What if my postings regarding TRLIA levee work over the past few years turn out to be true? Of course a lot of naysayers would at the least, have egg on their faces. I have maintained since 2006 that TRLIA officials have not been forthcoming in their duty to inform the public regarding Levee matters. I have maintained they have been successful because the citizens of Yuba County are completely unaware of levee matters, such as the County  locating all the funds to upgrade RD 784 levees instead of letting the time honored method of the Corps of Engineers, the State of California and RD 784, through the Yuba County Water Agency, hold forth.

I have maintained TRLIA officials ( Yuba County/ RD 784) were not forthcoming in the handling of Developer fees and State tax grants as shown by them not accounting for the Years 2004-2005-2006-and 2007 and not until I asked them if they had accounted for the money in an Open meeting regarding funding needed to finish the levee project, did they hire a local CPA.  The Couty Auditor those years did not account nor did Paul Brunner executive Director of TRLIA, cause an accounting to be made until I inquired.

What if my postings regarding the YUba River south levee not being upgraded as stated by Local members of the Corps, John Hess PE and Robert Trainer PE,  whos certification of the levee as 100 year level in 2007, did not meet federal levee safety requirements of 44 CFR 65.10, A requirement?  What if it is true what the State Department of water resources told me and others about the Foundation being demolished by boulders and not repared? What if the 150 feet wide section of levee at the site of the 1986 was not upgraded for erosion prevention as the rest of the levee was?  What if TRLIA only constructed the Floor part of the Seepage berm just behind the Walmart?  What if the Scour trench under the levee at the site of the levee break did in fact leak flood water through it in 2005 and 2006?

What if it can be proven TRLIA truly did not upgrade the Yuba South Levee as they say? What would the repercusions be in such a situation for TRLIA, Yuba County Officials, RD 784,  etc?

What if...

 

The original topic was " WHAT IF?" to fill a request I have continuyed it under thge new title above.

The " WHAT IF ? " question has been answered by investigation of DWR and TRLIA documents we received under the State public record acts, and given to State And federal officials for their investigations have shown The documents are valid, and we shall see what we see.

From my perspective, I know the Levee can not be certified under the required levee safety laws and given the documents that show work as done but inspections by Six individuals show as not done, the south bank levee is only Certified by the project engineers words and the Yuba county board of supervisors saying they have turned all levee decisions over to Paul Brunner PE, the executive director of TRLIA.

VICARIOUS Responsibility leaves the Board of supervisors at full risk from what Paul Brunner, Ric Reinhardt PE , Keven Mallen PE and Robert Bendorf have written to State officials for funding and certifications.

OMG - REALLY? Another thread that starts with EXACTLY, VERBATIM the same post as the other thread entitled "What if..?".

Ridiculous.

Did you have some topic items to post showing the opposite of what i state? For instance, do you have valid proof that TRLIA officials did construct Sand berms between the Highway 70 bridge and Shad pad road as they stated in their request for Multi millions in reimbursement funds From the Department of water resources? If not, Why do you post? In defense of the county officials who created the false letters that are now being investigated?

The new post was to make it easier to follow the developing investigation and audit documents, something some people, mostly invalidators, wish to refute by posts unrelated to the topic< such as yours.

I don't know or care about this topic. I live in the FOOTHILLS, which is the locale to which this site caters. You clog it up with garbage, arguing with everyone and reposting the same points (and entire posts, apparently) over and over and over, ad nauseum.

This topic concerns the taxes of every worker in the state of California through certain officials appointed by the yuba county supervisors filing false documents with the State DWR requesting prop 13 and Early Implementation funds! Those funds were voted on and approved by citizens for state wide water issues that protect and serve the people, not for Yuba County appointed officials to falsify and acquire.

It is clear you do have a horse in this race through your employment as a county worker.

At any time you could have refrained from posting invalidator non subject words but felt you must defend the source of the funds that keep you and others such as you at the trough.

