Pages

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

A Short Breather

The Regional Water Quality Control Board has moved the Cease & Desist Order hearings from March 23-24 to the end of April, thereby giving another month to their victims – The Los Osos Forty-Six – to prepare for what may turn out to be a HUMONGOUS legal battle.

The extra time will be helpful because what few people may realize is that unless things are entered into the “record” during this RWQCB’s “administrative” proceedings, they likely can’t be brought into any subsequent legal proceeding. So, it’s critical to have time to prepare each individual case.

This becomes especially true since the sledge hammer the RWQCB has chosen to use (the CDOs) ultimately can involve people losing their homes and life savings. Serious stuff, indeed.

Which is why I suspect the RWQCB will run into a buzz-saw’s worth of serious, serious legal problems and challenges as this process moves forward. The seriousness of the CDO process is also why everyone in Los Osos had better pay attention and why any of the Los Osos Forty-Six who have not contacted the CSD to link up with their fellow victims had better do so immediately. There’s a lot of legal expertise out there, and procedural expertise that they can avail themselves of before the April hearing date.

If they think they can just wander into the hearing room and fling themselves on the “mercy” of the Board, they’ll be the perfect illustration that the man who represents himself before a court has a fool for a client. And they will pay dearly for such folly.

The irony to be found in what the RWQCB is attempting to do here – for the first time, I might add – is the fact that RWQCB has a great deal to lose, the most important item of which is their credibility. Right now, the way they’re proceeding does not give me confidence in their “science” or in their competency. And once that goes, everything else will come crashing down.

By way of one small example: At the Feb. “informational meeting” I asked the Technical Mr. Science Guys on the staff, since the CDO’s discuss “alternatives,” what are the discharge target numbers that some “alternative” system must hit in order to be in the ball park. I was told that that was a very good question, they didn’t have any target numbers, but that was certainly something they needed to think about and perhaps they could come up with those numbers.

One month away from a major administrative hearing involving serious, serious legal outcomes and they didn’t have target discharge numbers that some “alternative” system must meet. Didn’t have the numbers.

This indicates to me that these boys are winging this whole thing and will be making stuff up as they go along. Not good, when the taking of private property, savings and lives are at stake. Once credibility goes, it’s impossible to get it back. And lack of credibility carries an awful price when you’re under tough cross-examination in a court of law.

Meantime, if you’re one of the Los Osos Forty-Six and have not linked up with your fellow POWs, I would urge you to do so. The RWQCB has started a war with the citizens of this fair burg, a totally unnecessary war, so it will be up to each of us and the CSD to limit the “collateral damage” they intend to do to our friends and neighbors.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Very good advice Ann.

The reason the RWQCB wouldnt publicly release the names of the Los Osos 46 is because they didnt want them to organize themselves.

That should tell you something.

Take Ann's advice and join forces on this.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone else wondered why the "random" method used by the RWQCB yielded no businesses??

It seems at least one would ahve shown up.

Perhaps the RWQCB didn't want to fight anyone with legal resources in place... like the corporations that own the Vons or Ralphs Shopping Centers. Or Ralphs or Vons themselves.

Maybe the U.S. Postal Service would be a good target. They have a restroom.

The RWQCB has certainly made it known that they hold tenents as equally responsible for discharging as home owners (in order to punish all us voters).

So, come on RWQCB... take on big business and government... lets get their lawyers involved too. Let's have some fun!!!

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Speaking of credibility, the CSD fair five have lost a lot of theirs. Just check out the meeting agenda for Thursday. Nothing but lawsuits. Looks like they are getting lots of practice, but are they getting any better at it?

As to the random method of property owner selection, do the math. How many houses are there? How many businesses like Vons or Ralphs? Since half of the community wants the sewer now and the other half doesn't, how economically sound would it be for Vons or Ralphs to jump into the fray? A lot of people might just opt for Albertsons, Morro Bay. You are assuming with all the money they have they wouldn't just rather pump than fight some way more costly lawsuit.

