Howdy, This Here is the BS-Ranch, The Ranch looks after a small amount of land located in the Inland Empire, but we also take notice to Things that are going on in the Owens Valley. We Welcome to the Ranch Pasture, Barns, and Corrals! But, if your not minding your feet you will have a Smelly Mess to clean off your boots when you leave.. Have a good time I hope you enjoy Da' BS.Ranch!
Showing posts with label West San Bernardino Water District. Show all posts
Showing posts with label West San Bernardino Water District. Show all posts
This might be a good thing even though we have had so much water lately and the Perchlorate business is in the back Pocket and finished, the city and county and cities surrounding can look ahead to the water supplies for the future.
BS Ranch
More water for the Inland Empire
By Charles Roberts, Editor, Highland Community News
The San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (Muni) and Western Municipal Water District have joined to get rights to water impounded behind Seven Oaks Dam.
The state has given the two districts temporary permission to capture up to 42,000 acre feet of water that would otherwise be released downstream.
The application had been contested by the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, but the Conservation District dropped its opposition and in return was guaranteed first rights to the 10,000 acre feet it had before the new water rights agreement. Bear Valley Water District also retained its rights to the water, which goes to the East Valley Water District.
After those rights are satisfied, the remainder will be captured and either percolated into the underground basin in settling ponds, or allowed to percolate into the basin downstream between Seven Oaks Dam and the Waterman Avenue Bridge.
The announcement of the agreement came Wednesday, March 5, at the regular meeting of the Muni Board of Directors.
Deputy General Manager Douglas Headrick reported 8,000 acre feet of water behind the dam now, adding after the meeting that about 75 to 80 acre feet a day are being added to that supply.
That's still a long way from 42,000 acre feet, but Headrick said the district will take whatever it can get and store it for future use.
East Valley Water District already takes water from the Santa Ana River upstream from Seven Oaks Dam, capturing it from lines used by Southern California Edison for its hydroelectric plants. That supply is not stored behind the dam.
In the past, the water behind Seven Oaks Dam has been found unacceptable for either treatment or percolation because of its high silt content.
"It's still pretty turbid," said Headrick, "but it's better now and we believe we can use it."
"This is a great day for Southern California," said Muni Board President Patrick Milligan. "We're going to stop some water that has never been stopped before. It has basically been nuisance water over all these years and now we're going to make that water available."
The temporary permit allows the capture from now until August, but there are still two more hurdles:
• The state wants metering devices installed to measure the flow, and
• The San Bernardino County Flood Control District must sign off on releasing water from the dam at a rate that is compatible with percolation.
County Public Works spokeswoman Roni Edis said that department has received the proposal and has put it out for public comment until March 22. A decision will be made after that, but she anticipated no opposition as far as the Flood Control District is concerned.
The dam was originally built only for flood protection. The proposal for water storage and release for conservation is a new addition.
The long and winding road leading to cleanup of the drinking water around Rialto is getting more tortuous.
On July 31, Goodrich Corp. sued Rialto and other parties in San Bernardino Superior Court to try to force the city to require a local businessman to clean up perchlorate contamination.
Next week, Emhart Industries - a defunct company associated with Black & Decker - Goodrich and Rialto-based Pyro Spectaculars are expected to ask a Los Angeles Superior Court to stay state hearings on the perchlorate contamination.
The legal efforts are the latest action the three companies have taken to thwart the state regulatory bodies trying to get the perchlorate cleaned up.
Perchlorate, a substance used to produce rocket fuel, fireworks and other explosives, has been flowing from Rialto's north end through the city, and possibly into Colton and toward Fontana. Perchlorate can interfere with the thyroid gland, which is important in the development of unborn babies.
"What this is really about is Goodrich's attempt to deflect attention from its own responsibility for contaminating the groundwater," Cris Carrigan, one of Rialto's lawyers, said about the suit against the city.
The State Water Resources Control Board is scheduled to hold hearings on the contamination - which was discovered in 1997 - later this month. The hearings have been delayed numerous times because of procedural objections raised by the three parties.
In the lawsuit against Rialto, Goodrich claims Rialto is obligated to order Ken Thompson, who owns land where perchlorate has been discovered, to clean up the contamination. It also says Rialto needs to enforce its own 1987 declaration requiring Thompson to clean up the area known as the McLaughlin Pit.