The spigot of tax funds has been cut off by the state and it is my recommendation that they confiscate all buildings, pensions, salary's, property that was gained through the millions falsified by those officials and all conspirators and other law breakers be held to judgement. This is the law.

I'm not a county worker. Not sure where you got that from... And I'm not "at the trough"... I'm just fed up with your posts.

Also, I'm not defending anything or anyone.

By the way, I am proud of the frown I wear, It was earned by bringing corruption of local government officials, to the fore front of honest people reading the posts.

The best thing to end my posts with is show proof I am wrong, if you can not, you are no different than the other invalidators, have no knowledge of the topic, just muddy the water.

I have seen your posts elsewhere on this site and having no knowledge of the subject, I refrained from muddying up the water, as you should do here if you truly have interest.

To give you some knowledge of the possible repercussions of county officials ill fated request for illegal funds, this county if the state follow the rules, will be bankrupt. Certain officials stand to face felony charges, others will face the voters.

We the people of Yuba county deserve and expect transparency from our local officials, elected and appointed, not the hidden letters to State AND federal officials stating they constructed needed levee work that they knew they had not constructed!

TRLIA officials at the direction of county officials i supposes, stated on their web site they had constructed sand berms from the union pacific Rail road, west to the Shad road in so many words. their actual web site post was " Constructed a 300' and 90' sand berm. That was true, And I have no issue with that However, under cover, they told state and government officials having control over reimbursements of local government spending on the states levees, and control over certifications and accreditation of levees, They had in fact constructed in addition to the 300 and 90 ' feet berms, an additional section of levee reaching from the end of the truthful construction to the highway 70 bridge and beyond. ( I posted a copy showing the under cover letter from TRLIA to DWR on the original " What IF" thread). The appeal democrat refused to publish this true corrupt hideous story, And recently eliminated all posts from citizens unless said citizen joined Face book, however this forum is to be applauded, and if they or anyone can prove my revelations false, I welcome them.

wow, my first time logging on here in a few weeks, my bullshit detector went off and sure enough Rex is at it again.

code3jennh - Don't get Rex going, he accuses anyone who doesn't agree with him of being an "invalidator", being at the Yuba County "feed trough", etc.

I, my family, and people I called friends here in Plumas Lake would be affected by the failure of a levee in this area, however I don't share Rex's views at all.

"We the people of Yuba County" Rex? Who are the "WE" you refer to? Did the people of Yuba County elect YOU to speak for them? Last time I checked you failed in your attempt to run for County Supervisor.

Prrof Rex? We don't need to prove anything, you are the one making accusations, and YOU are the one who must provide the proof to back up your claims.

Interesting Rex how another person comes out on this forum against you and is smart enough to see through your bullshit.

I for one will not get into another debate with you as it is a pointless waste of time to debate someone who is like a one legged cat trying to bury a turd on a frozen pond. Code3jennh couldn't have started of this post with a better response to you and nothing more needs to be said, you have my respect and admiration for calling Rex out regarding his bullshit.

120 days Rex? That is bullshit and you know it. If you had made a legitimate request through proper channels it would have been fulfilled as prescribed by State law. How do I know this Rex? One of my responsibilities as a State employee is to fulfill such request so I know EXACTLY how the law works in this regard.

You are just making additional excuses as to why you have yet to post any genuine proof to back your claims. You have no proof and have never had proof, all you've ever had is your own narrow view of the way things are as YOU see them.

Hell will freeze over before you post any proof Rex.

First of all, when a person loses in a debate, they resort to getting loud or using profanity, as you just did.

second of all I have to thank you for pointing out on my old thread that Yuba county officials Stated on their website they in effect, did not construct sand berms between Shad road and the highway 70 bridge, that reinforced my proof of corruption in TRLIA / Yuba county officials by falsifying documents in violation of state law. but, after all, you have said all along that when i prove the corruption in levee funds, you would be the first to assist me, you have Started well but I do not want a foul mouthed assistant. so, clean up your act .

