, they
want a quiet life like everyone else.

You disagree - the truck is in the process of restoration, the tyres
are spares for the truck, and the piles of pallets are "useful for
something even if its only firewood" - oh, and the post hole auger -
why you need one in the city is of no consequence, its a nice piece of
machinery, and you have thrown a tarp over it.

This a real dilemma - your precious treasures are someone elses junk.
You can almost certainly spend the next few years arguing with City
Hall about the precise legal definition of "Junk" They will win. You
will have a good fight, but they will win.

An alternative is to talk to them, see what they consider to be
acceptable for what is, I assume, a suburban property, and modify your
practices enough to be able to lead a quiet life, not annoy the
neighbours, and get on with your interests in things mechanical. Which
, I might hasten to add, is a perfectly legitimate pursuit - my
"junque" takes up less obvious space than your junk, so I dont have to
worry about such things.

An observation - dismiss it if its not relevamt to you - people who
surround themselves with crap and live amongst it usually do crap work.
Maybe you do need to sort things out a bit....

Andrew VK3BFA.

On 6 Dec 2005 03:00:58 -0800, "Andrew VK3BFA"
wrote:

They will win.

The brand new fence down the middle of the road .... G.
We got nice new drainage ditches too IIRC.
And culverts repaired.
--
Cliff

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.

We had a code inspector here who hated my '58 Chevy 4X4 . ******* cited me
numerous times , even though the truck was operable , tagged and insured .
Yup , it was rusty , and ugly , but it was neither derelict nor abandoned .
He finally stopped harrassing me when I showed up in court (over his
telephoned assurances that I need not appear) in full leathers ... his eyes
almost popped out of his head when he realized who he had been sitting next
to all morning .
Funny , I haven't been cited since that day ...
--
Snag aka OSG #1
'76 FLH "Bag Lady"
BS132 SENS NEWT
"A hand shift is a manly shift ."
shamelessly stolen
none to one to reply

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 00:11:39 -0800, "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



Compared to my next-door-neighbor, your place sounds like a
well-maintained mansion!
I'd be honored to have you as a neighbor anyday


BK

Hey Sam,

I'd send these muhfugguhs some solid waste.....

Will you be *my* loiyer??

Bespeaks the merits of big-assed tall *continuous* fencing all around one's
fiefdom. Wonder if a fukn neighbor ratted you out.

Oh yeah, clean dat **** up, cuz yer work *is* gettin a little sloppy
lately....
----------------------------
Mr. P.V.'d
formerly Droll Troll
"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

( 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

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 )


SNIP

Interesting and amusing letter. The bottom line is, that you are
obfuscating the facts as the powers at city hall see them.

I am curious to know how they will respond, and how long it will take
for them to win their case. against you.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

"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

( 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

Research what IS acceptable. What would it take to make any "junk" into
"art" or "sculpture"? You have a RIGHT, nay a DUTY to express your
creativity, and for someone to say what you do is not art is discrimination.
You could get a lot of mileage and backing from the local ACLU and TV
stations.

And, then move it to a place of prominence on your property, like out front,
or on a hill. Then the nosy neighbor who called it in can view it more
clearly.

Hell, who knows. Someone with some $eriou$ cash might stop by and spend
some real money.

Steve

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.

--
Remove "nospam" to get to me.

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 00:11:39 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
"PrecisionMachinisT" quickly quoth:

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

The letter is good, Sam, but could have been better. Addressing their
grievances point by point was very good.

In case there's a next time (probable), remember these tips:

1) Don't get facetious or cute with them. If the letter goes to court,
it could be pointed out as a taunt from you by their attorney. Plain
facts work best and ensure the judge that you are trying your utmost
to comply with codes, being a "good neighbor." Anything other than a
fact gives them ammo against you. (It doesn't matter how good it may
make you, or us, feel about the letter.)

2) Continue to check the codes for city, county, and state if any
pertain to your citation. City inspectors expand and trip over these
all the time. Look around City Hall and find all the variances they
have allowed to the code they're using against you. Get copies in case
you need them in court.

3) Spellcheck your letter before you send it. It was great up to the
word "bewhildered" which shouldn't have an "h" in it. It totally broke
the tone of the letter for me.

And, for heaven's sake, paint your truck so it doesn't look like a
typical Chebby, eh? donning FORD Nomex suit

(And I should talk, with a blue/primer/rust F-150 out front.)


----------------------------------------------------
Thesaurus: Ancient reptile with excellent vocabulary
http://diversify.com Dynamic Website Applications
================================================== ==

I am curious to know how they will respond, and how long it will take for
them to win their case. against you.

Abrasha
http://www.abrasha.com

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. Wants and desires on their part should play no part, as algore
found out in 2000... it's the law that matters. The law is exactly what is
spelled out in the statute and nothing more.

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.

Jim


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

nice, but you mispelled "actuality"...;^)

how'd it work out?

John

"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

( 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

"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

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
[...]

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




Few things in this life offer less payback and result in more mental
pain than feuding with an entrenched government bureaucracy. Unless you
have $100K sitting around and are willing to hand it to an attorney as a
retainer, I'd advise you to make peace with these pinheads. Another
option is to move to a place where they aren't.

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...

Why not find out where her office is and stop by and ask her? I'm betting
that she's planning on either trying to sell or buy some land or a building
near your's and she's worried about being able to sell it. Who knows, you
might have stumbled into some local land scandal...:^)

If she turns out to be a bigger problem, post a "No Trespassing" sign and
file a complaint against her if she violates it.

John E.

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote in message
...