Goodrich has also claimed that the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, whose staff will be arguing against the three companies at the hearings, has not lived up to its responsibility to close the pit properly.
Patrick Palmer, a Goodrich spokesman, said the parties responsible for the contamination should clean it up and that if the proper procedures had been followed in 1987, the perchlorate would have been discovered years earlier. By not pursuing Thompson at the state hearings, Rialto and the Santa Ana board staff are failing to go after one of the responsible parties, Goodrich claims.
"We're very disappointed in this matter, where only select responsible parties and very key facts are being ignored," Palmer said.
Carrigan and Kurt Berchtold, assistant executive officer of the Santa Ana water board, both said their agencies have done nothing wrong and that Thompson might still be pursued in the future.
Thompson hasn't been a focus of the cleanup investigations thus far because he did not discharge perchlorate into the ground; he merely bought property from a party that did, said Scott Sommer, Rialto's lead attorney in the perchlorate matters. So far, the state regulatory agencies have focused on pursuing the parties suspected of actually discharging perchlorate. Any perchlorate he did spread by operating on the site was spread unknowingly because the perchlorate hadn't even been discovered there yet, Sommer said.
Carrigan said it's not even clear what Goodrich wants the city to do and that the suit is just another attempt to outspend state agencies and Rialto by using clever legal tactics.
At last count, Rialto has spent about $15 million on its efforts to investigate the perchlorate and take legal action. As that number has risen, dissatisfaction with the city's legal strategy has mounted.
The three parties being pursued in the state hearings have been criticized for using a number of aggressive legal strategies. One of the environmental groups involved in the hearings, the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, dropped out after being overwhelmed by how difficult the process had become.
In a letter to one of Goodrich's lawyers, Jeffrey Dintzer, the executive officer of the Santa Ana board, Gerard Thibeault, said the parties' legal efforts cost the state $954,000 and 9,430 hours in staff and attorney time in the 2006-07 fiscal year, and the costs are still growing.
At a Rialto City Council meeting on Wednesday, a woman - who identified herself as Donna Worley and claimed to be a concerned citizen - caused quite a stir when she went before the council to complain about the same matters contained in the Goodrich lawsuit. Earlier, she had provided The Sun with information about Thompson, in a letter calling the situation "just another case of the city helping the rich." At the meeting, she mentioned a potential recall of members of the council, prompting a vigorous response from the dais, especially from Councilman Ed Scott, who noted she lives in Burbank and accused her of working for Goodrich.
In the other matter regarding potential court action in Los Angeles, on Tuesday, James Meeder, an attorney for Emhart, wrote a letter on behalf of all three companies saying that if the hearing officer of the state proceedings did not disqualify the state board and the regional board from the process, he would go to court to ask for a stay in the hearings.
The companies claim the Santa Ana board's staff and the state board have taken part in improper communications or are biased against them because the state board handed out grants to local agencies to treat perchlorate. They have also claimed bias on the grounds that the Santa Ana board's staff erred in its handling of the closing of the McLaughlin Pit and is itself therefore partially responsible. Palmer also said the state board has no right to try the matter at this point.
Hearing officer Tam Doduc ruled Saturday against the companies.
"I think their disqualification argument lacks merit, and it would be sad if the proceedings are stayed," Carrigan said.
Berchtold said allegations of bias or that the Santa Ana board tried to cover up its own actions are "just not the case."
If all else fails, a federal trial on the contamination is tentatively scheduled for October 2008.
After reading this it seems that The City of Rialto, and The City Council is being Treated as I was treated when it came to my workers compensation case, It took me 10 years to settle my case, and it was only settled because my lawyer made an offer to settle out of court, well Rialto accepted that offer and that was the only reason that my case was well handled. I even Died On Duty, in a Motorcycle Accident. But that didn't matter.
This case will not be settled and all of the J&K Utility Tax money is going to the lawyer, Owen's so that he can take this case to Court. I don't think that this will go very far in October 88 either...
I figure that the Law Suite route that they took forced the hand that they have to pay some of the cost, so in order to get away from that now they must go after the Government to get the money needed in order to get the water filters that are needed to clean that perchlorate out of the water and away from the Water Drinking Public!!
I guess, they will be having to shake the hands of the Government to get this done now, since Owen's Idea of a Law Suit has Failed!!
