Pages

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Anne’s article originally appeared in the March/April 2006 edition of HopeDance #55 (http://www.hopedance.org/) and is reprinted here with permission of the author.


Shirley Jackson Comes to Los Osos
by Anne R. Allen

In Los Osos, California, during the first week of February, a remarkable thing happened. The few rights left to us by the Bushist corporate oligarchs were revoked by a group of unelected local California bureaucrats.

The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) chose 50 random citizens to be punished — without charges, trials, or legal representation — not because of anything they have done or not done, or even who they voted for, but simply because of where they happen to live.

I believe this is called scapegoating. It would appear to have little to do with water quality and everything to do with terrorizing the population.

Given the turnout for last September’s surreal Los Osos Community Services District (CSD) recall election, and the closeness of the vote, these as yet unnamed citizens have a less-than 30% chance of having opposed the sewer and the RWQCB’s edicts. According to published statistics, they also have less than 5% chance of owning a leaking septic system. Perhaps they have, like me, already forked out the $4000 “prepayment” for the sewer, which has apparently evaporated.

Their only crime is residing in a town that has been torn apart for more than 30 years by controversy over funding for a much-needed sewer — controversy caused by lack of government oversight of developers over a generation ago.

But hey, these scapegoats were chosen by lottery, “to be fair.”

“The Lottery” is the title of a famous story by Shirley Jackson about a seemingly normal town where an annual lottery designates a random victim/scapegoat to be stoned to death. Critic Peter Kosenko said in his New Orleans Review article on Jackson, “The lottery functions to terrorize the village into accepting, in the name of democracy, the power on which its oppressive social order depends.”

Jackson’s story came to my mind (the part of it that wasn’t busy being terrorized) when I read the news of the RWQCB’s latest action in their ongoing battle with the new CSD board of Los Osos.

In his comments in the Tribune, the RWQCB’s executive officer Roger Briggs showed a lack of empathy that appears to border on the sociopathic. He seems to regard the residents of Los Osos as a monolithic entity with the sole objective of thwarting his power, rather than individual citizens who may or may not agree with the new CSD officers. He seems to believe that the actions of a few residents of Los Osos a generation ago are the fault of people who innocently bought or rented homes here in the years that followed.

Mr. Briggs and his board haven’t addressed the fact that if a county project has been a source of constant controversy for half a century, maybe the problem lies in the project, not the character flaws of people who move here. Although – wow — if previously good citizens morph into pro-pollution anarchist crazies just by moving to a place, I’d say there might be something more terrible in the water than a sewer could cure!


I have been out of the country for most of the last three years and did not support the recall, but after watching the RWQCB’s colossally disrespectful treatment of Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee, I could see why Los Ososans felt bullied. After Mr. Blakeslee facilitated a compromise between the warring factions in September, the RWQCB reneged and told him, “It’s been fun wasting your time, dude, but the whole compromise thing was a lie. You lose.”


Our elected representative — the person who stands for you and me in what used to be a government of, by and for the people — was brushed off like so much trash by this organization that apparently answers to no authority higher than its own will.

And now, like the villagers in Shirley Jackson’s story, county residents show little compassion for the innocent victims of this out-of-control bureaurocracy. The new CSD board has so far offered no more comfort than to post a petition on their website and ask fellow citizens to donate to a private fund to help these folks who are about to be fined up to $1000 a DAY. But each of those fellow citizens knows he or she may be next.

The Los Osos mess is a bad one. The lack of oversight of development in the 1960s and 1970s created monstrous problems—from unpaved roads to a lack of public facilities. The solution will probably be as complicated as the problem. But terrorizing a town and pumping the 95% of septic tanks that function perfectly well won’t keep one bacterium out of anybody’s water supply.


Anne R. Allen lives part time in Los Osos and part time in northern England. She’s the author of two novels published in the UK: FOOD OF LOVE and THE BEST REVENGE (available at amazon.co.uk.) She writes the column, IN Her Own Write, for INkwell Newswatch, Toronto’s online writers’ zine, rated the #1 writer’s source on the web. Her short fiction currently appears online at Chick Flicks and Dispatch Litareview.

78 comments:

Shark Inlet said...

I won't agree that Jackson's story is at all similar to what is happening in Los Osos. First off, our friend Anne forgets that all properties will be given the same orders by the end of the year.

At most we are talking about an additional four pumpings. If the LOCSD wants to argue at the RWQCB hearing that all pumping orders should be delayed until the date that the entire community will have received their CDOs, they can. They probably should. However, please realize that if some 5000 properties are all going to start bi-monthly pumping at the same time, there will be an immediate (rather than somewhat gradual) rush to hire pumping services and some will be harmed.

Maybe the CSD could volunteer to get pumping schedules set up and could manage the paperwork for us. That would be helpful.

So, if Jackson's "The Lottery" is not an appropriate analogy, what is? I would suggest the US in 1860. If you remember your history books, the South was not 100% full of slave-owning oppressors yet was still asked to stay within the United States even if they didn't get their way 100% of the time. The South got many concessions from Northern legislators but still wanted more control over their own laws than the Constitution allowed.

In the same sense, Los Osos is not 100% full of rabid anti-sewer fanatics ... we just seem to have elected five to represent us when dealing with the State government and to build a sewer. Like in the 1860s, there was a war. Those in CCLO won several of their first few battles in their war with the State government. On the other hand, we all know that by the time the later 1860s rolled around, the Civil War was over and the South had been decimated.

Was the war the fault of the North? Why couldn't the North just let the South have their way on every issue and so avoid the war?

These same questions are being asked today ... but about the RWQCB and SWRCB? Why is the state being so mean and vindictive? Back in 1860, I am sure that residents of Richmond Virginia felt strongly that they were being oppressed by those in DC who were being "vindictive" and "mean". The problem here perhaps is that history is written by those who win. In the case of the Civil War, we are told that the North was very willing to compromise with the South, yet still the South insisted on more and more and more. I see something entirely parallel here. The RWQCB has worked with those in Los Osos for years to get a plant built. They didn't enforce the prohibition against discharges. Even with the CDOs they still aren't doing what they have the right to do (stop all discharges ... period).

How do Pandor and Stan fit into my analogy. I don't know the names of the Southern politicians before the War, but there were some who were attempting to work things out with the North as much as possible. The were marginalized and eventually the firebrands took over ... then we had a war because of their unwillingness to do what was right. Was the result good? I forget.

Anonymous said...

Inlet's postings are consistantly centrfugial, disrespectful, obsessive and tiresome. Anybody ever done a word count on the inlet's postings??

My thanks to Anne R. Allen & to HopeDance for their concern for our community

Anonymous said...

And thanks to calhoun's cannons for posting this excellent food for thought.

Shark Inlet said...

Now Dogpatch is taking me to task for caring deeply about the fate of my friends in Los Osos and for being able to type quickly.

Oh my ... has anyone every bothered to figure out how often Dogpatch has added something to this discussion rather than simply bad-mouthing my postings?

Glad you didn't bother about any "rpm" comments because I was going to have to compare you to Bill "No Spin Zone" O'Reilly and Fox News where if you don't toe the party line you are forbidden to have an opinion.

Anonymous said...

Shouts to the Dogpatch Refugee!!
Shark Inlet quit spinnin' sooo hard, your making me dizzy!
Love to to Churadogs, Anne R. Allen, and Hopedance. When Roger Briggs and company did this to our town, I remembered Shirley Jackson's story too...

Anonymous said...

Shark Inlet writes with detail, presents facts and challenges others to debate! I do find "'centrifugal', disrespectful, obsessive and tiresome" most of the other comments. Just read the previous comments and compare!

Anonymous said...

Shark Inlets,
Please pull your stinky heads out of your collective butts. Spin, spin, and spin some more about your precious Tri W. Your fanatic defenses of this inefficient project is only topped by your desires to fine and punish the people of Los Osos. Question: Do you care more about water quality or your precious?

Shark Inlet said...

What I would like to see is some discussion of the way the LOCSD has spent money since the election. Admittedly some of the money was spent on issues related to the starting then stopping of construction. On the other hand, had construction not started, this CSD would already be broke. They're living off of the SRF money.

In any case, I would like to see some defense from LOCSD supporters for the LOCSD actions which seem to be to simply spend spend spend on lawyers. Why couldn't this board simply move forward with their "out of town" project without all the lawyer cash giveaways?

Churadogs said...

Inlet states above: "In the same sense, Los Osos is not 100% full of rabid anti-sewer fanatics ... we just seem to have elected five to represent us when dealing with the State government and to build a sewer."

The five CSD board members are "rabid anti-sewer fanatics?" Well, who knew!

Further from Inlet, above: "What I would like to see is some discussion of the way the LOCSD has spent money since the election. Admittedly some of the money was spent on issues related to the starting then stopping of construction. On the other hand, had construction not started, this CSD would already be broke. They're living off of the SRF money."

Now, THAT's a great topic. I think the "mid term" budget's coming out soon, so let's all attend the various finance committee meetings and see if there's a way to break out costs into pre-election, post-election, and figure out just how much money got "wasted" because the old CSD tried to block Measure B, started to pound money into the ground by refusing to wait for the election & etc. Now, that'll be a lot of fun.

Anonymous said...

So Ann,

The point of the meetings will be to determine wasted expenses? Where does one put wasted expenses on the ledger? Before the election, a majority made decisions, afterword, a majority made decisions. Expenses are expenses. Did the CSD as an entity change between 2004 and 2006? Where did you get your accounting degree from? Where did you get your public finance degree from?

Did the money on Measure B get wasted before or after the settlement?

Where in the law does it say that an elected body has to what for an election to make a decision it has authority for? Or is it that maybe you don't prescribe to the concept of representative government?

As misinformation by Ann runs rampant in Los Osos....

Anonymous said...

What would our expenses be if the former RECALLED board had not started a project 20 days before an election that would terminate said project? Why couldn't they wait to move forward until after the recall election when they KNEW the community did not support the project? If the former board had not disbanded committees and locked their doors and shut the community out, maybe we'd have a project the community supported.....what would our EXPENSES be then.....the former borad's scorched earth policy in the months before the election saddled this community with debt against it's will. Now, the poor babies want to dissolve the very Government they created because our community DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM!!!!! These people are sick and twisted. They make me want to vomit.

Shark Inlet said...

I am afraid of answering because anonymous or Dogpatch will mischaracterize my response ... but ... if we are going to talk about what our debt would be had the previous board not started construction ... I suspect it would be lower. Rather than about $50M in debt we would have only $40M. (Note: some of our debt associated with the contractors is because the current board chose not to stop the contracts immediately but instead keep the contractors hanging around at $200k/day.

If you're a gonna claim that the community supports the current board you are sadly mistaken. Every single person I've spoken to about the recall wishes they could have their votes back, that they could vote "no" on all four issues.

Anonymous said...

"If you're a gonna claim that the community supports the current board you are sadly mistaken. Every single person I've spoken to about the recall wishes they could have their votes back, that they could vote "no" on all four issues."
The objectivity and credibility leaves me breathless.
"I am afraid of answering because anonymous or Dogpatch will mischaracterize my response ..."
My response: Hypocrite.

Anonymous said...