PrecisionMachinisT wrote:
Snip
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.

I was wondering how in the hell anybody saw your stuff. She must be
getting ready to list one of your neighbors. Are you going to ask her
if you should counter her complaint with a trespassing charge of your
own? G

Later,

Charlie

"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.

--
Remove "nospam" to get to me.

A nosy neighbor didn't like that I parked my travel trailer on a dirt strip
on the side of my house. He called zoning, and the zoning compliance
officer came out and looked at it. He was obviously miffed that he had to
come deal with this situation, as he had far more serious violations to deal
with.

He told me that the trailer had to be parked on concrete. The front of my
house was all paved. He said I could park it in FRONT of my house if I
chose, and I would be in compliance. He also said I could park it on the
street if I moved it every 72 hours. He also stated that I could park it IN
FRONT of my neighbor's house for 72 hours max. He did say that IF I did put
it back on the dirt strip, I had to put up a block wall, thus making the
dirt strip a part of the back yard, and that if I parked it where it was, I
would be in violation. He basically told me where the lines were, and how
to dance inside them.

I shuttled the trailer from in front of my house to in front of my
neighbor's house for a month when I sold the trailer. The first time I
parked it in front of the neighbor's house, he called in again. I saw the
COs truck at their house one day.

Apparently, he informed the neighbor of the law, and that I was in
compliance.

I think the neighbor found out that sometimes when you make a wave, it can
swamp your own boat as well.

Steve

snip, snip, snip .........

boing! ........... idea ............

'Tis the season. Put Christmas lights on your stuff, and some religious
figures.

Officials would rather fight with a chainsaw than go after something
religious.

Just a thought to buy a few weeks.............

Now, I'm going back to my nap ..............

Steve

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

Don't bother comparing your "stuff" to the "stuff" others have on their
property.

Government won't care what others do until they figure it out by themselves
or someone complains. Either way, it probably won't change their action
towards you.

Only exception to this would be previous judgements that were made on
similar situations.

Visit www.yunx.com to see why I'm so adept at government and court
proceedings these days... I stopped the log a while back because activity
got too hectic. I spent 15 hours yesterday running around filing papers and
interviewing people physically assaulted by my tenants.
--


Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
(908) 542-0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com

V8013-R

LOL Very nice.
Very scary, lesson noted.

- -
Rex Burkheimer
Fort Worth TX

Kirk Gordon wrote:
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

In article , PrecisionMachinisT says...

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.

Heh. If you make nice with the officer, he might tell you who the other
three are.

Sounds like it's time to see what kind of potential violations ms hendryx
has in *her* closet.

Jim


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

"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

Where's Kelvin Throop?
--
Cliff

Kirk Gordon wrote:

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




Kirk,


I think you've found your new profession if the machining industry goes
bust.


John

In article ,
Kirk Gordon wrote:

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.
.....

In the good old days a rope would have worked wonders, now we have to
use a backhoe

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

In article ,
Tim Killian wrote:

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
[...]

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




Few things in this life offer less payback and result in more mental
pain than feuding with an entrenched government bureaucracy. Unless you
have $100K sitting around and are willing to hand it to an attorney as a
retainer, I'd advise you to make peace with these pinheads. Another
option is to move to a place where they aren't.

I have a brother who makes sport of feuding with bureaurats, including
IRS, zoning and EPA. He has a history of winning.

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

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.

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

In article
,
"John Emmons" wrote:

Why not find out where her office is and stop by and ask her? I'm betting
that she's planning on either trying to sell or buy some land or a building
near your's and she's worried about being able to sell it. Who knows, you
might have stumbled into some local land scandal...:^)

If she turns out to be a bigger problem, post a "No Trespassing" sign and
file a complaint against her if she violates it.

If she turns out to be a bigger problem, an anonamous tip about a drug
dealer might happen.

..... Unless she has an arab looking friend or customer that Homeland
Security wants to look into

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

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.

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

Nick Hull wrote:
Snip
In the good old days a rope would have worked wonders, now we have to
use a backhoe


Yeah, it's a lot harder to find the revenuer's body if it's not hanging
on the end of the lynching rope.

Later,

Charlie

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 10:18:53 -0800, with neither quill nor qualm,
"PrecisionMachinisT" quickly quoth:

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.

Best of luck with your reinspection tour, Sam.


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.

Won't SHE be surprised when her new christmas present turns up?
I wonder what it could be... very evil grinne


--
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?

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.

Jim


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

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 01:03:14 GMT, 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.
My 12 year old asked me to park my Gremlin around the corner when I
picked him up at school.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

"PrecisionMachinisT" wrote: (clip)....the officer informed me she had filed
a total of 3 complaints on that same day. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Actually, that is good for you. The more she looks like a kook, the more
you look like an innocent victim. From that perspective, Emmo's advice
seems right on target.

On Wed, 07 Dec 2005 01:00:02 GMT, Nick Hull
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Killian wrote:



I have a brother who makes sport of feuding with bureaurats, including
IRS, zoning and EPA. He has a history of winning.
A couple years ago my son's repayment schedule got screwed up by the
student loans lender with the result that the total amount became due
NOW. Of course, a collection agency got involved and since he was
living at home, the phone calls came in on the "house" phone. The main
annoying phone person eventually was told not to call any more due to
the harassment to which she was subjected whenever she dialed in at
7:00 AM. A couple latter callers were terminated after they discussed
personal information without verification of the identity of the
person to whom they were speaking. Some of the fun went away once his
loans were retired.
Gerry :-)}
London, Canada

"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