BS Ranch
Rialto takes perchlorate stand
Article Launched:07/28/2007 09:59:16 PM PDT
According to the most recent Study by the Center for Disease Control, perchlorate in drinking water, even at low doses, is a threat to the thyroid function of many of U.S. women, and to brain and nervous system development in children. By 2002, it had become apparent that a 6-mile-long plume of perchlorate, a key ingredient of rocket fuel, and trichloroethylene (TCE), a hazardous solvent phased out of industrial use by the 1980s, contaminates the otherwise pure groundwater aquifer that supplies drinking water for the city of Rialto and the Rialto Utility Authority.
The source is a World War II ordinance depot later used for manufacturing by large defense contractors and fireworks manufacturers. The contamination comes from land now used by San Bernardino County for its Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill, to the west, and a 160-acre site to the east occupied by Goodrich Corporation, Emhart (Black & Decker), Pyro Spectaculars and other manufacturers.
In response, the Rialto City Council adopted a policy of shutting down contaminated wells to avoid serving perchlorate in any amount to its citizens. Initially, perchlorate concentrations were detected in the dozens to several hundred parts per billion (ppb). Additional investigation and testing found perchlorate as high as 5,000-10,000 ppb, the highest level in the nation in a domestic water supply. The state of California action level is 6 ppb.
Protecting citizens' health is paramount, but the potential effects on business, development and the city's finances are also dire. Installing wellhead treatment costs millions, and operational costs add millions more. With the new 210 Freeway, parts of the city are poised for increased development and employment. But if the city cannot assure a 20-year supply of water, state law prohibits local development.
Projected costs for the cleanup run as high as $200 million to $300 million.
Initially, Rialto turned to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Santa Ana Region (RWQCB) for assistance. EPA undertook some studies and issued investigation orders to some of the dischargers. At the time, the Bush administration, under pressure from major defense contractors that had used perchlorate nationally and the Pentagon, resisted adoption of a federal cleanup standard or rigid enforcement by the EPA. EPA took no further action, and deferred to the state of California.
The first prosecution effort by the RWQCB ended in a dismissal for lack of evidence. In 2003, Rialto turned to San Bernardino County and asked it to take steps to control the perchlorate from its Mid-Valley Landfill. Through then-supervisor Jerry Eaves, the county declined to offer Rialto any help and denied the extent of the contamination later confirmed by more testing.
Faced with ineffective action from EPA and the regional board, a rejection of liability from the county, and some expiring statutes of limitation, Rialto brought suit in federal court in 2004 to make the large corporate polluters and insurance companies - rather than its own citizens - pay for the cleanup.
Through investigation of activities as far back as the 1940s, and under federal discovery authority, a mass of evidence was collected and delivered to the RWQCB and EPA. Using some of this evidence, Rialto was successful in November 2005 in obtaining a Clean-up and Abatement Order from the RWQCB that requires the county to clean up the perchlorate emanating from the landfill. By late 2006, the RWQCB began a further prosecution of Goodrich, Emhart/Black & Decker and Pyro Spectaculars, supported in substantial part by the evidence from the federal litigation.
Rialto's strategy is straightforward: use the federal litigation to supply evidence to EPA and the regional board with the objective of obtaining orders for cleanup of the basin. California law requires such a lawsuit to invoke the decades of insurance coverage of many of the dischargers, some of whom otherwise lack funding.
Rialto's objective has always been to play a supporting role to federal and state agencies to obtain the orders for prompt cleanup. That strategy has worked as to the county and its landfill.
The current State Water Board prosecution, which goes to hearing in Rialto Aug. 21-30, will hopefully result in a cleanup order on the eastern part of the plume as well. Rialto will participate and assist the RWQCB in presenting important evidence.
If that hearing, which has been delayed four times by the large, well-funded law firms representing the dischargers, is not successful, Rialto has as a backup its federal lawsuit, which should go to trial in late 2008. Either way, Rialto is committed to making the large corporate polluters and insurance companies pay for the cleanup.
The same federal litigation has been filed by the city of Colton, West Valley Water District and the private supplier Fontana Water Company. Right now, Rialto and Colton are doing the work in the litigation. The same water purveyors, and the county - both singly and jointly - have applied for federal and state cleanup money for years with only limited success.
Rialto is following a dual approach of assisting the administrative agencies and using the federal litigation as a backup. We request this newspaper and all affected citizens to support the current State Water Board prosecution in Rialto Aug. 21-30.