I think The RWQCB's only mistake was to not send all the CDO's at the same time, regardless of the trouble of scheduling hearings. Give them a break. This bunch of them at least wants to uphold the law. Los Osos is at fault. Just suppose you were waiting for an answer from the courts as to a big money settlement that was owed to you. Wouldn't you get a little impatient after 20 years - 30 years? Would the flimsy reason - "Oh we can do it better this time around and squeeze out a few more dollars" satisfy you?

Shark Inlet said...

Here is the issue ... in my mind ... right now ...

Do we want (as a community) to continue to fight the state mandate that we clean up our water on each and every issue?

Sure, Lisa has told us all that they intend to build a sewer ... but they stopped the only project that seems to have any liklihood of being finished within the next five to ten years.

If we as a community "band together" to take legal action against the RWQCB, SWRCB, CCC and everyone else out there for not being "scientific" enough, for being "mean" to us and for enforcing laws in a way different from what we want them to do ... we're waging an expensive and high-stakes battle with a very deep pocketed organization, the State of California. If the SWRCB and RWQCB are wrong on every issue in a legal sense, we have the possibility of winning and perhaps state rules governing such boards will have to change ... but it will likely be very expensive for us and we likely won't be reimbursed even if we do win.

The subtle issues involved here are deeper than any of us understand ... they might end up in the State Supreme Court. I'm not going to say that you shouldn't tilt at windmills ... but I would say that from a strictly financial point of view, it is not wise. Go ahead and knock yourselves out ... fight the man. But please please please don't bankrupt my neighbors who are on a fixed income and cannot afford this legal fight that they don't want.

Perhaps a far wiser strategy is to do a legislative end-run around the problems. If the LOCSD has enough money (at the rate they're spending on lawyers nowdays it seems like they do) they should lobby those in Sacramento, from the Governator to Sam B to everyone in between. They should ask the state to draft legislation that the RWQCB and the like must take science into account during their enforcement actions ... they should ask the state to foot the bill for arbitrary changes in design requirements ... they should ask for the Governator to simply write a sewer for Los Osos into the state budget directly.

Anonymous said...

Sewertoons might just have hit the nail on the head. It is all about money. I'll quote you Mr/Mrs/Ms Sewertoons:

"Just suppose you were waiting for an answer from the courts as to a big money settlement that was owed to you. Wouldn't you get a little impatient after 20 years - 30 years? "

No money is owed the CCRWQCB but they take the money they get in fines and use some of it to finance their operation. Wouldn't it be possible to "skim" some off the top for your own personal use. Say if you were a malicious, sadistic 30 year employee in a position of power. Not naming names just supposing. But isn't this a good possibility? Overseas banking is not all that difficult to do and if you have a friend in Zurich, it makes it that much easier.

Pumping septic tanks every other month will solve nothing. The CCRWQCB is not working with the people, but working against the people. They don't want to resolve anything - they want MONEY, MONEY, MONEY, PAIN, ANGUISH, SUFFERING. They are dishonorable employees of the State and we pay their wages.

I will not wait for them to take my house and life savings, I will move. This is clearly not the USA, but some dictatorship with an abuse of power. I read their latest "how to" for the meeting on April 28th. They can't even use their copy machines. You have to send 2 copies here, 7 copies her, etc. And the format is Word, Excel, PowerPoint, .pdf. I can do just about anything with one copy and let the recipient reproduce it for whomever they choose. And as far as how to submit it, gimme a break. Plain old paper is OK and perhaps the only way some of us folks know.

We can only hope that the wrath that has been unloosed is stopped by the Governor, or the US Attorney General.

I don't live here, I suffer in fear and anxiety here.

Mike Green said...