Also, to debate you have to present proof of my wrong, not just say, " REX IS wrong" but show proof from documents that TRLIA/Yuba county did NOT falsify those documents. Mere shooting arrows will not stand up in this thread Invalidatordad, Try a novel method for you, forgo invalidator one, and clean up your mouth.

We have sent to the State 12 invoices of work done under the contract between TRLIA and DWR, they did not refute, invalidate, spin off topic, cuss , they just investigated it and have contacted me for questions, no invalidation at all.

People have asked me for a "Smoking gun", I would say there is no greater Smoking gun than invoices showing work in an area where there is no work. To any person with no horse in this race, the invoices are a killing smoking gun, to an invalidator such as you, no amount of proof in any manner will suffice. You should have stayed under your rock invalidatordad.

Oh I am so sorry Rex, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings with my use of profanity eo emphasize my statement. Geez Rex, didn't the Chiefs you worked under in the Navy ever cuss and swear? I'm just calling it like it is.

Actually Rex as the accuser in this instance the onus s on you to proof wrong-doing by those involved, in this case proof that fraud occurred. That would of course mean that you would need to post these 12 pages of invoices you claim to have and supposedly back up your claim.

The person who is losing a debate is generally the person who resorts to name calling, and attacking anyone who challenges or doesn't agree with them, all one has to do is look at your responses to code3jennh.

Post your proof here for all to see or stop posting Rex. Talk and post here all you want but without proof to back your claims you have no leg to stand on, all you have are your own opinions.

 It does feel a bit like walking downhill when you walk South. The feeling is quite different than walking North. When you walk North the sun is at your back. You really notice it this time of year. The sun is so low in the Southern sky.

 

 I swam the Yuba River once. It was really clean and there wasn't alot of fish. When I got to the Simpson lane bridge i found an old pay phone that was tossed over the bridge. When I got to the tenth street bridge I found a big prybar. I just couldn't pass it up so I had to swim the rest of the way with this big prybar.

 I still have it in my garage and have used it on occasion.

 

 How about the proposed amnisty for illegal aliens?

 

 Personaly I don't think we should do anything with them until we secure the border.

 

 After the border is secure we send them home as they pop up in te criminal system. So long as they stay out of trouble they can stay. I don't think it is worth the effort to try to deport all of the illigals at once.

 

 The reason to secure the border is to protect the immagrent that want to come here. Those poor folks are being used by everyone. The coyotes are taking them for thousands of dollars and then at the first sign of trouble they abandon them to fend for themselves or worse kill them after they get there money.

 

 

One thing I can absolutely guarantee Rex is that code3jennh has no "horse in the race" as you say because they are most certainly not employed by Yuba County. As with everyone else who doesn't see things they way you do you accuse them of working for the County, or having worked for the County or other entity involved in the levees. The same applies to 2grands and myself. as I told you before I do work for the State and I have knowledge as to how the Public Records Act request process works. Your are trying to hoodwink people into thinking, again, that people are trying to block your quest for knowledge when such information is freely available for anyone who knows how to find it. I'm calling your postings what they are Rex, absolute bull manure (heaven forbid I offend you by cussing).

Call us all invalidators until the cows come home but the fact remains you claim to have evidence of wrong-doing where there is none. You ask us to prove you wrong when it is up to you to prove you are correct with your accusations.

Post here to your hearts content Rex, though your first clue this isn't the place to talk about levees is the title of this forum........Yuba FOOTHILLS. Though apparently this is the only place left for you to post, and as code3jennh said, NO ONE ACRES what you have to say.

Adios Rex!!

I think the most annoying and disturbing aspect of this post is the fake headline describing disaster and destruction. It uses a "War of the Worlds/Orson Welles" technique to stir up fear, intrigue and readership. This type of post shouldn't be allowed.

Now, if it was real, there's room for a serious discussion. However, over the years, this poster has used hypothesis, repetition, labeling and heavy-handedness to drive a point. Interestingly, this technique does work because several of you feed his desire by communicating back, thereby continuing to stir the pot. You're just as guilty. If you'd just learn to read and go, you'd be much happier and the poster would have an audience of one.