The state Legislature should be encouraged to supply funding for prosecution of the dischargers and to assist with the cleanup. EPA should likewise be more actively involved, and take further action on the evidence that has been supplied to it. The health and welfare of Rialto's citizens, and its women and children in particular, deserve nothing less.
- Winnie Hanson, Rialto's mayor pro tem, and Ed Scott, council member, comprise the Rialto Perchlorate Subcommittee.
When is enough enough? When should Rialto throw in the towel and call in the big dogs?
The city has been fighting for a decade to get suspected polluters, including major corporations and the Pentagon, to pay the costs of cleaning up perchlorate that has contaminated Rialto's wells. But the lawsuits and extended legal battle have cost more than $18 million so far and could go much higher.
And while Rialto's city attorney seems content to play David to the suspected polluters' Goliath - albeit, with the help of a cadre of top-level lawyers - it's chiefly customers of the city's water utility that have had to bear the burden, and the brunt of the costs, with no quick end in sight. So far, the city has spent the equivalent of its Police Department's budget on the fight.
The city's water agency serves about half of Rialto, with Fontana Water Co. and West Valley Water serving the rest. And so, it is about half of Rialto residents who are footing the bill for the city's legal juggernaut. The surcharge on water bills starts at $6.85 a month and rises from there.
If Rialto eventually wins its case in court, resident ratepayers will be reimbursed. But that could be a long time in coming. And the total for actual cleanup of the contaminant could be $300 million.
Besides ratepayers' hefty chunk, the City Council also contributed $5 million from general fund reserves to escalate the fight last year. But even the council has become leery, without seeing much in the way of results.
Why won't Rialto call in the cavalry and ask the feds for help? We're sure city ratepayers would like to know.
Why is it that the city has insisted on going it alone, without bringing the resources of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to bear?
Commenting on Rialto's reluctance to do the logical thing, Penny Newman, executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, said, "I think going with EPA and the Superfund program is probably the strongest mechanism a city or community has. I'm always amazed that people - communities - shy away from that."
Indeed, Rialto has become almost territorial in pursuing the fight on its own. It's almost as if time and money were no object. Let the ratepayers pay it - that seems to be the city's attitude.
But with the pricetag reaching into the millions, it's time to regroup. The city needs to take a more regional approach and spread out the costs.
Rialto initially considered going with EPA. But after looking at a variety of Superfund projects, and finding that each took 17 to 27 years to start cleanup, the city felt it would take too long, said City Attorney Bob Owen.
So, this is any better? How long does the city expect ratepayers to keep fronting litigation costs?
The state Water Resources Control Board, which has taken over from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, plans hearings in August. At that time, it could order three suspected polluters - Goodrich, Pyro Spectaculars and Emhart Industries, parent company of Black and Decker - to remove the contamination.
Then again, those companies all have been fighting long and hard to delay any consequences.
The San Gabriel Valley Water Co., which owns Fontana Water Co., and the West Valley Water District have urged Rialto go with a regional coalition that works with the EPA.
Rialto has been fighting for cleanup of the Rialto-Colton Basin, without regard for pollution of West Valley and Fontana wells.
And while a fault separates the West Valley and Fontana wells from the Rialto-Colton Basin, such that the regional agency has said it can't prove the suspected Rialto-area polluters caused contamination of the other wells, it's all the more reason for a regional approach that takes all of the pollution into account.
Yet Rialto persists in its one-sided struggle.
Better to lean on the EPA - and save residents the aggravation.
I am wondering why, the County of San Bernardino is not mentioned in this fight for the water rights and the fight for the water, and the monies to pay for the filtration to clean out the Perchlorate from the filters. I did a vast Search across the State and found that there was over 200 Wells in California that was effected by Perchlorate, many wells had to be shut down and some had to be filtered with the Revers Osmosis Filtration system, Each filter, I am talking about one filter, costs $4 Million Dollars, and they are very expensive. Rialto needed to have many of these Expensive Filteration systems on their system to clean the water and make it safe from Perchlorate!
But The question that Remains is What or who paid for the cleaning of those other 190 wells in the State of California tha that I could not find any news on? Who paid for the Filtration systems, and why didn't I find any other City's or Counties taking the Privious Owners of the Businesses to court that was responsible for placing the Perchlorate in the Water Table in the first place? I guess I can tell you that one thing is for sure.