Funny. Everybody I know, wishes the former board had not started the Tri-W project. You are so full of shit shark. Your spin doesn't even pass the laugh test anymore. Oh my God you're funny. Everybody I know, can't wait until lafco denies the petition for dissolution. Everybody I know, can't wait to laugh in the face of taxpayer watch as they try to run candidates for an institution they tried to dissolve. Everyone I know, can't wait to vote against the solutions group dumb shit assholes that got us into this mess in the first place......I know all 8000+ registered voters personally. I spend 23 hours of my day having tea and biscuits with them. Everybody you know....HAAAAA!!!!!!!Come on shark......I was born at night, not last night....Your spin shows a serious disrespect for our electorate here in Los Osos. Maybe that's why you keep losing elections....What a laugh riot you are.....and you say you don't spin......

Mike Green said...

Im confused Publickworks, as usual. Did you mean it was OK for elected officials to completly go against the statements and visions they made in order to be elected :

"Where in the law does it say that an elected body has to what for an election to make a decision it has authority for? Or is it that maybe you don't prescribe to the concept of representative government?"


Is this the best defense of the "30 day wonder dig"?
That it was technicaly OK for them to do that, no foul?
and to place blame on all our troubles because the new CSD board is actualy trying to do what they said they would do? and dont, in some peoples view, do what they want?
I say the system itself was the biggest contributor to our woes.
In this case representative government sucked the big one.
problem is, we don't have any other way to do it.

Anonymous said...

Just so long as those poor widdle contractors get paid and poor widdle insurance companies don't get taken advantage of...Nasty Los Osos homeowners bitchin about their broken homes. There are regulatory edicts to be followed after decades of blasphemous refusal. Punish us oh Great State, so that we know your Might & return to the golden path of Tri W! We dissolve ourselves to be at your feet, give us your wisdom and just & merciful guidance, oh great Water Gods!

Mike Green said...

Thank You Doggie! (couldn't have said it better myself... I'm flattered)Mike Green

Shark Inlet said...

To Dogpatch and our anonymous friend ...

Is your goal to simply be insulting and to spend so little time discussing the issues that this comment section becomes worthless?

If you would perhaps address any of the issues it would be nice.


As to Mike's question ... if you believe that the last board didn't have the authority to start construction, you should also believe that this current board doesn't have the authority to do make any decisions before the LAFCO dissolution issue is 100% resolved or before the November 2006 election. This is not a great argument for starting construction before the election, but it is a good argument that the current board ... who argued that construction shouldn't start before the recall election ... shouldn't do anything to move the project out of town before November.

Anonymous said...

Mike,

Why are you confused? In 1998, the got elected based on a pond and a prayer. In 2002, they still got re-elected based on a changed promise. Not as convincing as in 1998, but pretty convincing.

Maybe Dogpatch can only believe they were trying to screw poor ol' dogpatch. Maybe they were trying to do what they thought would be in the best interst of the town (it's not like they lost by a landslide), and maybe they figured that the new board wouldn't risk untold millions for a new risky propsosition, maybe they thought the new board would be a little more cautious given the circumstances. Hey, maybe they couldn't stomach the though of individuals getting CDOs if the project thought - boy, what a bunch of bastards for even considering the consequences of stopping the project. Why don't you ask them.

Did the new board consider that individuals would get CDOs?

As for DawgPatch. On no, let's not blame poor poor members of the new board, lilll doggy woggy. Let's just talk about how we can pin the spin, oooh, how about that rpm phrase, yeah, that's a catchy one. We wike phwases. Rufff, Ruff. Down Boy.

Shark Inlet said...

Dogpatch,

If you want to fight the state government and proclaim their laws irrelevant you shouldn't get surprised if they fight back.

On issues where one is morally in the right (like the civil rights movement) it is worth the fight even if you get personally hurt for the greater good will ultimately prevail.

However, if you are arguing that you should have the right to pollute until you get your most favorite of the infinitely many possible sewage treatment facilities you don't have any moral high ground to stand on. If your position is that you should be allowed to piss in your neighbor's drinking water the state has the right to tell you that you don't.

Mike Green said...

To Sharkey and Publickworks:
As usual, I dont make myself quite clear. Blame my 6th grade education and the fact that I am a car mechanic
What I'm trying to say is that in my opinion the "30 day wonder dig" was a political suicide
Did they have the "authority" yes, was the decision smart?--------------
Is it any wonder we are at this juncture?
Also, it is my observation that ANY measure that claims "cheaper, better, faster", will win an election in Los Osos
Anybody want to ride the "system" bus some more?

Anonymous said...

Mike,

Politically, was it smart. Probably not, but who knows. Maybe the construction swayed voters one way and others another. Maybe if they had purposely stopped, and then got fined, it wouldv'e helped their cause.

But if the idea was to get it constructed, then they did exactly as they promised.

You know, people want to assign all these extraneous motives to every action. Sometimes the explanation is just simple.

They were going to construct that project, regardless. The new board was going to stop the project, regardless. Guess what happens when the there's a duel and both people fire at the same time. Nobody's left to claim victory.

It's kinda laughable when both Ann and Shark agree suggest the construction lost votes. They can't really know, there wasn't an exit poll by CBS news.

Churadogs said...

Public works said, "Maybe if they had purposely stopped, and then got fined, it wouldv'e helped their cause."

If I'm not mistaken, they had a 90 day no-harm, no foul stand down clause they could have used, they also were given more time by the State Board to reconsider the bids that came in waaaay over what they thoght they would, (they refused to take that time) and when they went back for $40 more millions, they were also given time to ascertain that that was actually what the citizens wanted (to my knowledge they never did that, just signed on the dotted line immediately) & etc. Meanwhile, they kept claiming that if they didn't move ahead rapidly they'd get fined & etc. In reality, in fact, truthfully, there were options available to them -- without incuring any fines -- that they could have taken until the election. They refused to take those options. The question reamins, Why?

Anonymous said...

Huh?

Ask yourself Ann, are you sure about your statements being facts?

"there were also given time to
ascertain that was actually what the citizens wanted"

Can you point to the clause in any document that states that?

"90 day stand-down no harm, no foul"

With regards to what? The construction stand-by? There are standby charges, hence there can be harm. If they went on standby prior to the election, it would have been the same as standby after the election, hence I'm complaint could have been filed against the district.

Please point to the document from the regional (not state) water board that gives a no-harm, no foul clause for standing down for 90 days. Please clarify your information, otherwise it is just misinformation.

If they delayed for the election, I believe they would have been delaying pure and simply, and that IS stopping progress towards compliance, violating the TSO, Basin Plan, etc., etc. And then what?, would you have been complaining about the RWQCB issuing a complaint before an election as interfering in an election? When are you going to get it through your head the RWQCB considers that the CSD (and actions) are the same regardless of who's on the board. Of course it's a fine line they have to take, because they obviously know there's potential changes in local decisions. So shouldn't they advise the local decision makers of the consequences of decisions? Wouldn't you want the local decision makers to understand those consequences, and wouldn't you expect them to weigh those consequences (such as potential fines against both the district AND the homeowners)?

They were given more time to consider the bids, but that wasn't a time extension on the TSO. If they re-bid and came in lower, yeah it wouldv'e been great. If re-bid higher, that would have been worse, and if no bid, guess what - you could have had fines with a no bid situation. You really seem to assume that all the consequences of re-bidding would have been beneficial from the CSD's point of view.

They could have re-bid, got a no bid, won the election, re-bid afterward, and got the project you dislike at an even higher price. Maybe they even did you a favor, given your preferences.

Yes, there were options available, and they all had consequences. Are you so sure those consequences would have been any better?

Anonymous said...

Shark,

First,
this comment section becomes worthless when you start spinning about all your anonymous invisible "mystery friends" who are against our Government.
We, the community of Los Osos, elected this CSD to REPRESENT us and work towards a wastewater project the community supports......


Second,
you say our current board shouldn't have the authority to make any decisions before the November elections......

How about this for a concept?.......
Our current CSD Board formulates a plan for a wastewater solution that includes an interim septic management and water conservation program in prelude to a wastewater project that actually makes sense and helps our water pollution and water supply problem......not this punitive joke that the RQWCB wants to inforce that will actually DESTROY OUR WATER SUPPLY AND MAKE OUR WATER POLLUTION WORSE......How about our current board, our ELECTED CSD, puts this water conservation/septic management and wastewater project plan on a ballot in November and,
WE ALL VOTE ON IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!.......
Oh but that's right you and your "FRIENDS" (HAAA....sorry that post is still cracking me up)...you and your friends would vote AGAINST an interim water conservation/septic management program that makes sense and a wastewater project that the community supports, wouldn't you?......
Oh wait, I forgot, I'm sorry..........
YOU GUYS DON'T WANT ANY OF US TO VOTE ON ANYTHING...YOU WANT TO DISSOLVE THE CSD DON'T YOU........

prediction...
you'll try and spin this and say you're not infavor of dissolving the CSD then you'll write a 300 word paragraph on why the CSD should be dissolved and that all of your "FRIENDS" regret voting for the CSD(HAA again ...excuse me i feel a sneeze coming on...."BULLSHIT"..oh excuse me)
It was your "friends" who created the CSD in the first place and now they want to dissolve it because our community rejected their bad idea.


Your spin is getting soo old and tired Shark and I'm not going to ignore it.....I will follow you right back in here and dissolve your BS spin with the truth.
What's the truth?
I ask everyone to discover it for themself and attend a wastewater committe meeting and a water committee meeting. Stop trying to choke down all sharks bullshit rap. It will just make you want to vomit anyway. You will have a hard time finding the truth in any of sharks posts.
You'll find the truth of what your Government is doing for you at wastewater and/or water committee meeting.
Incase you didn't know Shark and Pubic, our New CSD has reformed these committees that your "FRIENDS" dissolved.
The community was against a center of town nightmare, so the former CSD disbanded these committees to shut the public out of the process.
Our new CSD has reformed these committees and welcomed the public back. But I guess you don't want this either....do you Shark and Pubicworks?.....
What the CSD is working towards is an interim water conservation/septic management program and a final wastewater project.
You'll probably see it on that November ballot.
The one that shark and his friends want to take away from you.
What can I say about Publicworks and Shark Inlet?
Boys and girls, the words for today are "POOR SPORT, SORE LOSERS"
Can you say "POOR SPORT, SORE LOSERS"?
I knew you could.....

Shark Inlet said...

Ann has a good point that I should probably not have called the current board "anti sewer fanatics". I should have said that they "act like anti sewer fanatics".

Mike ... You are 100% right. The choice to start construction right before the election (or the decision to have the election after the start of construction ... same difference) is likely what cost them their jobs ... and our community. Without a poll we don't actually know (yes, publicworks is right) but I cannot count the number of people I met who said that they voted for the recall because the former board choosing to start construction just before the vote seemed to be something that they could have simply delayed a bit to see what the community wanted. Do I blame them for being unwise and losing the election? Yes. Do I blame the new group for being even more foolish, perhaps a hundredfold? Hell yes!

Ann, you are mistaken about the "stand down" clause. The clause gives the SWRCB (not the LOCSD) the ability to delay construction. Furthermore, you are just speculating that had the board asked for a re-bid on the contracts that they would have gotten lower bids. In fact, the bids could have been considerably higher due to a variety of reasons, including the costs of fuel and concrete having gone up considerably.

While Ann claims that they had other options besides going forward with construction, she doesn't tell us what those options were, those options that would not have resulted in fines. So, Ann, what were those choices?


To our anonymous friends ... I did not say that this board doesn't have the authority to make decisions before November, just that their authority to make such decisions is the same as the authority the previous board had to make decsisions before Sep 27. Along those lines, people who who argue "no treefall before recall" should argue that the current board should wait until November before they choose to sell TriW or some other silliness. Both boards have the authority to do whatever is within their authority. Both boards have the authority to be unwise. No one has the right to play both sides of this issue and say that the previous board didn't have the right to start construcition but now tell us that selling TriW is okay.

