Pages

Sunday, September 10, 2006

Lawsuits 101, Sort of

In a Sept 9 Tribune letter to the editor, Los Osos Resident Dick Sargent wrote: “ On August 31, Los Osos Community Services District President Lisa Schicker reported on 15 pending lawsuits.

“Astonishingly, she repeatedly stated that “We are (only) defending the citizens of Los Osos.

“What a brazen attempt to dismiss legal repercussions to her board’s reprehensible fiscal conduct! Los Osos citizens have been betrayed and worse, are being misled by the Los Osos Community Service District’s “cover-up” campaign.”

Mr. Sargent wasn’t at the August 31 CSD meeting for a reading of the lawsuits, with brief explanations as to what they’re about, so maybe he missed some of the information before writing his letter. The full list was printed in the agenda and was available at the table for members of the public.

Here, with notes I made at the time as to what they are about, are the lawsuits. By my count, 4 of the 15 suits were brought by the CSD against other persons/entities, with one of those five considered a “friendly” adjudication with all the water purveyors to decide how to allocate water being sold in the basin. (This actually shouldn’t be on the list if the list is considered an “adversarial” list, but it is a “lawsuit,” so I’ll leave it on. Another questionable “adversarial” is a case over easements for sewer pipes for the old project, my presumption here is that it’s a matter of settling over price, etc, while another was a personnel matter having nothing to do with Sewers but having to do with gender bias by the “old administration.”)

The Bankruptcy filing I’m putting in the “neutral” corner since it is a direct result of the other 14 but isn’t filed “against” anyone, so to speak.

One of the more interesting cases to me, are the lawsuits brought by the construction companies who, if memory serves, were still under contract, said contract which they all signed said they agreed that in the case of any legal disputes to enter into mediated negotiations and arbitration, etc, before filing lawsuits, but they went ahead and filed lawsuits anyway and did so before any arbitration could be started and/or completed. Aw, so much for signed contracts, eh?

And, most interesting is the breach of contract suit brought by the CSD against the State Water Board over just exactly who pulled the plug and exactly when on the second chunk of the State Revolving Fund, since that was the banana peel on the top of the hill that started the rock fall. That one will be a legally interesting doozie.

1. Taxpayers Watch, Joyce Albright, Robert C. Crizer, Christopher Isler, v LOCSD, Appeal, (CV051012), Measure B (the lawsuit brought by TPW to toss out Measure B, still on appeal)

2. Taxpayer’s Watch, Joyce Albright, Robert C. Crizer, Christopher Isler, v LOCSD, Steve Senet, John Fouche, Chuck Cesena, lisa Schicker, Julie Tacker in SLO Superiour Court (CV050862) – public waste. (A lawsuit personally suing the individual Board members for “public waste,” has to be some kind of sick joke, methinks, and begs the question: Shouldn’t somebody have also filed the same lawsuit against Gordon Hensley, Richard LeGros and Stan Gufstafson, the recalled Board members who voted to pound millions of taxpayers dollars into the ground only weeks before the recall election even though they didn’t have to? Guess there’s “waste” and then there’s, uh, “waste?”).

3. Los Osos Taxpayers Association v SWRCB and LOCSD in SLO Superior Court – public waste and Prop 218 (This one’s also an interesting potential doozie: The SRF Loan was increased some $40 million without a current “revenue stream” and no Proposition 218 vote by the homeowners to agree to indebt themselves for the additional amount. At dispute is whether that Loan required a Prop 218 vote or whether all the additional monies could just be piggy-backed onto the original 2000 design/start-up assessment vote.)

4. LOCSD v SWRCB in Sacramento Superior Court (05AS05422) – breach of contract (SRF Loan) This is one of the doozies.

5. RWQCB v LOCSD in SLO Superior Court (CV051074) – Injunctive Relief Measure B.

6. Barnard v LOCSD (CV060094) – contractor action against LOCSD in SLO Superior Court. This is one of those interesting ones. Did their contract specify arbitration? If so, what were they doing filing a court action at this point?

7.SWQCB v LOCSD – ACL/TSO appeal to SWRCB. Four times at the ACL hearings, former CSD General Manager Bruce Buel was asked if the original Time Schedule Order set by the “old” CSD and the RWQCB to complete the (Tri-W- sewer system) was “reasonable” or “unreasonable” and four times Mr. Buel answered – “Unreasonable.” I presume that this lawsuit intends to pursue the notion that if the original time schedule was “unreasonable” then all else that follows is equally unreasonable and the time schedule really should have been changed to allow for equally momentous changes on the ground.