Back when they started and found out that they had Perchlorate in contamination in the water table in Rialto, Rialto's Council Immediatly said that he must start a law Suit against the Businesses that were found to be responcible for the contamnation of the Perchlorate in the Water Table. I have Written all along that this was a bad Move since the Companies all have said that they were going to pay for the filters and clean up what they could of the Perchlorate from the Water Table, but Owen said that even with the Company spoksman saying that they were going to pay for their clean up.
I beleive that Owens, with all the extra pay that he received from the city should be held responcible for paying for the clean up of the water table, and the Perchlorate! They cannot beleive that Owen's did this law suit for the City of Rialto's Benefit, because Clearly it was not for the City of Rialto's Benefit, since it didn't benefit the City of Rialto!
Rialto Lost in this whole thing, Clearly since Owen's Continued his Pursuit of the Law Suit against the Businesses that admitted to being responsible for the Perchlorate Contamination of the Water Table, Dating back to World War One, and Clearly they were not the owners of those businesses then, they were the purchaser's of the businesses, so they got the businesses, and with that they inherited the responciblity of the Wrong Doings of those companies form a long time ago. When Owen's Representing the City of Rialto Took the Responcible Businesses to Court they decided to pay for only the stuff that they were told topay for, that left a huge amount that was left unpaid and The City of Rialto's Water Department was left with these Bills for the Remaining Clean up.
You Clearly Cannot Blame the Businesses, but the Lawyer's that Represented the Law Suit that started it!!
THE LAW SUIT IS TO BLAIM FOR THE LIMITED CLEAN UP OF IT!! NOT THE BUSINESSES HERE! THE LAWYERS ARE TO BLAME!
When I say lawyer I mean the one that started the whole Law Suit, OWEN!
The City of Rialto, and The Rialto City Council should fire their council, Owen, simply has to go, he has been there long enough and has made his milliions off the city, and if left in the City Representation Positon, he will make himself a millionare over and over and over again. With Law Suits, JUST LIKE THE ONE THAT THEY JUST LOST!! 10 FOLD W/PERCHLORATE!!
Don't get me wrong, but isn't Toxin-free water what any Home owner wants when they own their home and they pay their taxes, and then they have all that water bill paid, and suddenly they have toxic water, that is terrible for human consumption, You spend your hard earned money, that you had worked really hard for, yet you find that the place that you purchased that you figured was safe for your family is actually poisonous Water that gives everyone Cancer if they drank the water!!
All you want is to keep your family SAFE!! It is no wonder that everyone is up in arms about the Contamination in the Water Supply at Rialto!!
They need to Concentrate on keeping the Water Clean, rather than Suing the Company Responsible for the problem. Rialto needs to concentrate on the clean up and not on the problems surrounding the clean up. Perchlorate is nothing to play with it is a dangerous substance when left in the water supply!!
BS Ranch
Toxin-free water demanded in Rialto
By Jason Pesick, Staff Writer Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
Article Launched:06/28/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT
RIALTO - Hundreds of residents and representatives of organizations around the state came to a rowdy forum Wednesday night to demand that an ingredient used to produce rocket fuel, perchlorate, be cleaned out of the local drinking water supply.
The event, held by the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, featured marching, Aztec dancers, a hearing before a panel of guest activists and calls for action.
"This particular pollutant is really worrisome," said UC San Francisco medical professor Gina Solomon during a presentation on the health effects of perchlorate.
Well-known activist Dolores Huerta was expected to lead a panel of guests to demand change, but she was unable to make it to the event.
Perchlorate is used to produce different types of explosives, and although its health effects are not well understood, it can interfere with the thyroid gland.
A number of residents took the opportunity to tell the panel - which later voted to have the State Water Resources Control Board order cleanup - about the problem.
The center's executive director, Penny Newman, highlighted how much longer it has taken to clean up the perchlorate in Rialto than it took to clean up perchlorate discovered in Redlands the same year.
Rialto has accused dozens of parties of being responsible for the pollution, while only one party caused the contamination in Redlands.
But Newman said Redlands is a wealthier and predominately white community with more political influence than Rialto.
"I don't know too many people who say race does not play a role in our society today," she said before the event.
The contamination has been spreading from Rialto's north end through the city and into Colton. Local water companies have spent millions of dollars to clean it out of the water they serve their customers.