However, I do believe that this post is way out of line due to it's fake disaster headline and should be removed. And Mr. CleanUp, I'm sure you'll post a ranting response to me, but I assure you, I will not respond. So, you can just let your fingers rest. Perhaps you can use them more constructively, like the little Dutch boy, and put them in the dike...

Nobody cares about apathy. My observation is the people in California really don't care. They did not see themselves paying for the bonds.

I thanked some people for voting for a proposition that autnorized sale of bonds to repari levees. They didn't care what happened to levees because they were not protected by levees.

Nobody knows about ignorance. The people I asked did not know how the bonds would be retired (paid off). The people I talked to did not know if the levees would really change the probability of flood.

The people I talked to did not understand that 100 year flood means a one percent probability of flood in any one year.

The people I talked to did not understand EXPECTED VALUE. If you don't understand expected value in the sense that insurrers use the term, expect to suffer huge losses.

I think I am talking to the people that read YubaFoothills.com. All three of of them, Jenn and Clean and Dad.

Thanks for moving this topic to a shorter thread. Can we keep the posts short and balanced between facts, believability and emotion?

What is your understanding of expected value?

How will the TRILIA bond be paid off?

I'll make this multiple choice.

A. I don't care.
B. I don't know
C. Essay response.
D. It depends.
E. I don't know and I don't care.

Logos, ethos, pathos.
What are the facts?
Are the people believable?
What emotions are involved?

Tall trees, there is one way to make the South bank of the Yuba River meet levee certification of 100 year strength through federal law 44 CFR 65.10 ( the only game in town ) and that is to certify the foundation of the levee will support the levee itself, among other certifications. The foundation of levee at 0.79 levee mile marker, the site of the 1986 levee break, was demolished by giant boulders crashing down onto it the night of February 20, 1986.

When we get rain that saturates the levee and the flood waters sit against the water side of the levee for days, the levee with no foundation, will fail.
That reason for the corps of engineers withdrawing their certification of 100 year level levee they issued in 2007 was the certification did not meet the federal 44 CFR 65.10 laws and neither does the TRLIA project engineers self certification in 2009.
That is a disaster waiting too happen Tall trees.

Dick Boyd, It is true Yuba County placed the citizens and the future citizens in Debt through bonds but the funding that TRLIA Engineers falsified records of construction to the State DWR for came from a State wide voter bond, Prop 13, and to a lesser extent Early implementation funds.

Also Dick, The count is over 200 views now, not just Jenna, dad and I.

Big deal Rex over 250 views............it is so simple to run up the number of views on this worthless topic. In case you didn't know Rex every time YOU (meaning cleanup) click on the topic the count increases, the same for myself and anyone who is following. The number of views (as you seem to indicate in your last post) is far from indicative of the "popularity" of this topic.

So again Rex we don't need to prove you wrong, you are the accuser and in a court of law would be required to prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. If I were a juror in such a hypothetical trial I would have to vote NOT GUILTY were TRLIA is concerned. If that were the only not guilty vote then it would be a hung jury. Under your interpretation of the law that would mean a NOT GUILTY verdict based on the prosecutor (you) not having proved their case. Of course in this jury we also have 2grands and code3jennh also voting not guilty.

I'll click and leave a few more times just to run up the views more so you can satisfy your ego which seems to think you are popular.

Wow, 275 views now with just a few clicks of the mouse.

Post away Rex, I made my point.

With any luck enough people will report you and this topic will magically disappear.

Guess I'll take your advice now and crawl back under that nice rock I found at the site of the 1986 levee break.

I'll follow this post with baited breath to see if you actually post PROOF. Oh the anticipation.

The amount of posts was in answer to Mr.Boyd s saying he was apparently addressing only You, Me and Code Whatever.