8. Montgomery Watson Harza v. LOCSD in SLO Superior Court -- CSD defending. Contractor dispute.

9. Corenbaum v LOCSD, Bruce Buel, Bruce, Bruce Pickens in SLO Superior Court. A gender bias case filed by a former CSD employee against former CSD employees. Not sewer related at this point.

10. LOCSD v Golden State, et. al. in SLO Superior Court. A “friendly” adjudication to parcel out who gets to sell what water in the basin.

11. LOCSD v Regional Water Quality Control Board, as designated party to individual CDO’s. The CSD asked for and was granted standing as a designated partywith the Los Osos 45, who had received CDO’s. Their legal case resulted in having the original case tossed out and started over, primarily because the original CDO’s were so goofy (legally) and so challengeable in a “real” court, that the Regional Quality Control Board figured they’d better start over and maybe this time do it right. When they do, the CSD will be there and hopefully, their case as a designated party, will also help the hapless 45 who are being “tried” (again) in what the Bay News is openly referring to as “a kangaroo court.”

12. LOCSD v Corr, eminent domain action in SLO Superior Court. Case regarding easements for sewer pipes.

13. Sturtevant v LOCSD in SLO Small Claims Court (SC060026) and

14. Merrill v. LOCSD in SLO Small Claims Court (SC060257) These two are a puzzlement to me. Presumably, they’re a request to have the person’s prepaid sewer fees returned, which is weird, since the “prepayment” was really only a partial “down payment,” so to speak, on whatever the final cost of the sewer would be. The HUGE balance of the cost was going to arrive in the form of a “service fee.” That the original payment was very, very tiny compared to the final “service fees” indicated to me just how “bait and switchy” this whole deal was, especially since the HUGE final amount never had a Prop 218 vote behind it. Whole thing reminded me of the old sales ploy: Only $9.99 [then in really small print . . . plus $2,000 handling and servicing fee, plus $10,887.45 applicable license and taxes and $4,519.99 extended service warranty contract.] Ironically, the new State Revolving Loans now require a Prop 218 before they’ll get out the door. So, what does that tell you about how the Tri W loan was set up in the first place? And certainly explains the LOTA lawsuit over the matter.

15. In re Los Osos Community Services District, United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, Northern Division, Case No. ND 06-10548. CSD files for bankruptcy. (see previous posting, Bankruptcy 101 for notes from that Q&A at a CSD meeting)

In his letter, Mr. Sargent claims “brazen attempt[s]” and citizens being “betrayed and worse,” and “misled,” and etc.

Me? I see some really critical lawsuits that need a full hearing, for the sake of this community and the citizens that Mr. Sargent claims have been betrayed. As for “brazen,” “misled,” "reprehensible fiscal conduct," and “betrayal,” the betrayal and reprehensible fiscal conduct I’m seeing in the lawsuits listed above is of a far different sort than Mr. Sargent is alluding to. Far different.

43 comments:

Anonymous said...

Now Churadog has substituted her "scientist" hat with her "legal" hat. Is there no limit to her expertise?

"Have Expertise, Will Testify" could be your new mantra!

Great post!

For the benefit of the gentalia obsessed, could we here from the "Psychologist" hat next?

FBLeG said...

Anon 11:38am said,

"Now Churadog has substituted her "scientist" hat with her "legal" hat. Is there no limit to her expertise?"

Churadog is a reporter/commentator (and a good one at that). I appreciate her breakdown and explanation of what all of the lawsuits are about. This to be contrasted with coverage from the Trib.

Good work and thanks.

Anonymous said...

Yes we are fortunate to have a variety of perspectives to read and ponder. Thank you Ann,

Anonymous said...

Ann:

Great legal analysis from a completely biased and inexperienced reporter. I guess you are hoping beyond hope that the inept LOCSD lawyers will prevail. I hope they spend lots of their money fighting the state, and like the LOCSD become bankrupt.

Your analysis is bankrupt. Stick to writing about rocking chairs.

Anonymous said...

To: F**KING-Balls-le-gross:

You are a scumbag filled with rotten cum left under a bed for three weeks in the dust and dirt. Thank you for supporting the brillient Ann. She needs the support, just like Joey, and the lying LOCSD Five.

Anonymous said...

i feel the same way about F**KING-Balls-richard-le-gross. at least dick can share his rotten cum left under a bed for three weeks in the dust and dirt with his butt buddy gordon.