The entire mess could cost $300 million to clean up.
Rialto and Colton have tried a number of strategies to get the dozens of suspected polluters, which include Goodrich, Black and Decker and Pyro Spectaculars, to clean it up.
A federal lawsuit is still in the early stages, and the state regulatory bodies charged with monitoring water quality have struggled to move the case forward.
State hearings have been delayed numerous times, most recently from July to late August, delays Newman called "unacceptable."
RIALTO - With both of his tiny hands clenched around the steering wheel, Isaac Ruiz found himself buzzing along the freeway.
It was the typical stuff found on Southern California highways: rude drivers weaving to and from, changing lanes without using their signals, and driving inappropriately slow in the faster lanes.
Suddenly, traffic slammed to a halt. He threw his hands up in frustration.
"I was like, `errrarrrrrrrggghhhhhh!"' he said. "Keep it going! Get it going! Get it going now!"
And just like that, the 210 Freeway extension gave birth to its first traffic jam.
Of course, Isaac is 6 years old and was driving a go-cart around a course made of plastic during Saturday's Play on the 210 Freeway event, which was attended by thousands to celebrate the unofficial opening of the east-west artery expected to be an economic boon and a savior for drivers. When power was lost to the machine pumping air into the inflatable course, two large pieces fell to the pristine pavement and blocked the way.
Isaac's father, Carlos Ruiz, said his son and daughter, Naomi, 3, were just enthused to check out the roadway, actually slated to open Aug. 31.
"They've been waiting for weeks, saying, `We
get to play on the freeway!"' said Ruiz, 35, of San Bernardino. "I told them it was the only time I could say to them, `Go play on the freeway."'
Sean McGee, 7, of San Bernardino, who sang with the Taft T. Newman Children's Choir at the morning ribbon-cutting ceremony, knew he was violating his mother's cardinal rule of "don't go on the street, or you'll get run over," he said. But this time, he had permission.
During any other time, he said, "I'd be grounded."
Lee Burns, 12, of San Bernardino found the pavement to be perfect for skateboarding.
"It's good," he said. "It's not too rough. It's not too hard. It's cool. But it's hot."
In addition to skateboarding and little motorized cars, kids and adults alike could listen to live music, browse through the dozens of booths hawking food and goods, lug their way up a climbing wall, partake in road races or check out some of the classic cars on hand.
Keegan Holden, 31, of Rialto was there displaying his candy-apple red '65 Lincoln Continental for the first time.
But he was just as interested in getting a glimpse of the freeway that will help out his installation business, K's Garage Doors.
"This freeway is going to give me a lot more time to do business," he said.
That was a focal point at the ceremony held to celebrate the freeway and dedicate the roadway to the late Rep. George E. Brown Jr., California's longest tenured congressman.
"The future of this area, as I have said many times, is going to skyrocket," said Josie Gonzales, the San Bernardino County supervisor whose district includes the freeway extension. "Everything you see here, take a look, it will be different."
Speaker after speaker also lauded Brown, a Democrat from San Bernardino, as a visionary leader.
"George would be humbled by the recognition," said his widow, Marta Macias Brown.
And while Brown might have claimed he didn't deserve it, as his widow said, the dignitaries all insisted that the famed congressman, one of the first to oppose the Vietnam War, did indeed deserve the honor.
Opening Day
RIALTO -It was the question on everyone's mind Saturday: When will the 210 Freeway extension open?
As elected leaders and other dignitaries gathered in Rialto to celebrate the near-opening of the east-west freeway, even San Bernardino Mayor Pat Morris pressed transportation officials for not only a date, but, with his tongue placed only somewhat in cheek, the exact moment.
"It will be open by the time school starts," Tony Grasso, SANBAG's executive director, said to an enthused crowd.
But when Darren Kettle, director of freeway construction for the county transportation authority, was cornered later in the day, he gave a far firmer answer: "We are saying Aug. 31. If not a little earlier."
Completion of the freeway will provide another direct link between San Bernardino and Los Angeles County.
It is my belief that if they are going to have a party then why will they not open the rest of the freeway, the lines are drawn, most if not all the on/off ramps are in repair and ready for use, but they say by the time that school starts, yet they have a party now and get everyone excited about the party now. I for one don't understand, the freeway is done for them to break out the cake and Ice cream.