Ah, Sharkey,
I've said all along that the "Water Gods would scurry away if we could only enlist the combined efforts of our higher up elected officials,
Sadly, the best we've ever been able to drum up is poor Sam Blakeslee.
He got prety much dissed by the "Water Gods"
I even asked him point blank one time on the Dave Congleton show to tell us why the "negotiations" tanked.
Too bad hardly anyone was listening.
He didn't have a good answer except to say he didn't want to call anyone bad names.
And where is Shirley?
Last comments we heard from her were at the last election, (I paraprhase here) "PLEASE dont vote for the recall because the county will have to pick up the project at an even greater cost."
(not, "please don't vote for the recall because these people don't deserve it")
I wonder what she's thinking now?
The problem as I see it is we've made ourseves a poltical "third rail"
A pariah to our neighbor communitys.
Grover Beach is already on record about not wanting the county to spend resources on the "Los Osos" problem,
can't say I blame them.
Should the CSD board use whats left of our meager funds to hire lobbyist?
Good question, in this case it may make more sense to do that than pay laywers for litigation.
Maybe they can hire Joey to go sit in one of Able's trees in Santa Maria.
Maybe we can get every nurse that lives in Los Osos ( and there is a lot of them) to complain to Lois.
One thing I an sure of, as long as we keep acting like a bunch of disorganized yahoos, no political leader will have anything to do with us
Thats just my opinion of course.

Churadogs said...

Here's a puzzle to me: The CSD is moving ahead with the new sewer, RFPs due in tomorrow, I think. The CSD staff is already meeting with RWQCB staff to look at what GM Blesky calls "low lying fruit," i.e. areas of the community that can be nitrate-reduced in a coherent, organized way. Since nitrate reduction is the goal of the CDOs, if the RWQCB offered various alternative strategies for the homeowner (Dr. Alexander's "gizmo," for example, and waived their $900 a year discharge permit fee & etc) do any of you think for a moment that this community wouldn't say, Heck, yes, let's move on nitrate reduction while the sewer's being built, where and how do I sign on?

I think that's exactly what this community would do right out of the box. The CDO's are the wrong tool for the job. Certainly, they could be held in reserve -- Do X,Y & Z while the new sewer goes ahead, or we'll start the CDO's.-- but in the meantime, here's some stratagies we can help you get started on right now. I think this community would move on tht without complaint.

One of the slanders whispered into the ears of the RWQCB is that "you people out there don't want a sewer." That slander appears again in a March 1 Trib. letter from John Perkins. He states, with no evidence whatsoever to back up his statement, that there's a group of Los Ososians, a group " . . . larger than most of us want to admit, for whater reason does not believe we need a cerntralized sewer system." Really? How many of THOSE have you met? A tiny handful? Most everyone I've met and talked to, want some kind of system. Many people I've spoken to just didn't want that system in the middle of their town.

But this slander persists to the point where RWQCB members use the words "you people out there . . ." and then make false judgements about this community, as in, "Everybody knows you people out there don't want a sewer. . . . ," which is then followed by lunatic Board decisions based on that false perception.

If ever you doubt that slander can't harm you, think of RWQCB member Mr. Shallcross, he of the Kumbaya fame. He was one of those "you people . . ." people. And based on his false perception of Los Osos, he voted for the CDO's. Any why not? After all, none of us "you people" out here wants a sewer, do we?

As for people thinking the RWQCB is simply getting tired of waiting, you need to look at their record since they passed resolution 83=12 & 13. There were numberless "delays" since that time by both the county and the new CSD and yet the RWQC Board did NOTHING. Not even require the county and the new CSD to turn-key #83-12 and form a septic managment district. Instead, for years, they did Zip, Zero, Nada. For years. So, their cries now of Emergency! Eeek! We must Pump 'N Dump NOW or we'll all die! ring hollow on my ears.

And, interesting note about the lack of businesses on the hit list. The CSD has requested a copy of exactly how they came up with the "random" list. So far as I know, they've received no answer.

Anonymous said...

You are correct Ann, "Once credibility goes, it’s impossible to get it back".
"No fines, no lose of SRF loan, etc."

Shark Inlet said...

I almost agree with you, Ann.