I would love this board to give us all the options ... honestly evalutated in terms of costs ... and give us the choice. I liked that aspect of Measure B quite a bit. Perhpas you're new around here because I've argued for some time now that we should be given all the choices. I believe if that were to happen, TriW would come out a clear winner. Certainly there is no way we'll be able to get our costs back down to what the previous board's TriW project would have given us, but ... if TriW would run you $300/month and "out of town" would likely be five years away and cost you $400/month and you would also have to pump 100% of your effluent Jan 2010 until the sewer is online (perhaps costing about $1200/month), what would you choose? I would suggest the majority of "us" in Los Osos would pick TriW ... even now.

If you don't like my opinions you are welecome to ignore them or to argue against them. I would be nice, though, if you would be willing to provide some substance to your arguments. For example, I've said that our costs will likely be higher for "out of town" than TriW. You've offered no evidence to the contrary.

What I find most ammusing about your comments, my anonymous friend, is that you presume that I am one of the Dreamers/Dissolvers. If you believe that the LOCSD has welcomed public input you are quite confused. Maybe they've welcomed your input, but mine has been pretty unwelcome by the board, just like you aren't interested in it being posted here.

If, this next November, your board is voted out of office ... or if, by a public vote, the CSD is dissolved, will you simply shut up and say "oh well, the majority disagrees with me, I guess I shouldn't say anything"? If so, great. If not, you shouln't suggest taht I don't have a right to voice my opinions just because 51% of the voters in Los Osos disagreed with me on Sep 27.

Again, I would love an honest November vote ... one that gives us all the options, not just those that are more expensive than TriW.

Anonymous said...

anonymous,

Now that you got that out, go pop open one of those wine-coolers, or whatever floats your boat.

You know what, I gotta say one thing; I really do believe anony's statements represent close to the majority of Los Osos. Your statements also represent the typical comprehension and understanding of facts of the majority of Los Osos.

Let me extend my heartfelt sympathy to you as well.

Anonymous said...

Shark,

Right now, our elected CSD, the folks you say are acting like "anti-sewer fanatics", are working towards a wastewater project. Do you know what an RFP is? Your calling them "anti-sewer fanatics" is just more of your tired BS spin. Shark, you are the KING of empty arguements and baseless spin. You say our current board does not welcome public input?" What in the hell are you taking about? (excuse me I'm feeling another sneeze coming on......"BULLSHIT"....excuse me).
You want facts and substance?

OK.
Here's some facts and substance regarding the public's input and representation in our local Government......

The former board was recalled in disgrace because they refused to represent their community.....
Fact: The former RECALLED CSD board disbanded all committees to shut out ALL members of the community locking their doors on the public shutting us ALL out of the process. FACT: They held the mininum number of meetings (usually 1 per month) allowing us only three minutes a month to speak on the issue.

Our newly elected representatives:

FACT: Re-established the committee structure and are welcoming EVERYONE back into the decision making process.....YES EVEN YOU SHARK INLET ARE WELCOME TO ATTEND AND MAKE ANY COMMENTS YOU WISH AT ANY COMMITTEE MEETING or CSD MEETING!!!!!!........
to say you're not welcome is not a fact, it's a LIE.....
FACT: our current elected REPRESENTATIVES, are having three meetings every month and every member of the community IS invited.....EVEN YOU SHARK INLET...to say you're not welcome is not a fact, it's a LIE.
Director Schicker at every meeting is offering an open invitation to ALL members of the community....including taxpayerwatch....
You Shark Inlet are the one who is "QUITE CONFUSED" regarding the community's input and access to our local Government CSD elected by the people of Los Osos .
I must say I am a bit confused by something you said......
Even though President Schicker has openly invited ALL members of the community to CSD and Committee meetings....if your not a dreamer/disolver, then why wouldn't you feel welcome to attend a CSD or committee meeting.....HMMMMMMMMMMM.....
And you say you're not a dreamer/dissolver(excuse me i'm feeling another sneeze coming on "BULLSHIT" oh excuse me again...)
I'd love to have an intelligent conversation with you and to hear your ideas at a CSD meeting or a committee meeting rather that just respond to your spin and Bullshit lies in this blog. But, making up false and misleading statements in this blog is so easy for you isn't Shark. You don't want to go to a CSD or committee meeting because your lies and spin will be exposed infront of the whole community for everyone to see. So, go ahead, hide in the shadows with all of your "FRIENDS".....LMAO.....you are really killing me with all your "friends" statements......You say "I cannot count the number of people I met who said that they voted for the recall who regret it .......and every single person I've spoken to about the recall wishes they could have their votes back, that they could vote "no" on all four issues."(excuse me I'm feeling another sneeze coming on......"BULLSHIT"....excuse me, I'm very allergic to Bullshit) .....
You cannot count?
It's kind of hard to count to ZERO isn't it......
Can't you see that we all see thru this? Oh my God, what little respect you show to the fellow members of your community. Are you just trying to be funny? Do you realize how full of shit you sound when you say your not a dreamer/dissolver and then proceed to hammer and bash our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES with lies. You don't think we all see thru this?

FACT: Our new CSD REPRESENTATIVES are going to let us vote on a project before they start ripping up streets and digging holes in the ground......
I'm so glad you agree with me on this...maybe there is a brain hidding in there somewhere........
FACT: Unfortunately Shark, Tri-W probably won't be on the ballot because THE COMMUNITY OF LOS OSOS ALREADY VOTED AGAINST IT!!!!!!!
HELLO, ANYBODY HOME? For this reason they have every right to and should SELL TRI-W!!!!!!!! If the former asshole board members, who didn't represent our community, hadn't saddled this community with enormous debt with their pre-election scorched earth policy that even you disagree with, we might not have to sell it. Oh well.
I love it when you post in here.
Keep up the good work.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to dissolve your lies with facts....these substantive facts........

Mike Green said...

I name thee "Anon substantive facts"
Well done great post.
Thanks

Anonymous said...

"Oh my God, what little respect you show to the fellow members of your community. Are you just trying to be funny? Do you realize how full of shit you sound when you say your not a dreamer/dissolver and then proceed to hammer and bash our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES with lies. You don't think we all see thru this?"
Word. Bitch slapped all across Ann's Blog. Thanks Mike, thanks Anons, Ann deserves every bit of support she can get.

Shark Inlet said...

Anonymous,

Your post here is making me sad for our community. Your "you lost, get over it" attitude won't help our community heal or "work together" to achieve a solution of any sort. When Lisa and Dan criticize people for stating their opinions, it doesn't exactly encourage people to make their opinions known. The LOCSD needs a 218 vote soon to have any hope of not going bankrupt and to get this they'll need the property owners to support them. The key here is that the property owners won't vote an additional cost on themselves unless they are convinced that it will be worthwhile. The LOCSD's choice to not compromise with those they are asking to "come to the table" will blow up in their face. Property owners as a whole want the least expensive solution. If TriW were something the CSD would at least adopt as a "last resort" option like they were willing to do during the October "negotiations" it would go a long way to convincing folks that we'll be given a real option.

You've told us that the citizens voted against TriW. Well, TriW was not on the ballot last September. Three measures were about replacing one guy with another. The other measure said that the WWTF should not be allowed near a school and that we should all get to vote. You are thinking that these were all about TriW, but when you recall that TriW was not mentioned it seems that you are making a leap of logic. What if the part of Measure B that seems to forbid TriW is overturned? Wouldn't then the other aspect of Measure B indicate that TriW should be included in any ballot of options for our citizens?

What I am asking for here is for democracy. I am asking for TriW to be given a fair and honest evaluation compared to the other choices and for us all got get to vote on the results.

Why are you afraid to let the people vote on the options? Why do you insist that your particular interpretation of the Sep 27 ballot is the only reasonable one? Why don't you want to let the people choose? If TriW will really cost us less than some other site, why would you not want to allow the citizens to choose the least expensive option?

Anonymous said...

Gee Shark.....

What took you so long?
But, thanks. Thanks for another one of your twisted posts that will be sooo easy to pick apart.....

Who told you to get lost?.....I just looked at my last post and counted very quickly six times where I directly or indirectly invited you to get involved in taking part in the wastewater project your current CSD board is developing for our community.....
I don't feel sad for our community. I am very optimistic about our community's future. I honest to God believe our new CSD will provide our community, finally, with a viable wastewater project. What they are doing just makes way too much sense.(interim septic management/water conservation program in prelude to a wastewater project the community supports). I think when the waterboard finally realizes how rediculous and impossible their CDO plan is...I'm betting they will come around. We're welcoming you to hop on board anytime Shark.... Are you telling me this is something you would vote against?
Now, who's the "anti sewer fanatic"? I feel sad for folks like you who refuse to join us and take part in the process to finally develop a project for our community.


Next queestion....How is dissolving the CSD "helping our community heal or "work together" to achieve a solution"? Don't look now, but your community IS working together to achieve a solution. See you at the next wastewater meeting Shark? Not exactly telling you to get lost am I? The dissolution movement is a movement AGAINST A WASTEWATER PROJECT!!!!!! The dissolution movement is not "helping our community heal or "work together" to achieve a solution. The dissolution movement is a sad and pathetic attempt TO KEEP OUR COMMUNITY DIVIDED!!!! And, it will fail.

Next, I've never seen Lisa or Dan criticize anybody for stating an opinion. I have seen them criticize people for spewing misinformation and lies. Your not a dissolutionist are you Shark?(HAAA) Who in their right mind would encourage or allow someone to missinform, deceive, and lie?

Your next statement:
"The LOCSD needs a 218 vote soon to have any hope of not going bankrupt and to get this they'll need the property owners to support them."
Are you saying that you would NOT support a vote to fund a wastewater project? Sorry, I think that unlike you, most of the property owners of this town want a viable wastewater project. Once again, who's the "anti sewer fanatic"? Any property owner or vacant lot owner who attends a wastewater committee meeting will clearly see that the QUICKEST PATH TO SOLUTION IS TO TAKE PART IN YOUR GOVERNMENT AND LET THEM HELP US BUILD A WASTEWATER PROJECT!!!!!!! Dissolution is just the same old tired nonsolution path to more delays and uncertainty.

Your next statement is a real laugh riot. OH MY GOD....this is my favorite.....
"The LOCSD's choice to not compromise with those they are asking to "come to the table" will blow up in their face.".....
Well, I guess you were out of town in October when the CSD with the SWRCB spent a week in Blakeslee's office and AGREED TO COMPROMISE!!!!!!!!...just to have the SWRCB renege.....Also, at every CSD meeting Lisa and citizens ask, no beg, Stan and Gordon and Richard and Joyce and Pandora to come to the table. I guess you haven't been to or seen a CSD meeting lately. These people are nowhere and I mean nowhere to be found.....Did they take over Sadam's spider hole? THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH YOU SHARK.....instead of taking part in the process, you chose to isolate yourself and spin and make shit up and twist the truth(your tact in this post)and lie(the tact in your previous post that I shreaded to pieces) in a feeble attempt to make our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES look bad....Sorry, not working. Our new CSD is well on it's way to a wastewater solution....Your spin is so transparent and weak. There is no way we're going to let you and your dissolutionist friends prevent us from developing a wastewater project........Sorry.

Your next comment...another laugh'er.....
"Property owners as a whole want the least expensive solution."
Dissoultion means more delay. More delay = MORE EXPENSIVE. DING DONG! ANYBODY HOME?