I have proved my case to the State, and after investigating the Documents State Engineers gave me, The State assigned a case number and are investigating. No proof will be offered on this or any board at this time. No comment is necessary, your beliefs of TRLIA s levee work are well known and mine mirror the former Corps of Engineers words written to me in 2006, " We agree with your view of TRLIA s levee work." That from the Top engineer for the Federal Corps of Engineers of the Western States, regarding a letter the TRLIA Executive officer McClain sent to him in 2006 asking that he certify the Linda levee. He refused and after he left, the new Colonel permitted the Certification in 2007, but it was removed in 2009 as not meeting levee laws, as it is today.

Again, Your views are well known, I disagree with your views but you are welcome to them .

This topic is as relevant today as it was in 2006 as the only levee work constructed on the Waterside of the South bank levee of the Yuba River is a levee sloping project in 2009, which by the way was funded by Early Implementation Funding gained by TRLIA, based on the Non -Existent Sand berms from the Bridge to Shad Road. The Beat goes on....

We recently were given a document from Engineers of DWR that was the original agreement of one of the grants, stating all monies disbursed to the grant agreement shall be deposited, administered, and accounted for separately from Yuba county funds of any kind.

After the completion of the project funded by the grant the state shall require TRLIA to conduct a final audit conducted by a independent registered CPA upon completion, the audit shall be submitted to the state for review and acceptance.

The project status of the particular project stated : TRLIA completed performance of the tasks identified in the contract agreement in 2007 and submitted final construction documents to the Corps in March of 2007.

Given that completion date, TRLIA should have audited the Funds that were kept separate from YUba County's other funds, and the State should have it available for viewing.

WE shall see if TRLIA audited the $43,000,000 and has receipts showing disbursements from the Funds.

So Rex when are you going to update your blog? It has been 6 months since you've posted anything there, and it is a more appropriate forum in which to post.

The county auditors office was requested on 12-08-11 to advise if the county " Yuba levee finance authority" had kept the $43,000,000 separate from other yuba county funds. The office has not replied though they only have 10 days to respond or tell us why they need more Time.

I understand that the auditor is leaving office the 30TH of December, but the office is still there.

Rex - It is the Christmas Season. Can't you find anything good in the world?

Are you sure there hasn't been a response or is it you aren't aware if there was a response? It is public information that there has been audits.

My question for Rex would be how was the request made? Was it a formal written request detailing the exact information you want?


2grands is right, it is Christmas, as such I will Merry Christmas to and be safe over the Holidays.

Mr. Sellers was given the Grant Agreement #4600004326, signed between DWR and TRLIA on October 18, 2005. The Original agreement contained the requirements that TRLIA would keep all funds received from DWR for levee work separate from Yuba County funds. That was a simple question under the STATE PUBLIC RECORD ACT (SPAR), and my right to know.

Did Yuba County as required, keep the $43,000,000 for Phase 2 levee work separate and available for State audit? I know Yuba County Officials Locally use their own rules because an attorney told me "We do not follow that here" Regarding the federal constitution, ( The Bill of Rights ) Again, a simple question under the SPAR that permits us to keep tabs on Governments that remove transparency and our rights.

Since Mr. Sellers failed to follow SPAR law by after 10 days sending my answer or sending me a letter showing why he refused, that leaves the County open for a law suit if we choose and if we win, the county among other things has to pay court costs.



A person need not give notice in order to inspect public records at an agency’s offices during normal working hours. However, if the records are not readily accessible or if portions of the records must be redacted in order to protect exempt material, the agency must be given a reasonable period of time to perform these functions.
When a copy of a record is requested, the agency shall determine within ten days whether to comply with the request, and shall promptly inform the requester of its decision and the reasons therefor.31 Where necessary, because either the records or the personnel that need to be consulted regarding the records are not readily available, the initial ten-day period to make a determination may be extended for up to fourteen days.32 If possible, records deemed subject to disclosure should be provided at the time the determination is made. If immediate disclosure is not possible, the agency must provide the records within a reasonable period of time, along with an estimate of the date that the records will be available. The Public Records Act does not permit an agency to delay or obstruct the inspection or copying of public records.33 Finally, when a written request is denied, it must be denied in writing. 34

54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares
that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other
public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the
people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be
taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.
The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the
agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do
not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for
the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people
insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the
instruments they have created.