My question is whether the CSD would have done anything without the RWQCB starting up with CDOs. I saw no action toward picking those "low hanging fruit" from our board until there was a credible threat. The very fact that Julie said "nyah nyah nyah nyah ... the regional board can't do anything to us" may be what convinced the RWQCB that they needed to take this action.

Don't pretend that you're not in a battle and that your actions, to some large extent, influence your opponent's re-actions.

Churadogs said...

I have never pretended that we're not in a battle. Unfortunately, the word results in a certain mental paradigm that blinds people to options and solutions, it sets up a Us vs THEM mentality, WIN-LOOSE, & etc. all of which are losing mentalities, not winning ones.And you're seeing the results of that mentality now.

Anonymous said...

Absolutely Ann,

Mentality: It's the same old people, i.e. the Solutions Group, blah, blah, blah...

Ann, you've been one of the chief setter uppers in the us vs. them mentality by trying to pigeon-hole people as 'Tri-W ers' and 'Dissolvers' all the while ignoring the fractious make-up of people that supported the recall.

Jeez, Ann, starting being objective for what reality is and what some of the recall agendas were.

Stop talking about people being blind until you take off the eyepatch that covers one of your eyes.

Churadogs said...

Sorr, but the Us vs Them paradign was set up long ago and not by me. For ages I thought the CSD needed to do what the Coastal Commission asked them to do -- for real -- a side by side cost comparison for a system in town and out of town, then let the "buyers" decide which one they wanted to buy. That never happened, and to this day,I'm remain puzzled as to why not. Instead, we were told -- adamantly -- by the old CSD, that the "out of town site" was waaaaaayyy more expensive and hence was taken off the table. According to the brief sentence that appeared by the CC staff in the de novo report, the "out of town" site would be -- a rough guestimate only -- $1 mil cheaper or $5-6 more expensive. As I noted at the time, 1 less to 5-6 more on a (then) $150 +++ mil project IS CHUMP CHANGE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN LEFT UP TO THE VOTERS TO DECIDE. (This is especially ironic because while Gordon Hensley was earnestly stating that he couldn't possibly in good conscience vote for an alternative system that might cost "more," he did vote to "save" about $5-6 million in capital costs for a less expensive/less effective sludge presser/drier which had the real effect of moving that "savings" over to the very REAL additional cost of transporting wet sludge over to the "hidden" O&M side of the ledger. When I emailed him to ask, Uh, isn't that "savings"you've proudly annoumced just going to be eaten up by higher (heavier0 wet sludge transportation costs, he gleefully replied, That's right. So much for the piety of "saving" the community money.)

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

If you are so anxious for the choice to be left up to the voters, why are you supporting the board's choices which won't allow us the option of TriW?

Churadogs said...

If and when Measure B fails in court or whatever, then Tri-W will be back on the table. If Measure B reamins, in part, on the books, one nice thing bout Tri W is we KNOW the baseline cost of the thing. Add on OM&Rs and we can compare all that with whatever costs come up on the "alternative" solution. So, Tri-W is, in many ways, a semi-"benchmark" to compare against.

Shark Inlet said...

Hold on a minute, Ann...

You're telling us that TriW will be back on the table when Measure B goes down. That is not what Gail, Keith, Lisa and Julie have told us. If they sell the site (and they've put it on the market ... sort of an odd thing to do unless they want to sell it) it would make putting TriW back on the table sort of hard ... or at least pretty costly.

What if we see in August that the "other" sites are considerably more expensive than TriW as going to be ... how long do you think this board will last in office? Not too long I would bet.

Churadogs said...

Listing a property is different than selling it. IF, as some maintain, the site is legally encumbered, then selling it may take years and years of litigation. (I found it really, really odd, that "trial balloon" of a story about how the County Parks was somehow "interested" in acquiring the site as a park . . . .????? Very strange, from a department that just got investigated by the Grand Jury, which report smacked the BOS for basically starving that dept to death, no money for maintenance, a true red-haired stepchild! Now, suddenly, the Department is asking about spending gazillions to buy more land????? )