Next........"If TriW were something the CSD would at least adopt as a "last resort" option like they were willing to do during the October "negotiations" it would go a long way to convincing folks that we'll be given a real option."

TRI-W, TRI-W, TRI-W........
IT'S DEAD. IT'S AS DEAD AS THE TREES AND ANIMALS AND ALL OF GODS CREATURES THAT WERE RIPPED FROM IT'S SURFACE FOR NO REASON. IT'S GONE. IT'S BYE BYE. Do you guys have obsessive compulsive A.D.D.? What is it with this Tri-W obsession. I said this before in jest but "Are the kickbacks from the overbid contractors still pending?".....I just don't get it. When the CSD finally sells TRI-W, Will guys support our viable wastewater project the community supports instead of the dead project we voted against that is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN?

Next......Jesus Shark, Oh my God, you've reached new heights with this level of spin......you're kidding, right?....here we go....

"You've told us that the citizens voted against TriW. Well, TriW was not on the ballot last September. Three measures were about replacing one guy with another..........you recall that TriW was not mentioned it seems that you are making a leap of logic. "

You're right Shark, Tri-W wasn't on the ballot. There were three guys on the ballot....THREE GUYS WHO ALL CAMPAIGNED AGAINST THE TRI-W PROJECT. THE HEART AND SOUL OF THEIR CAMPAIGN WAS TO STOP THE GOD AWEFUL NIGHTMARE OF A MIDTOWN ENERGY GUZZLING SLUDGE FACTORY AND DEVELOP A PROJECT WITH THE PUBLIC THRU COMMITTEES THAT OUR COMMUNITY CAN GET BEHIND AND SUPPORT. Are you saying that the new board should break their campaign promises and turn their back on their supporters? Sorry Shark, I've come to know John, Chuck, and Steve. These guys have something called "integrity". Look it up. It's in the dictionary under the "I" section. They're not the type of politician that you're use to.....you know, the type that will lie and say anything to get elected like "better, cheaper, faster", then bait and switch and fuck the community who voted for us based on our promises ..."let's do what we want" and turn their back on those who put them in office....in short, they're not like the assholes you support that we just removed form office.
Come on shark, you can do better than that.....you think I'd let that one go? Your spin is actually regressing quite a bit. Regressing to the point that is not even believable on the face of it. I mean really "TRI-W wasn't on the ballot" .....it was on the ballot in three different places not including "measure b".
I'm sorry Shark, but why do you think we recalled dictators Stan, Gordon, and Richard?.......It wasn't just because they were assholes and treated their constituentes with contempt....it wasn't just because they turned their back on our community by disbanding committees and shutting all of us out of the process.....IT WAS BECAUSE THEY SUPPORTED A GODFORSAKEN, NIGHTMARISH, SMELLY, ENERGY&MONEY GUZZLING SLUDGE FACTORY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR TOWN!!!!!!!!!

Next ridiculous statement coming right up:

"What I am asking for here is for democracy. I am asking for TriW to be given a fair and honest evaluation compared to the other choices and for us all got get to vote on the results."

You were in town last Summer and Fall, weren't you Shark? All year as a matter of fact "TriW was given a more than fair and honest evaluation by a biased board who supported the TRI-W project even against the will of the community....that wasn't a fair and honest evaluation, it was prejudice in favor of TRI-W and guess what?.....THE COMMUNITY OF LOS OSOS STILL VOTED AGAINST IT!!!!! On September 27 Shark, We had this thing called an ELECTION. It's the way us folks here in America exercise our DEMOCRACY. We voted against TRI-W. When we voted for John Fouche, we voted against TRI-W. When we voted for Chuck Cesena, we voted against TRI-W. When we voted for Steve Senet, we voted against TRI-W. When we voted "yes" on measure "b", we voted against TRI-W. WE VOTED AGAINST TRI-W FOUR TIMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry Sharky, we already voted on TRI-W. And, WE VOTED AGAINST IT!
TRI-W IS OVER! TRI-W IS DEAD! TRI-W IS GONE. BYE, BYE TRI-W.
If the September 27 election wasn't about TRI-W, then WHAT IN THE FUCK WAS IT ABOUT SHARK? I know, that's right, I forgot, Chuck, John, and Steve wanted to be on the CSD so they could organize the Christmas parade. That's right.
Sorry TRI-W. Sorry the evil demon assholes didn't listen to the people of your town. Sorry they scalped the natural beauty of your God-given landscape to the dirt. Sorry TRI-W. We tried to stop them. They just wouldn't listen. That's why the evil demon rapists of your earth are gone now. We sent them packing for what they did to you, TRI-W. I think they are hiding out in Sadam's spider hole.........
they certainly are not taking part in the process to develop a wastewater project that our community supports ......

Anonymous said...

You are absolutely wrong. Maybe for YOU September 27 was about one thing, that being Tri-W. One thing about September 27 is clear. It was not just about Tri-W, because John, Steve, Chuck SAID SO, or weren't you listening to them campaign. You said they had integrity, so are you saying they were lying about it being more than Tri-W? Measure B was not just about Tri-W, because if so it would have specifically SAID SO.

Are you saying Meas B was constructed as obstruction to Tri-W? That would be illegal. All Shark said was he wanted the voters (the intent of Meas B) to have the clear choices outlined in it. I'll assume you voted for it.

Do you know how many people have come to meetings and gone away in disgust, and won't come back. Who created that environment of hecklers, and filabustering?

Go ahead and start cussing some more. You are an example of why people want dissolution, because you can't discuss anything without become beet red. You don't really want Shark's opinion, you want to shout him down.

Why would any same property owner vote to lien their house just so the district can exist? You can't even discuss any benefit to letting the county run the project without going ballistic. Here's a reason - the County has the financial rating and credibility to do. It would have a better chance of getting a SRF loan, WITHOUT LIENING YOUR HOME. that's a good thing. Yes, it might also delay it some. That's a bad thing.

Go ahead, it's time for you to start cussing at me. The thing is, you have never answered Shark's question he's asked over and over again, which is why wouldn't you want Tri-W as a choice if it might be cheaper?

If you use your reasoning, then the 2002 election should have shut up Keith, Al, Linde, and the rest.

Anonymous said...

Pubic,

You are soo right, the September 27th election was not just about TRI-W. I guess you just skimmeed over my post and didn't read it in it's entirety.
Let me copy a segment of it for you........
"I'm sorry Shark, but why do you think we recalled dictators Stan, Gordon, and Richard?.......It wasn't just because they were assholes and treated their constituentes with contempt....it wasn't just because they turned their back on our community by disbanding committees and shutting all of us out of the process....."

I so agree with you Pubic, It wasn't just about TRI-W.......It was about bad government. TRI-W was just a HUGE glaring example of how the former board thumbed their nose at their constituentes and how the former board refused to listen to and represent their community.......
You did read my post, didn't you Pubic? Another problem that you and Shark have is that you both seem to have selective reading skills.....
because in my previous post, I probably list about 5 or 6 reasons why the former board was recalled........
TRI-W is just the centerpiece of a prade of errors and contemtuous acts towards our community that led to their demise.....
I do thank you for correcting me Public........
you are soo right, THERE WERE MANY, VERY MANY REASONS WHY THE FORMER CSD BOARD WAS RECALLED IN DISGRACE....good for you Public, and thank you so much for pointing this out.....To support your so right and valid point that TRI-W was NOT the only reason the former CSD board was recalled, I will copy some of the other reasons why the former CSD board was recalled besides TRI-W from my previous posts........

"Fact: The former RECALLED CSD board disbanded all committees to shut out ALL members of the community locking their doors on the public shutting us ALL out of the process."

"FACT: They held the mininum number of meetings (usually 1 per month) allowing us only three minutes a month to speak on the issue."

"FACT: Our new CSD REPRESENTATIVES are going to let us vote on a project before they start ripping up streets and digging holes in the ground......the former CSD board saddled this community with enormous debt with their pre-election scorched earth policy that even you disagree with....."
(by the way, starting the project BEFORE the election was a huge resaon why they lost. People who were undecided, I'm sure looked at this as a BIG slap in the face to our community......What kind of asshole would do something like that to their community? The solutions group, who is now calling themselves "taxpayerwatch", lost all creditability with that move...how can we trust anything they did or want to do with a move like that? Even you and Shark agree it was wrong. I've asked this question several times.....if you and shark are insiders to taxpayerwatch, maybe you can tell us.......WHOSE IDEA WAS THAT? OH MY GOD WHAT A GAFF.....I'm guessing Pandora. Anyway whose ever idea it was, will you please thank them for me because it cost your side the election. I'm guessing it's the same person who came up with the idea to dissolve the CSD in an election year.....nice move again.....paint yourself into a corner right before the November election....After LAFCO and the County reject the dissolution, how in the hell are you going to run candidates for an institution you were just months before campaigning to dissolve? Your candidates are going to be the laughing stocks of the community........I ask again, who in the hell is making these decisions? Anyway is doesn't matter our CSD will be well on there way to a wastewater solution come November. A solution that incorporates a interim septic management/water conservation program in prelude to a wastewater project that the community supports. A project that was developed based on community input and support via the committees ...... yes the same committees the former CSD dissolved because they didn't want the PUBLIC to interfere with their personal agenda and THEIR project.
Did I list already that disbanding ALL committees was another reason why the former solutions group CSD was recalled in disgrace?....I think i did.......
Anyway you want some more reasons why the former CSD was recalled BESIDES Tri-W?(did i thank you for pointing this out and correcting me Public?)

OK here's some more reasons........

Here's one of my favorites.....
Trying to have a restraining order placed angaist a member of the Public.....that was awesome....OH MY GOD what a riot...."Stan call the police, someone is trying to tell the truth again. We can't have that at our CSD meeting." I don't think you'll be seeing current CSD board trying to have restraining orders placed on ANYBODY.....Not even Joyce Albright or Steuart Dinker...no matter how ridiculous there statements are....I really am missing Joyce at the CSD meetings. she was always good for a laugh or two....

Want another reason why the former CSD 3 were recalled? Did I thank you for pointing out that TRI-W wasn't the only reason? I think I did......
Anyway, here is another reason.....
How about.....PAYING A GUY CLOSE TO 20000 DOLLARS A YEAR TO STAND IN THE BACK OF THE CSD MEETING AND GUESS WHAT?........DO NOTHING!!!!!
They were already paying the sheriff, who knows how much, for security so, WHAT IN THE HELL WAS THE UNTRAINED MANEQUIN FOR?
Boys and girls, todays word is "CRONY". Can you say "CRONY"? I knew you could........
I must say, this position did serve a purpose...it showed us ALL how our the former CSD board liked to spend and waste OUR money.......
it was on display for ALL of us at each and every meeting.......
Not only did our newly elected CSD eliminate this wasteful spending on this worthless position....but we are not wasting money on paying the sheriff to stand in the back of the room and do nothing either. And, let's face it, don't you think the sheriff has something better to do.... Like...oh....let's say FIGHT CRIME!!!!!
If there is a problem....the sheriff's station is just two blocks away....what a joke. The sheriff and the "rent a cop/bump on a log" had nothing to do with security....it had to do with INTIMIDATION. Funny, their feeble attempt at intimidation not only turned into one of the biggest jokes of their term, it was also another reason BESIDES Tri-W that they were recalled.......