Chapter 54950 was brought into law to prevent such as TRLIA saying they did one thing, Created sand berms from the UPRR to the Shad Road, and under the radar, saying to State and Federal agencies they constructed sand berms from the UPRR tracks to the Highway 70 bridge and beyond to West of the bridge.

By filing a claim for reimbursement of constructing sand berms using local funds, they bilked the State out of Multi millions of Prop 13 and E-I tax funds.

This refusal of Yuba County's Auditor office to follow the law as written and at least reply within the 10 day limit with their reasons for not replying.

I know we the people have not given up our sovereignty although Yuba County Elected and appointed officials think they have taken it away. Rest assured, they have not!

December 16, 2011


Dear Mr. Archer,

Thank you for your email on November 25, 2011 regarding the Feather River Repair Project.

Your comments concerning the Feather River are appreciated.

After receiving your email, the Sacramento District levee safety office reviewed records provided by Three Rivers Levee Improvement Agency (TRLIA), and based on previous knowledge of the site and additional work completed during the course of the Yuba General Reevaluation Report (GRR), we have summarized below the seepage mitigation measures:

a. 50 ft deep cutoff wall installed by the Corps during the system evaluation work during 1997, terminating close to the Western Pacific Railroad embankment.
b. 40 ft long by 90 ft wide seepage berm overlapping the cutoff wall and abutting the railroad track.
c. Over-widened levee at the location of parallel railroad and highway 70 alignments. No seepage mitigation measures are proposed or constructed here because the combined highway/railroad embankments serve as a buttress and a seepage berm for the levee.
d. 50 ft deep cutoff wall installed by TRLIA as part of Phase 2 of their levee improvement project, extending toward the 1986 Linda break site.
e. 90 ft wide seepage berm constructed by TRLIA as part of Phase 1 of their levee improvement project, overlapping the 50 ft deep cutoff wall from Phase 2.
f. The 90 ft wide berm (as described in e.), widens to a 300 ft wide berm once reaching the 1986 break site. This berm extends to the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.

Based on this research and consistent with our recommendations from the GRR, we find the seepage measures constructed by TRLIA are consistent with the Corps’ recommendations and that there are, in fact, sand berms constructed in the locations you described.

We understand your concern about your view on TRLIA deceiving the Department of Water Resources (DWR), but unfortunately, we have no evidence to support this claim and cannot comment on this issue, as that is really between TRLIA and DWR.

As documented in the Yuba GRR Geotechnical Appendix and based on our feasibility-level evaluation, the levee you are referring to is expected to provide adequate performance for geotechnical modes of failure of the embankment and foundation to the mean 200-year flood return period. This conclusion is an acknowledgement of the previously constructed work and expected level of protection provided by the levee at these locations only, and does not constitute certification of the system by the Corps with respect to the National Flood Insurance Program.

We do appreciate your comments and suggestions, and will take them under advisement.

Sincerely,




Mark Ellis
Project Manager


This is the reply i received from the Corps of engineers when I asked if the Corps accepts TRLIA Project Engineers Ric Reinhardt Certification of the Yuba River South bank levee. Mr. Ellis states in the Formal reply, that their are Sand berms were I stated there were none, however there are no sand berms were I state there are none.

Of note in his letter is the fact the Corps constructed in 1997 the Sand berm on the West side of Highway 70 bridge proving TRLIA claimed falsely they constructed it in 2005.

Where is this Money?

Mr. Ellis was careful to explain they would certify the West area beyond the bridge as 200 year level levee because of the Extra wide levee and sand berm they constructed in 1997, but would not extend the certification to any other part of The South bank levee of the Yuba River south bank.

Just as I said,

Mr. Ellis states " Based on this research and consistent with the recommendations of our GRR, we find the seepage measures constructed by TRLIA are consistent with the Corps recommendations, and that there are, in fact, sand berms constructed in the locations you describe. "

Mr. Ellis is to quick to agree with TRLIAs writings to the corps, as they have been in the past, and completely overlooks the section of levee without sand berms. Those un constructed sand berms were required for the Corps and FEMA to certify and or
give accreditation, but more so, they were to protect upwards of Forty thousand people!