There's more....you want somemore?
Let's see.......how about never completing and affordability study that was approved in February 2005. We sure would hate something like AFFORDABILITY to get in the way of our wastewater project wouldn't we....."Stan why don't you move that requst for an affordability study to the very back of the table, we'll look at that later....much later....OPPS...Stan you pushed that request for an affordability study right off the table and into the trash......"
oh well, we didn't want anybody to know HOW MUCH THIS WAS GOING TO COST, DID WE.........

Is that all the reasons the former CSD was recalled?....Nope, I'm just getting started......
How about refusing a project audit on the costs of the TRI-W project? Can't imagine why they'd want something like that...can you?(HAAA)

ANOTHER?
OK........
Refusing and independent analysis of the wastewater over-bids. Instead, they based their decision on the advise of the management consulting firm whose fee was based on a percentage of the project costs. NO SHIT. HOW FUCKING UNBELIEVEABLE IS THAT ONE.
You guys remember the theft of the said management consulting firms offices? All that was taken were computers and records.....HMMMMMMMMMMMM......
I wonder who would have the motive to do something like that? I don't think we need to call Columbo....
I just really can't imagine why these guys were recalled.....can you?(HAAAAA)

Want some more examples?
OK........
How about going to the state and saddling our property owners with an extra 50 million in debt without any say via a 218 vote, then putting the contracts out to bid and ..... there is only one bidder on the treatment plant and the bid for the entire project comes in exactly 50 million over bid....HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Boy and girls, today's word is "COLLUSION". Can you say "COLLUSION"? I knew you could.
Wasn't it funny how after the SWRCB reneged on their compromised deal with the CSD after a week of mediations and negotiations with the CSD.......
the deal that "dreamers" and our new CSD seemed to be in agreement on. (what a job Blakeslee did to bring both sides to the table in agreement......too bad the SWRCB shot us down)...... Wasn't it funny how the State then came back to the CSD with a disingenuous offer that INCLUDED a 218 vote? Where was the 218 vote in May when they encumbered property owners with an additional 50 million in debt. They pulled this offer of the table so fast their heads were spinning.......they're going to have a fun time explaning this whole thing to the Fed's. Let's see.....you released an additional 50 million in funding to a community with a pending election that could very well KILL the project the funding is for without a 218 vote.....HMMMMMMMMMMM......
Well, I could go on, and on, and on, and on, and on.....but I really do have better things to do than respond to your nonsense in this blog......

Let me respond to your complaint about the heckling. I'm not sure when the last time was you went to a CSD meeing....... President Schicker has admonish ALL who call out and heckle. Especially those who support the board. Clapping has been replaced with a waving of hands. I've seen her at meetings stop the meeting until the disrupters in the back, whether they support her or not, stop or move outside the main hall. Our meetings are more civil they they ever were.
No sheriff or "stand in the back of the room and do nothing" rent-a-cops required....
regarding your accusation of filibustering ..... i'm really not sure what you're talking about......all 14000 citizens of Los Osos and any member of the Public for that matter are welcome to speak at the podium......
But you are RIGHT Publicworks. You are so right......... John and Chuck and Steve DO have integrity and the September 27th election was about more than just TRI-W. Thank you so much for pointing this out. I didn't realize than you were on our side and supported our newly elected CSD. Thank you so much.
And I'm sorry, but you are very mistaken. I don't want Shark or you out of here......
I am anxiously awaiting your next post. Have a nice day!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Selective reading? Selective facts. You are right on some things, definitely the guy in the back thing, but you've also twisted a lot.

I would imagine the meetings are more civil. Why? Not because Schicker's running them. It seems If she asks her supporters to be quiet, they actually listen, unlike when Stan asked. Because people who have the opposite views now show more respect and don't speak 7 times in one meeting on the same thing.

Replace clapping with waving? Great, Lisa's instructing a Kindergarten class now. Just watched the last class (ooops, meeting) on the tube, still plenty of clapping. Is it a CSD meeting or a wrestling match?

if there's no need for a sargent- of-arms, then why did the Lou Tournay(?) guy tell Schicker he felt intimidated. Wonder if he shows up anymore. Oh, of course he's welcome.

So you want Joyce there so you can laugh? That somes what you're all about.

Committees? They were never disbanded. That's a fact. You've provided a load of bull, and that is a fact. But go ahead and politicize it some more, it worked before. Keep saying it over and over, I guess it becomes true. Go ahead, dig a deeper hole for yourself on that one with your response.

And why do you want a 218 vote?. You want to lien your house for another project that might not get completed? Do you even understand 218?

The state added 218 because they knew it would take another five years to complete a damn project, and the state can't have $130 million dollars out there that long without collecting interest. Having that much money out there waiting for a project to complete construction would not be fair to other projects. It's got nothing to do with admitting a mistake on 218. Where do you come up with some of this stuff? Do you think those guys in Sacramento really care about Los Osos any more. Guess who's getting the money. Lompoc, with their $50 million upgrade is going to save about $10 million due to Los Osos stupidity.

The 'saddled with debt' argument runs both ways. The old board did did commit us to the project, no question. It's the new board though that may well have saddled us with debt for it, though.

You guys complain about Sharky spinnng. If he's a 45, you're a 78.

And thank you for pointing out you agree with shark, that the Sept. 27 was about more than Tri-W. I assume you agree Tri-W should be a choice. If it's more expensive, it'll be rejected, and there'll be nothing to shout about.

Anonymous said...

Again another bitch slap across the blog, this time the real punk of the propaganda tag team, Mr. "Fonding Father's Crud" himself, the oligarchy's apologist, Herr/Damme Publickverks finds themselves spun the other way.
Anon, this one really really misses Stan's rightous gavel and the snitch in the back of the room.
Yes, thay are very selective readers. These signal jammers think they are so good at this that nobody can call them on their shit. Guess they're wrong as usual.
BTW FYI next time you go at my moniker, mein Capo, here's what up: "Dogpatch" from the old bag with the little dog under her arm's public comment, to wit: "I'm tired of this town looking like Dogpatch"
Dogpatch, an OLD reference to the classic populist comic strip Lil Abner. Dogpatch is the wrong side of the tracks. My side of Osos is Dogpatch. Refugees are made everyday, all over the world by the policy decisions made by our government. So this next time try going after the refugee part: Refugee from reality, maybe or maybe Refuse instead of refugee or maybe you can just give us the lyrics to some stirring old
Luftwaffe ditty.
Hey anon, wanna bet the response time, word count, or narrative tone? Pugnacious?Indignant?, Prissy? Obsessed? Self Rightous? I dunno, I'm a bit confused, myself. Gotta watch the cussing though, certainly don't want to offend their earnest sensibilities.

Shark Inlet said...

Anonymous,

You're getting as verbose as I am. Is this good?

If you are interested in discussion it would be good for you to show it by addressing my points. If you (or someone else out there) can show that "out of town" will cost us less or even about the same as TriW we can talk. Until then I'll just write you off as someone uninterested in discussing with me the one point that people seem most concerned with ... the costs.

Admittedly there may be some out there who don't care about the costs but do care deeply about the location. (Most of the time it seems that the LOCSD board feels this way and that Ann and even Dogpatch do as well.)

The closest you've come to discussing topics I've addressed is when you said that this board has compromised (back in October). Interestingly enough, they've since gone back on that very reasonable position. It would have been nice had the board stuck with what they were willing to agree to in October. If it was reasonable to agree to once and it if was the one thing that got our community as a whole to rally behind the "negotiations" it would seem that the CSD shouldn't sell off TriW. If anything, the board should make a committement to build at TriW if building there is cheaper or if an "out of town" plant can't be finished before Jan 2010.

In any case, if you're interested in discussing things, just get back to me...

If you're more interested in ranting and raving that is fine as well. Just please don't expect me to respond when you call me a Dreamer/Dissolver or when you say that that board has welcomed everyone to the table.

Shark Inlet said...

Dogpatch and anonymous ...

Just a quick note. Not that you want to attract flies, but vinegar is far less effective than honey.

This is all to say that politeness counts and when a discussant seems to be rude they tend to lose those who are "in the middle". It is far too easy to simply be rude and react in anger to the opinions of others that you disagree with. However, to disrespect the individual in your postings will cause many folks to turn against you. (Sure, there will be some who won't, but not all that many.)

One key point here is this ... did you write somethign your mom would be proud of? Did you write something that you wouldn't be embarassed for your boss and co-workers to see? Perhaps you didn't mind the "move the sewer" and "Recall Now" signs in your yards, but would you want your name and address on your postings?

Just a quick thought that will help you and your side ... and that all people should pay attention to. Politeness is one way of showing your character.

Anonymous said...

Ah, self rightous AND prissy plus that familiar dose of the hypocrite.

Shark Inlet said...

Dogpatch,

Same goes for you as for anonymous. If you are interested in discussing issues, let me know. Until then, all the best to you...

Anonymous said...

Ok shark,

I'm really am feeling sorry for you now.......
and I think you've gone off the deep end. Maybe you should post your name and address so we can call Atascadero State for you.....
You say I haven't addressed your "points"? How verbose do I have to get? Did you read my posts? All anybody who comes in here has to do is look at my last few posts that adresses your previous "posts", point for point...and I pick off your points statement for statement......fact for fact........
Shark, you seem to have this narcissistic fantasy that just because you type a few words into a blog that it's the whole truth and people will believe you......
Sorry Shark, It's not working anymore....you've been exposed way too many times.....we just don't believe any thing you say anymore...........with your lies, deception, and misinformation, you've spun you're creditibility right off the deep end and right out the window......
For anybody whose visiting this blog that hasn't lost their mind yet.......
read the posts in this blog and tell me that I haven't addressed Shark & Public's "points".......
Also, I really didn't get personal with you Shark......but seeing as how you want to bring my mom and my boss into this(damn Shark, how low and sad and pathetic can you get?...are you that desperate for material that you have to bring my mom and my boss into the debate? WOW, sad, very sad)......
let me say this.....unlike you, I'm guessing.....when I go to work, I check my politics at the door. My boss, my co-workers and pretty much everyone who know's me(not you obiviously) respects me for this. As far as my parents go.....My father taught me never to talk politics at the dinner table. Away from the dinner table, I have shared some of the stories of our sewer saga with them and they highly respect me for taking a stand in what I believe in and getting involved in my community....... Also, and probably unlike you, I'm able to separate politics from the many friendships that I have in this community as several of my friends SUPPORT the Tri-W project. Now, I'm not about to start telling a bunch of lies about "how all my friends who supported Tri-W wished they'd never supported the former board".......I'm not going to do this cause I'm not a lier and anybody with half a brain would see right thru it.....I will say that I have managed to mantain a good and cordial relationship with the friends I have that supported the now dead Tri-W project and the former board......
But Shark, when I'm not at work and I'm away from the dinner table, I live in this place called AMERICA. And, in America, we have this thing called FREEDOM OF SPEACH!!!!! I know this little thing called FREEDOM OF SPEACH is probably really, really bugging you right about now cause I've used it to blow you and your "points" right out of the water......
"If you are interested in discussing issues, let me know"
HAAAAAAAAAAAA! WHAT A LAUGH RIOT YOU ARE!!!!!!!!
go ahead shark, type whatever you want......
If anybody is interested they will read our posts and see that I tear you apart from top to bottom....issue for issue, destroying your misinformation, deception, lies, and spin with FACTS.......
Here's another example....everybody ready for me to expose Sharks bullshit spin and missinformation with a FACT?....
Ok here we go.......
Shark, in your 3:20 post you say:
"this board has compromised (back in October). Interestingly enough, they've since gone back on that very reasonable position......"
FACT: IT WASN'T THE CSD THAT WENT BACK ON THIS POSITION, IT WAS THE SWRCB WHO REJECTED THE COMPROMISE....
Nice try Shark. Keep up the good work. Continue to destroy your creditibility with deception and misleading lies.......isn't this fun?
Let me stick a fork in Shark......yep, Sharks done. Who likes their Shark well done?
Shark, from the great movie Citizen Kane, I'll leave you with this one final word........"ROSEBUD"
see you around Shark..........

Anonymous said...

Publicworks,

You comments are so empty I really don't even feel the need to go after them........

You do make one comment that is soo false and utterly off the wall untrue that I just can't let it go......
you actually said:
"Committees? They were never disbanded. That's a fact........"

OH MY GOD YOU'RE FUNNY. How can you tell a flat out lie like this and look yourself in the mirror?....
Alright, attention on deck. Anybody who attended a committee meeting between May and November last year, please raise your hand. What? Nobody?
Public, are you ready for a FACT?
A FLAT OUT FACT THAT IS GOING TO EXPOSE THE LIE YOU JUST TOLD?
Ok, here we go (did I tell you guys how much I really am loving this?).........
After not a single committee meeting for 2-3 months, at the July 30 meeting, the former recalled in disgrace CSD board,
VOTED TO "TABLE" THE COMMITTEE SELECTION PROCESS......
if anybody thinks i'm lying, you can rent the tape of this meeting at the CSD office or the South Bay Library....
Do you know what it means to "table" an item Publicworks?.....to "table" an item means TO TAKE IT OFF THE AGENDA!!!!!!!!! IF THIS WASN'T DISBANDING THE COMMITTEES, I SURE AS HELL DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS!!!!!!
Publicworks, you and Shark are really losing it and actually starting to embarrass yourselves with your ridiculous lies and misleading deceptions...call it whatever you want.........disband, table, eliminate, dissolve, but to say the former board didn't shut down the committees to shut out our community from the decision making process last year is just a flat out LIE. I can actually prove this one. The former board is on tape voting to remove the committee selections from the agenda......like I said, I was born at night, not last night.....nice try.
Actually, it wan't a nice try, it was actually a very pathetic attempt to make me look like the lier and you turned the gun on yourself, didn't you.
Next time you want to call me a lier, make sure that I can't prove you're the lier with a video tape......
Let me stick a fork on Publicworks.....yep he's done too.........

Anonymous said...

Really Anonymous,

You think that puts a fork in it.
I'll tell you what, as usual you like giving half the story.

They tabled committees until the election - two months - like it made any difference at that point.

That parade from Margetson, Swanson, others about committees and how their always talking about participation - what a bunch of bunk.

Hensley explained why in the July tape. So go rent the May tape, Margetson, Swanson, and Owen blasted volunteers to committees - volunteers. They don't want anybody who doesn't march to their drumbeat. It was repulsive, and then you and them turn around and ask people to participate. Linde of all people who can't get 2 facts straight (god, who would put her on a committee), and Keith who claims to care and then blows up at everyone who disagrees with him. People go to meetings and Keith yells and runs after people he doesn't even know. Yeah, that's your crowd.

And then they whined on and on about committees when they were one second away from resuming. I watched on the tube how they politicized the issue they created. As if they had no hand in it. The fact is, you and they do not want people to go to meetings or be on committees, if they don't meet your perverse liking. You'll probably complain about that too.

Yeah, you'll twist that around again, because that's what you do. Don't ever post again and talk about twisting - you just proved you're the master of it.

Now, I'm not the one who lied. You did, and you just confirmed it.

Shark Inlet said...

It seems that no one has answered a few key questions here that are worth addressing.

Mike, you seem pretty good at being open and honest. You're also someone who disliked the previous board and supported the recall. All are welcome to answer these questions, but I only expect Mike will actually do so.

Let me start by saying that if the CSD were to vote today to "go back to TriW", the construction costs (in other words, the cost to run the plant would be added on) would be about $300/month (due to a higher interest rate and accumulated debts). Presumably they would need to re-bid the job and the bids would determine the actual costs ... I am assuming the bids would be comparable. If there were to be a dissolution of the CSD and the County were to take over, the costs could easily be $350/month due to some additional delay ... but the County might be able to get a SRF loan to lower the construction costs to somewhat, perhaps as low as $200/month if we could fincance the whole thing ... something that seems very unlikely these days. Presumably a cheaper plant would

I presume that if the costs were the same for an out of town plant as for TriW you would prefer out of town. If it were to cost some $50/month more to have the plant out of town (on top of what appears to now be about $300/month for TriW) would you want to pay? How about an extra $100/month?

During the recall election we were told by the recall candidates that they could get us a plant for $100/month. Even without all the legal fees and debts I can't see how this could have happened. While I am agry about being lied to by the candidates who are now in the majority and I am angry that so many in my town believed those lies ... the question we ought to be asking ourselves is this ... what will the costs be of continuing with this board's goals and what will the costs be of a dissolution attempt.

I don't want a dissolution. However, if the cost to me of a dissolution is considerably lower than the cost of continuing with the current board, I will be forced into voting to dissolve if asked.

If the people outside the PZ knew that they are most likely on the hook for CSD debts, would they be more likely to vote for dissolution or less.

I wonder.

Anonymous said...

Hey Anony,

One more thing, how come it took 5 months to re-start committees.
I'll tell you why. No one half-qualified wanted to join. Why don't people join? I'll tell you why. Look in the mirror. Who wants to take the abuse and participate?

You said one thing correct. John and Steve do have integrity. They're not perfect. But there is hope. I wonder when they push through the next project, how much you'll be shouting them down.

In watching the last meeting, one great thing occured. They stood up to the Keith, Richard, Linde 'don't do anything without debating it for 5 years' lobby to do something about seawater intrusion.

Anonymous said...

"THERE SHE BLOWS!!!!!!"
Shark Inlet, the great white narcissist whale!!!!!!!

Sure you're not infavor of dissoulution, are you?(HAAAAAAAA)
(EXCUSE ME ANOTHER SNEEZE COMING ON .."BULLSHIT".. excuse me..too bad the immunologists haven't come up with an antidote to this Bullshit allergy I have)
Guess you haven't figured out by reading the previous posts that we all know YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT!!!!!
So, go ahead live in your fantasy world of narcissitic make-believe......it's actually quite entertaining.........
Oh yes, is case you haven't heard yet, I would like to invite you to a wastewater committee meeting....your current CSD IS working towards a wastewater solution that inclues an interim septic management program in prelude to a wastewater project......but you don't want to talk about this....do you.....
it's not part of your narcissitic fantasy, is it.........
I'm sure dissolving the CSD and dissolving the WASTEWATER SOLUTION THEY ARE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW FOR ALL OF US and thus delaying the project another 5-7 years will be much cheaper........RIIIIIIIIIIIGHT!!!!!
Sorry, don't think so Shark.....
Are you sure it's not those kickbacks from the overbid contractors you're looking for?

Mike Green said...

Sharkey, Thanks for the kind words.
I read your post a couple of times and there seems to be only two questions there.
Please allow me to paphrase for the sake of brevity,
"would you want to pay an extra $100 dolars a month (or therabouts) to move the WWTF out of town?"
Well of course not! I dont want to pay the $200-$300 for the stinking thing in the first place! IT COSTS TOO MUCH.
Well, there is the truthfull side of me.
Now I'll be open.
I expected this kind of situation from the day I bought my house in 1991, when it was disclosed to me that the "county" was going to be building a sewer and the cost at that time was going to be about 10K a house and $80/mo.
I held back 10k from the price and invested it.
I also leveraged the equity after it doubled and with the low interest loans available bought two other houses in different areas, thereby spreading the risk to my eqity by bad local government decisions in any one place.
Thats why I'm such an advocate of onsite systems, I've cleared my backyard and I'll install as soon as I get a green light!
I like to rely on myself, always have.
The other question seems to be asking if I think dissolution would ultimatly be cheaper than going the course with what we have.
In my opinion dissolution would be a disaster. I wonder how many of those people that signed were here when the only local government we had was the county. Don't they realise that it was the county that created this mess? I don't just mean the lack of a sewer, but almost any infrastructure at all, sidewalks, streetlights ect.
No, I think things overall would get much more expensive with a lot less return to the community without meaningfull local control.
If the current CSD board can get a plan together then great, I think if you realy want to lower the costs of fixing our wastewater problem then the smart money will support the board but keep a close watch on the onsite solutions.
Well, thats my opinion.

Anonymous said...

"In my opinion dissolution would be a disaster. I wonder how many of those people that signed were here when the only local government we had was the county. Don't they realise that it was the county that created this mess? I don't just mean the lack of a sewer, but almost any infrastructure at all, sidewalks, streetlights ect.
No, I think things overall would get much more expensive with a lot less return to the community without meaningfull local control."
Props for exactitudedness.:)

Anonymous said...

Public,

I really have to thank you. This is the second time in a row you've come in here to validate one of my points. I'm actually starting to like and respect quite a bit.

So, what you're saying in your last post is............
When Stan, Gordon, and Richard were the Directors on the CSD, NOBODY wanted to apply to be on a committee.
Now........after the recall......now that we have a CSD Directors that in your words "do have integrity".....now that we have a CSD that actually put the selection process for committees back on the agenda....... Now, they received DOZENS of applications for committees!!!!!
(i mean really Public, the former corrupt CSD board didn't even agendize the committee selection process until July 30, 2005. When it finally did come up at that late Summer meeting, guess what they voted to do? TABLE IT!!!!!!! Take it off the AGENDA!!!!! You couldn't apply to be on a committee if you wanted to or not!!!!!)....
Our newly elected CSD welcomed the Public back into the decision making process. And, not only did they receive applications from THEIR supporters but from several "DREAMERS" also. And, to show you that our new board IS interested in REPRESENTING the ENTIRE community and that they do have integrity, they selected the few intelligent, reasonable "DREAMERS" that did apply to sit on very vital and most important committees. I can think of three right off the top of my head. I know that Joe Sparks and Gordon Taylor sit on the Wastewater committee. I been to a few of these meetings and let me say that I have garnered a great deal of respect for both of these gentlemen. Their intelligence, education, and knowledge on our situation is invaluable to our community. I also know that Dick Sargent is on the Emergency Services Committee. And, I just checked the CSD website, John Perkins(the Ambassador to the Sweet Springs Nature Preserve) is on the Environmental Committee. Please don't tell me that our new board isn't interested the representing the ENTIRE community and what's best for the ENTIRE community. The middle of town, energy guzzling sludge factory wasn't it.
In response to your next statement "I wonder when they push through the next project, how much you'll be shouting them down."
I'm sorry Public if you've mistaken me for someone who is "anti-sewer". I am not. I have been to a few of the Wastewater committee meetings. I like what I see. I support the Project Plan that they are working towards 1000%. To support "dissolution" is "ANTI-SEWER". Also, IF YOU SUPPORT DISSOLUTION YOU'RE SUPPORTING ALL THE CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS AGAINST THE FELLOW MEMBERS OF YOUR COMMUNITY. LET'S NOT AND NEVER FORGET THAT IT IS THE "DISSOLUTIONIST" THAT LOBBIED, CANPAIGNED, AND FLAT OUT BEGGED TO HAVE ALL OF OUR PROPERTY OWNERS FINED!!!!!!!!!! All DISSOLUTION shows its that our community is still DIVIDED!!!! And, the RWQCB has already stated that they are going to pursue the CDO's whether the CSD is DISSOLVED OR NOT!!!!!GEE, THANK YOU TAXPAYER WATCH, YOU SICK AND TWISTED BASTARDS!!!!
Anyway Public, I just wanted to thank you for making statements that actually support my arguements. I also want to thank you for agreeing with me that the "boob" in the back of the room was a waste of money and that the former board did like to spend and waste our money.
Gee Public, you're not such a bad Guy after all. I think there is hope for you yet!!!!