It is sad that the very people hired to protect the people, work for the state , Federal government, and Local government, block the investigation of Citizens trying to unravel Corruption, very sad indeed.

It is also sad when people throw out unsubstantiated accusations in name of protecting people and refuse to accept truth.
Reminds me of telling someone the sky is blue and they say it is red - and then they get angry because you won't agree the sky is red - when it isn't.

Notice that blog of yours "Where the truth can be told" (Agreed, the Rex Archer version of the truth) still hasn't been updated since June. No followers?
Why don't you find something good in the world or better yet with your family and spend your efforts making life better? Do you want to be remembered as bitter person consumed with hatred?

In reading what Rex posted there is yet another person telling Rex to go pound sand. Very interesting, though not surprising, that Rex won't answer my question regarding the details of his public records act requests, who he contacted, the specifics of his request, and how the request was made. In one post he said that his point was proven and in another he attacked the same person at USACE. Fortunately Rex to people see through your personality and your agenda.

Mr. Ellis states " Based on this research and consistent with the recommendations of our GRR, we find the seepage measures constructed by TRLIA are consistent with the Corps recommendations, and that there are, in fact, sand berms constructed in the locations you describe. "

This Statement "we find the seepage measures constructed by TRLIA are constituent with the Corps recommendations, " is in line with the State Engineer who sides with TRLIA, without going to the site and seeing for themselves that TRLIA is wrong.

I have shown the evidence of the original contract of October 2005, the HDR engineers cost estimate for TRILA to construct the sand berms of December 2006,
given to TRLIA by HDR, the 12 pages of invoices of work done on that section of levee given to the State DWR by TRLIA Engineers in the request for Multi millions of Dollars in reimbursement for local funds TRLIA says they spent, To the State officials responsible for protecting the public's tax funds.

The Documents are not Rex Archers fabrications, they are State documents given to me by State officials.

Thanks Rex but you've shown and not provided no answers to people who have asked you questions. Perhaps the new year will bring changes in your attitude but I seriously doubt that. Catch you on the other side of the new year Rex. Thanks for an entertaining 2011.

Breaking NEWS! It appears TRLIA or someone, is planning work at the site where they say they constructed sand berms, Construction stakes are driven into the land side of the levee. RD 784 earlier repaired a fault at the Shad road and levee toe junction with numerous sand bags, they told me Goats had chewed up the toe of the levee. Appewal democrat reported?

Nothing surprises me anymore, since twelve Engineers backed TRLIAs assessment of 100 year certification, in 2009, and the State Reclamation board president told me the Whole Engineering family disagreed with me on the Linda Levee, and three engineers working with the county and TRLIA wrote letter to DWR asking for reimbursement of Local funds they say TRLIA spent on the States levee, and at least three state engineers, are blocking all attempts at unraveling this greed based scam of the State taxpayers levee upgrade funds, I would wonder why they would use their badge to work ( Engineers license) in supporting Yuba county officials in Bilking tax funds ?

The repair silently by TRLIA of what was a major levee problem goes along with the Silent treatment yuba County officials have treated the Voters with since 2004 at least.

What else has the Appointed absentee officials and some elected officials kept from the people?

Wheres the Money?

Some of us went over to the construction stakes on the landside of the yuba River south bank levee, and several ideas of what they could be for came forth but, the best was an attorney who said, " I know, they are going to pour sand down the side oi the levee, through the giant tree trunks, and when they fill the section, swear that those trees grew UP through the sand berm over the week!

Have the supervisors turned their heads away from this ripping off of taxes, do they know what is going on, I know some do, winter gets deeper, snow turns to water Etc.

The next thing that will happen is it will flood. Then it will be declared that the flood is larger than a 200 year event. Then Rex will argue that the size of the flood declaration is improper and it is TRLIA/Yuba County's fault.

If I may preempt Rex. I would like to declare that the size of the flood declaration is not correct. I am not the first with that declaration, by the way.

 

In my opinion, we are demanding a one percent happening of a flood. That is what a hundred year flood means in terms of risk. In terms of what insurance companies and governments stand behind. We are planning to be flooded, on average, once every hundred years.

 

Well, not really. We are planning to cover the loss by collecting insurance AND taxes. The amount of insurance collected is NOT enough to cover the losses. What is not covered by insurance is made up in taxes.

 

Can you spell FEMA?

I think the number should be one-tenth of a percent. A thousand year flood.

Whose fault will it be? Who cares whose fault it is unless they have very deep pockets and can reimburse those who have lost.

Usually the one with deep pockets is the governement. The government is us.

Should we (the government) allow construction in an area that has a one percent chance of flooding? If we do allow such construction, should we (the governed and the government) require construction which is not likely to suffer damage when it does flood? Such as houses on stilts? Or on barges?

 

Should California follow the lead of Dayton, OH and the Tennessee Valley Authority? Or should Californians continue to burn down houses to enjoy the taste if roast pig?

 

Let the squirting of duck dung between the teeth begin.

In Rex's world it will always be TRLIA and Yuba County's fault. End of story.

Earlier, I said I would not post any evidence in this case on this or any forum, however I will post an excerpt from one evidential document, the Early Implementation ( EI ) program April 17, 2009.

This document came along with others under the SPRA request to DWR Engineers. The document was sent by TRLIA to DWR by MBK employee and Project Engineer of TRLIA, Ric Reinhardt as justification for DWR granting TRLIA reimbursement funds for local funds TRLIA said they spent on sand berms on the YUba river south levee in 2005.

The engineer stated in the following words on page 4, Phase 2, " Added a seepage berm to the existing yuba river left ( south ) bank levee from the Western Pacific Rail Road (WPRR) to highway 70 and from highway 70 to the Southern pacific Rail road."

who's fault is it that Reinhardt falsified a claim Under the E I program and several others? Rex's?

You won't post any evidence or don't have any evidence Rex? Posting an excerpt from a document means nothing since you can parse words and totally change the context. Besides which the documents which you claim to have requested under the Public Records act are publicly available.

Why no BREAKING NEWS on your blog Rex? How many people on this forum really follow you Rex? It is truly sad that you have dedicated so much energy to all of these conspiracies.........................Despite you claim to the contrary the Constitution is alive and well in Yuba County. Your previous quote that "we're not under that here" is in specific reference to the fact the 5th amendment guarantee against double jeopardy didn't apply in your trial since in your case it was mistrial due to a hung jury. You've said things so much now that you actually have convinced yourself you can't possibly be wrong. If you say something enough people may actually believe you, fortunately those on this forum are much smarter than that.

Not much rain the forecast right now, in fact I've turned on my sprinkler system, something I've never done in Dec/Jan.

Time to watch some football and enjoy life.

I was out and about earlier and saw the stakes mentioned. Must be a slow news day is a hand full of stales in the ground is "BREAKING NEWS". One thing can be said with certainty,they aren't doing any work on the levees as that is not permitted after October. Those stakes could be there for any number of reasons Rex, besides the final report to DWR and the request for funding both indicate the exact work done,

If you have problems with TRLIA then I suggest you contact your County Supervisor, or better yest contact Mary Jane Griego since she is a family friend and would never steer you wrong/

1782 posts

514

October 29, 2011 10:45:00 AM PDT

The document's i received from DWR covers the land side of the levee from Shad pad road West to the highway 70 bridge. You are describing from Shad road East, a non issue.

Again, TRLIA posted on their Website, as you correctly stated, that the final construction shows they never intended to build sand berms between Shad Road and Highway 70.

However, the documents TRLIA sent to DWR for reimburserment and to FEMA for accreditation, as well as to the corps for certification in 2007, and to me in 2011, stated TRLIA had constructed sand berms from Shad road west to the highway 70.

That document is posted on here to see.