OH MY GOD!!!!
I just previewed this post and I'm actually COMPLEMENTING dreamers. I'm having hallucinations that our community is comming together.
I must be coming down with something. Look who's dreaming now. LOL. I guess it's just too early to be mean. Check back later.....LOL
Have a nice day.

Shark Inlet said...

Anonymous raises one interesting question when suggesting that a dissolution will delay a sewer by 5-7 years.

We really don't know how long any dissolution related delays are and we really don't know how long any delays related to the current board attempting to put a project out of town will be ... and time is of the essence. As you and I have both pointed out, time equals money. Both in terms of the inflation in construction costs, whatever plant will be built and in terms of the CDOs having a 2010 "drop dead deadline".

I would love to hear a reasoned discussion of this issue because if it can be shown that the delays associated with dissolution would likely be substantial (like 5-7 years), it would suggest that dissolution has another major drawback (above and beyond the loss of local control ... a huge drawback!).

Shark Inlet said...

Mike, I appreciate your honesty.

If I trusted the current board to be able to accomplish their goals I would find it far easier to be optimistic like you.

Here's the problem I am having with our board. They told us they had a plan but they haven't told us yet what the plan is. They told us that we could move the site of the WWTF according to the SRF contract but the lender disagrees. They chose to both default on the loan and sue the lender, lowering our chances for getting another SRF in the future. They chose to ignore the fact that their actions will both lower the amount we could even hope to get from a SRF loan and raise the interest rate we'll have to pay for open market funds. They've chosen to fight the RWQCB rather than to work with the RWQCB to deal with Measure B. Essentially, while I see their goal of moving the plant as one that one could, in theory, support, the real life costs of doing so are far too high. In my opinion, they've ignored these costs.

Shark Inlet said...

Anonymous,

I've just finished reading your positive comments on Joe Sparks, Gordon Taylor and Dick Sargent ... that you have great respect for all three, that you view them as intellegent, educated and knowledgable.

Then, in the next paragraph you seem to take the general opinion of those like me and Publicworks to task and roundly castigate those who are in Taxpayer's Watch.

Wouldn't it be ironic if some of the individuals you are praising as worthy of respect out of one side of your mouth happened to be the very same people you are criticizing as "sick and twisted bastards" out of the other side?

Anonymous said...

Anon,

What makes Shark or all of those people 'Dreamers'? For the most part, they don't 'love' Tri-W. That's insulting. As Shark said, he simply recognized the value in completing the project.

Again, you are absolutely incorrect about the committee process. It was put on and considered in May, you saw what happened, and then tabled in July. It was irrelevant at the end of July anyway until the election. The CSD meetings from December on were 90% political rallies and free-TV speeches for the recall crowd. Having CSD meetings as political events is not a good argument against dissolving it.

Dissolution has some problems with it, no question. But every time people shout down Shark, clap at a meeting, wave their hands like 3rd graders, dissolution makes more sense because it makes the point that the district is just cheerleading and not governing.

The fact is, putting the wastewater project with the county (Tri-W or not) has some good aspects to it, politically and financially. It would be better if the CSD is not dissolved because of water.

It's bunk about what you said about the CDOs. The CDOs are a direct result of the stopping of possible with Measure B. To twist that around for any other reason is bunk. If you want to keep the community divided, keep twisting blame for the CDOs.

The individual CDOs are an ABOMINATION. But they would not have occurred if the project wasn't interrupted, and the district had no plan and nothing to point to as progress. It's that simple.

If you politicize the CDOs, you'll just encourage dissolution.

Anonymous said...

Anon:

The statement that "dissolutionist" begged to have individuals fined is just flat out incorrect.

Maybe a couple of people at most might have said something about fining individuals.

Maybe a ten or so actually said something about fining the district.

However, the CDOs are a direct result of interruption in the project, with nothing to show at the ACL hearing.

Look at your logic, anony. You are suggesting that the RWQCB actually does what some of these people say. You also lump these people in with the old board, "dreamers", solutions group, etc.

Now, did the RWQCB ever do what the solutions group wanted? No, they rejected it.

If they didn't listen to them about that, they certainly didn't listen to them about fines.

You can't have it both ways (well, you can try, but it has no merit).

Why do you think so many people warned about the fines? It's because they knew the hammer would come down - it's as simple as that.

All you are doing is politicizing the individual CDOs, and I guarantee you my friend, there is no good from doing that.

Mike Green said...

Dear Publickworks,
I'm confused as usual about a couple of your comments, If taking them out of context is my problem, I apologise:
"The individual CDOs are an ABOMINATION. But they would not have occurred if the project wasn't interrupted, and the district had no plan and nothing to point to as progress. It's that simple."
Strong language for describing a logicaly derived decision (supposedly) By the beloved Water Gods, sounds a little political to me, and then:
"All you are doing is politicizing the individual CDOs, and I guarantee you my friend, there is no good from doing that.
Who's the Goose and who's the Gander?
Do you honestly believe that the way the Water Gods are comming down on us is totaly without political influences?

Shark Inlet said...

Good question, Mike.

Are the members of the SWRCB and RWQCB making political decisions where they might benefit?

I would argue that the answer is ... pretty much ... no. I rather doubt that anyone could point to a single member of either board as having political aspirations.

If they don't have political aspirations, they are not beholden to anyone.

Nope, I don't think that the "Water Gods" are trying to punish us ... just trying to talk some sense into a community which would rather argue about the "best solution" for a few more years than take action now which will at least be a partial solutionto many problems.

Mike Green said...

I would argue that ANY political appointee is beholden to someone or something. I sure dont recall voting for any member of the "water gods"
keeping their jobs in this case, qualifies, in my opinion, as a political aspiration in it's most pure form.
see, http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/about/swrcb.html
And what in the heck does "talk some sense" mean?

Anonymous said...

Mike,

I make a HUGE distinction between the actions against the CSD and the actions against individuals.

The CSD made a decision that stopped progress.

The individual property owners were not the ones that made that decision.

The CSD, as the water board itself said, are the voters (some property owners, some renters, and a bunch of people outside the prohibition zone).

The property owners didn't get a vote on the matter. And when they did in 2001, they voted for the project. If a property owner tries to pass the cost along, the rentor can go tell them to pound sand.

Now they're getting screwed two ways. The CSD stops the project they were assesed for, and the waterboard hits them over the head with a CDO to boot.

It seems like the waterboard should only fine the decision maker that's responsible for the decision - the CSD.

And then there's 2010; the property owners have 4 years to come up with a project that they don't even have the authority to construct!

Mike, if the waterboard was influenced by politics, then why did they also fine Monarch Grove, Pismo, CMC, SLO, San Simeon. The list goes on.

Mike Green said...

There is such a thing as politics of your own making,
You would resist doing things, that for no other reason, is against your will.
Call it Ego or Arrogance or something in between. Call it a percieved sense of duty if you want. It still boils down to the individuals wishes.
Who do you trust?

Anonymous said...

WOW................

This blog just got interesting. Very interesting......
I've had my suspisions regarding the identity of Shark Inlet. I believe they have now been confirmed.

More than one person has surmised, as I did, that Shark Inlet is Joe Sparks. You should seriously take this as a complement Shark, as I said in my previous post .... "I respect Joe's intelligence, education and knowledge of our wastewater predicament." But, one night a few weeks ago, around 8:15 on a Monday night while Joe Sparks was at a Wastewater Committee meeting, Shark Inlet posted to this blog. Unless more than one person is posting as Shark Inlet,
Joe Sparks IS NOT Shark Inlet......

Anyway Shark, in your last post you say .......
"I've just finished reading your positive comments on Joe Sparks, Gordon Taylor and Dick Sargent ... that you have great respect for all three, that you view them as intellegent, educated and knowledgable......."

You go on to say..........
"Wouldn't it be ironic if some of the individuals you are praising as worthy of respect out of one side of your mouth happened to be the very same people you are criticizing as "sick and twisted bastards" out of the other side?"

Well, If you read my post, I said ........

" I know that Joe Sparks and Gordon Taylor sit on the Wastewater committee. I've been to a few of these meetings and let me say that I have garnered a great deal of respect for both of these gentlemen. Their intelligence, education, and knowledge on our situation is invaluable to our community."..........

then I go onto say........

"I also know that Dick Sargent is on the Emergency Services Committee."...........

I don't know Dick Sargent personally. He's an acquaintance. I only know him in passing......a smile and a wave.
Although we disagree on all this sewer crap, I will say this about Dick Sargent.............
I Believe Dick Sargent is a good man with a good heart. I believe, like sometimes our children do, he got mixed up with the wrong crowd.
Dick, if you happen to wonder into this blog(and I doubt that he does, I mean let's face it, If your Dick's age, and you know how to use a computer, you must be a genius. I'm still trying to teach my Mom & Dad how to use the VCR)
Anyways dick, if you do happen to wonder into this blog, please don't interpret my last comment as condescending.
My father also taught me to respect those who have seen roads that I have not.

As for you Shark Inlet, a few posts back, I left you with a message from the great movie Citizen Kane. The message was "ROSEBUD".........
Citizen Kane was "The Man who had everything".....Welth, Power, Influence........
yet in the end, the only thought that brought him true joy was the memory of riding his sled "ROSEBUD" as a child......
I guess it was my way of saying "lighten up" Shark.......

I will close my post with this......
Saturday night, I was standing on a walkway.......as the sun was setting in the west over Montana De Oro, I looked off to the east, and saw what was the most beautiful Sky that I have ever seen in my entire life......I watched as the coral shades of the sun, slid off the clouds into blending shades from azure to indigo. Off in the near distance, I could hear the murmurs of a politician and a patriot citizen. Guess what they were talking about? I felt like shaking them up by saying "Hey, look at the sky!!" But, I didn't want to interrupt their moment or mine. By the time their conversation had subsided, the magnificiant sky had faded to black silhouettes of the seven sisters over a midnight blue sky.............

I pray that my morning visions of a community united were not just a hallucination......

We have good and honest people right now in our local Government and in our Community that want more than anything a wastewater solution.
If we can get behind them and come together as a Community, there is no State agency on Earth that can stand in our way........

Mike Green said...

Or don't you know the words to


KUMBAYA.

No politics my patootie!

Mike Green said...

Oh crap! that was bad timing!I was responding to publickworks and didn't preface my comment. oops,
Then again I think it's prety funny.
Loved your post "Anon substantive facts".
Ya, realy no good decision except to move foreward anywho!
Don't worry, lots more sunsets, some will be even better.
peace and thanks.

Mike Green said...

And "Anon substantive facts"
carefull about them old fogie jokes.
I'm almost older than dirt.
(at least I feel that way)
;) LOL.

Shark Inlet said...

Anonymous,

I appreciate the intent of your message.

You are right, my name is not Joe. I do consider the fact that you might think I was he a great compliment, indeed. The only think lacking in your reasoning is that the Wastewater meetings are Tuesdays not Mondays.

You started your comment with "I've had my suspisions regarding the identity of Shark Inlet. I believe they have now been confirmed."

Even without you saying who you believe me to be, I'll tell you that there was nothing in the post you are referring to that would be even a hint as far as I can figure. I'm just a nobody who pays attention to the newspaper, the CSD meetings and the like.

I, too, believe that our community can again be united. However, I don't believe that it must be united under a CCLO banner. There will always be some element at the extreme (or at both extremes) who will argue to the death. I am not that guy. I'm pretty centerist on this debate compared to nearly everyone I know who pays attention. I've also always been pretty honest about why I prefer TriW to some other possibility ... it could get done quicker and cheaper than any other solution. Like I've told Ron a few times, sometimes the best thing to do with a mess is to learn to live with it. If the cost of "fixing" the errors of the Solutions Group or TriW are too high, it would be better to live with TriW than to pursue some other place.

While the people running the CSD are, indeed, doing what they consider to be right and while they, indeed, are "good people" and honest ... I don't believe them to be wise at all. You're asserting essentially that if Los Osos wants to do something that goes against state law we will ultimately win. I'm not so sure ... hence my opening comments about the Civil War. Even if it were possible to fight the State and win on every issue, I am still convinced that I don't want another five years of inflation and people pissing in my aquifer before anything else is done.

This is why I was such a big fan of the result of the October "negotiations". There was a built in time limit to explore other possibilities before returning to a project which could be accomplished on time. Along those lines, if this CSD board were to take action to commit to pursue a TriW project if the results of the engineering study indicated that "out of town" were considerably more expensive or if the "out of town" site would take far too long to develop, I believe that those in our community who are no strongly leaning toward dissolution would realize that the CSD is willing to work with the property owners. While property owners aren't generally in favor of higher costs, I believe that they would, by and large, approve of such a compromise.

It certainly can't hurt the CSD to make such a committment. Without it they'll never be able to get a 218 vote passed to borrow the necessary money to pursue any project at all. Without it they'll be bankrupt, dissolved or voted out of office for sure in November. Sure, it would mean angering some of the most strident of the CCLO crowd, but those in leadership often have to make tough choices that will anger their supporters. If it weren't the case, it would be called "followship" or some such.

You are right ... there is a great opportunity to build concensus and to move forward, even if is not to "save the dream" ... but there must be compromise from both sides for this to happen. If those who support the board continue to say "you lost, get over it" they will not be able to effectively dull the dissolution efforts.

Anonymous said...

Here are substantive facts:

Dick Sargent is really Dick Sargent. At least he looks like Dick Sargent.

Mike Green is really Mike Green.

Gordon Taylor is really Gordon Taylor.

Joe Sparks is really Joe Sparks.

Anonymous is anomomous.

Shark Inlet is not a calculator.

Dogpatch is not angry 90% of the time.

Ann Calhoun is Ann Calhoun.

Now for the shocker.

Churadogs is NOT Calhoun.
Why? Churadogs is a better writer than Calhoun, because she/he writes more like Calhoun than Calhoun. I know Churadogs is not Calhoun, becuase when I make a response to Ann, she doesn't respond, Churadogs does. Calhoun is probably terrified about this revelation, because it exposes her journalistic flaws. Just watch - Calhoun won't respond, Churadogs will.

Anonymous said...

Shark,

FYI.......
Sorry, you're not off the hook. No lacking in my reasoning...just got the day of the week wrong.....my bad.
Whatever day it was, it was about a month ago give or take, we went to a wastewater committee meeting. Joe Sparks and Gordon Taylor were in attendance at this meeting. And while we were at this meeting, Shark Inlet posted to this blog.
So, in conclusion, unless more than one person is posting as Shark Inlet. Shark Inlet is NOT Joe Sparks or Gordon Taylor.

Your 8:05am post is very curious Shark. In this post, you seem to have a "freudian" misquote from my 726am post. This is outlined in my post last night where silly me got the day of the wastewater committee meeting wrong. Look at these posts. If Shark Inlet isn't Joe Sparks or Gordon Taylor then, I wonder who Shark Inlet is? HHMMMMMMMMMMMMMM........
These facts combined with other snippets and clues that I won't get into, give me a pretty good idea who Shark Inlet is.
Don't worry Shark, your secret is safe with me. Just do me one favor....will you please?
Please don't come in here a tell us all you're not a dissolutionist.
It's starting to get insulting. Besides the fact that I know that you ARE, you've made several statements in this blog that have been pointed out by other "posters" besides myself that would lead any intelligent reasonable person to know that you are a "dissolutionist".
Your act of coming in here like your some "centrist"(HAAA I'M FEELING ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE SNEEZES COMING ON..........."BULLSHIT"....sorry, did I tell you I was alergic to bullshit?) your "centrist" act is a joke. You come in here and say "I'm not a "dissolutionist" then you proceed to bash our elected CSD board and hump Tri-W. Why aren't you getting this FACT that WE'RE NOT BUYING IT?
I'll just ask you, please don't come in here and say you're not a "dissolutionist" then, sit behind a "dissolution" table on the weekends.
If you continue to do this the respect that I have for you now will quickly wane.

Anonymous said...

Boy am I messed up with what I write! I need to get back being Joey.

Shark Inlet said...

Anonymous,

Whatever you may think, you have no idea who I am. I have never sat behind a dissolution table in my life. I did walk by one at Vons one day, though ... but I don't think that counts.

I am pretty sure that any names you bring up as possibly being "shark inlet" will be wrong.

If you would like to start guessing I'll start answering now ...

ps - your first 20 guesses will be wrong.

Anonymous said...

Shark Inlet is Ann Calhoun!
She is a twisted double ego that talks to herself!
News at eleven

Guess who?

Anonymous said...

And Publickworks is Ann Calhoun too!
A dastardly single person conspiracy revealed.
News at eleven thirty

Anonymous said...

Public,

I've been ignoring you. I'm sorry. I just have one final comment on the committees then, I'm going to put the topic to bed because I think most people with half a brain know what this was all about. The former corrupt CSD board should of had committees in place last February like we do now. Their delaying the process was a political ploy in an election year just like the political ploy of starting the Tri-W project before the election. And, IT BLEW UP IN THEIR FACE!!!!
Don't get me wrong public, I'm not upset that the former corrupt csd postponed & delayed and the after postponing & delaying the committee selection process completely eliminated the committee selection process from the agenda. I'm glad they did it. It was one of the dozens of reasons why besides Tri-W they lost the election.....
Like you said, last year when dictators Stan and Richard and Gordon were Directors, nobody wanted to be on a committee.
This year, now that we have Directors who have, in your words "integrity", they receive more applications that they have spots to fill........

Anonymous said...

Shark,

Yea, I'm sure you walked right by that "dissolution" table.....you didn't stop and sign the petition, did you? cause you're not a "dissolutionist", are you?..you're a "centrist" right?..OH NO.....ANOTHER SNEEZE COMING ON.......ahh..ahhhh....ahhhhhhh BULLSHIT aacheww"......
You're so enamored in your own narcissism that it's blinding you to the fact that WE ALL SEE THRU YOUR SILLY ACT........
It's this type of egotistical mentality that would start a project before an election. It's also this type of egotistical mentality that would paint themself into a corner by starting a futile "dissolution" movement in an election year destroying any chance of running a serious campaign for an institution that just months before you were trying to "dissolve"....
Whomever you are Shark, can you tell me who is making these decisions? I'd like to send them a check......
Nevermind, come November this will all be moot.....our current elected CSD will have our wastewater solution well before us by then which will be an interim septic management/water conservation program in prelude to a viable wastewater project.
I think I'll send my check to the CDO legal assistance fund instead.
Shark, since you're not a "dissolutionist", I'm sure you'll be doing the same. And like Publicworks said the CDO issue is a separate issue from the dissolution issue anyway. I think the fight against the CDO's is something we can and should all get behind.
Write and send your check to The Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund (PZLDF). P.O. Box 6095, LO 93412

Shark Inlet said...

anonymous,

I've just figured out who you are. You are Keith.

No need bothering telling me I am wrong, I will ignore whatever you write and pretend you are Keith anyways.

Why don't you go pound sand?

Anonymous said...

"anonymous,

"I've just figured out who you are. You are Keith.

No need bothering telling me I am wrong, I will ignore whatever you write and pretend you are Keith anyways.

Why don't you go pound sand?"
Ah, the measured wisdom and careful discourse of Shark Inlet is demonstrated once again.

Anonymous said...

Shark,

I think anonymous will actually be more satisfied with your last post. He/she will probably take you literally - he/she is probably sure they've exposed the true Sharky.

After all, you are not allowed to be a 'centrist'. Here are the rules anonymous seems to insist on:

If you don't agree with the new board, you must be against them.

If you don't despise the old board, you must be against the new board.

If you challenge the new board on details, you must be against them (hey, that's a familiar refrain from anonymous' attacks on the old board! - deferred costs are ok to attack, just don't attack deferred plans or projects!!)

If were to you challenge the politicking and filibustering and the old lawsuits (tactics for political gain as much as anything ), you're against them.

If you point out ANYTHING that would have supported Tri-W, you're against them.

If you think it's NOT ok to settle with a law firm that has sued the district, and then turn and hire them (especially when a board member had affiliations with a suing organization that was represented by the lawyer), then you're against them. Not THAT's INTEGRITY, right?!

And Shark, if you think Tri-W is the least expensive way, then of course you must be a bottom-feeding, fascist-loving, developer embracing, class cleansing rube.

In fact, in unyielding loyalty and to support the new board, here's a suggestion - maybe the district lawyers can schedule a bunch more of those Disneyland vacations, and more decisions can be delayed!! I hear there are great discounts on some of those Spring vacations!! After all, professional courtesy is much more important than a little teeny weeney legal matter for Los Osos.

Hey, Shark c'mon over to a meeting! Only then can you be a true sanctimonious, pious, and credible citizen. And along with your attendance, you'll be laughed at, ridiculed, frowned upon, and if you're so chosen, yelled at.

God forbid, Shark, you even mention a reason to let someone else manage the project. Hey, Shark, maybe they'll even post and publicize your name on a bulletin board as an annointed evil person of Los Osos to join the others on that long list of culprits in the 30 year long Los Osos witchhunt. Because as we know, anonymous bears no responsibility - only others.

Shark Inlet said...

I think that someone has figured out a way to spoof this blog.

I "Shark Inlet" and "shark inlet" are different people. It seems that blogger.com has case-sensitive user names or something like that.

To verify which shark inlet has written a post, just click on the name "shark inlet" to view the user profile. (I would suggest right-clicking to open in another window for convenience.)

In any case, it is truly pathetic and sad that someone would do this as a way of confusing the situation.

However, let's address the issues that our spoofer inlet raises. Well ... it appears that there aren't any issues that he raises besides the question of whether the the sewer will be too expensive or not. As I've said before many times, all signs suggest that the costs associated with the sewer are only going up, up, up due to the actions of the current board. If anyone wants to argue that point, present a solid reason. Otherwise, we'll just take spoofer inlet's comments as essentially a sophomoronic rant.

Mike Green said...

This blog comment section is getting to be funnier than the comics, I hope Ann is getting as much a kick out of it as I am.
I don't want to insult anyone, but it appears to me that the identity crisis that is forming could be solved by---
using your real name..


HA HA HA HA HA


Talk about unintended Consequences

Mike Green said...

Sharkey, even if I do get to know your real name I wouldn't tell anyone unless you said it was alright. Why not create a blog? its easy and you could archive all your letters easily, and I would like it personaly because it would make referencing your inputs more easily searchable.
Your friend, Mike Green