Anonymous said...

i feel the same way about F**KING-Balls-richard-le-gross. at least dick can share his rotten cum left under a bed for three weeks in the dust and dirt with his butt buddy gordon.

Anonymous said...

Well, I'm done with this ridiculous blog. Shame on you, Ann, for allowing this filth to remain - and please spare us your "free speech" lecture. This kind of crap has no place in a rational discussion - I don't care what side of the fence you are on.

Ta ta.

Realistic 1

Anonymous said...

Ah the last vestiges of the sewer wars. CSD supporters. Ann's peeps. Foul -mouthed. Homophobic. Pathetically immature. Sore losers. Unwilling and incapable of admitting this CSD has bankrupted the community and forever screwed the Los Osos homeowner. This blog lost any semblance of civility and usefulness months ago.

Anonymous said...

May I ask, then, why you keep coming back?

Sewertoons said...

Ann said:
"Ironically, the new State Revolving Loans now require a Prop 218 before they’ll get out the door. So, what does that tell you about how the Tri W loan was set up in the first place?"

Maybe instead of that hypothesis, they changed the rules because of what happened in Los Osos????

A loan was accepted for a specific project, the new board chose not to accept the conditions of the loan (by approximately 20 votes, one third of the community NOT VOTING, property owners NOT allowed to participate), and claimed the loan illegal, all the while asking for the money from the loan? Think that schizoid behavior might have played into the State's decision??

Sewertoons said...

Regarding:
LOCSD v Regional Water Quality Control Board, as designated party to individual CDO’s.

Interesting how all Los Ososians - Cabrillo Estates, etc.comes to mind, are paying for this legal defense when clearly those areas will NOT receive CDO's…

Now which areas of the community do most of the Director's live in?

I happen to live in the PZ - was I asked if I wanted the CSD to defend me? Got the financial fallout of their "legal action" though, didn't I?

Anonymous said...

Once again, sewertoons shows us all what a complete and total idiot she is.
They changed the rules because the rules were illegal.
The State cannot encumber debt on the property owners of a Community without concent(218 vote). It's the law.
Did I say you were the biggest idiot to ever post in a blog?

Sewertoons said...

Gee anon 10:08, maybe I am a gay male. Making assumptions again I see.

Sewertoons said...

Actually anon 10:08, all that I think the state required at that point was a revenue stream, which there would have been to USE the sewer services.

Sewertoons said...

On this one:
SWQCB v LOCSD – ACL/TSO appeal to SWRCB. Four times at the ACL hearings, former CSD General Manager Bruce Buel was asked if the original Time Schedule Order set by the “old” CSD and the RWQCB to complete the (Tri-W- sewer system) was “reasonable” or “unreasonable” and four times Mr. Buel answered – “Unreasonable.

Funny. Had Tri-W continued, the old board would have met the time schedule for a completed project no matter how difficult that would have been. Then there would be no CDO's - no 2010 looming to punish us…

Sewertoons said...

Ann said:

"Shouldn’t somebody have also filed the same lawsuit against Gordon Hensley, Richard LeGros and Stan Gufstafson, the recalled Board members who voted to pound millions of taxpayers dollars into the ground only weeks before the recall election even though they didn’t have to? Guess there’s “waste” and then there’s, uh, “waste?”"

Guess no one felt strongly enough to do so. No one put their money where their mouth was. Guess in lieu of that the new board decided to get even by bankrupting the CSD and making even its continuance as an entity very, very uncertain. Hope stopping the sewer was worth loosing local control…

Joey Racano said...

Please support Sipes and the existing board members. They are the only ones who will protect you from paying for a sewer. They will make sure that our magnificant lawyers will get the money they deserve in the end.

Joey Racano said...

As I have said in the past (as a anon), all the previous board members were totally corrupt early on, and corrupt by following the directions of the corrupt CCRWQCB, with the exception of the wonderful and brillient Lisa and Julie. The water law is corrupt! The basin plan is corrupt! The county is corrupt! Science has been warped! There is no nitrate problem! Anybody who believes government about a Los Osos polution problem is being fucked by lies and corruption. There is plenty of pure water here.

Anything about my criminal record or service record, and that of Gail McPherson's is an absolute lie, and has been purchased by real estate developers in the papers to destroy us. The LOCSD and Ann Calhoun, our spokesperson, has been truthfull. The Tribune will never tell the truth if it hurts the developers!

Read the New Times, Ann Calhoun, and especially me for the facts.

Do not believe the bankruptcy, it is a lie told by the Tribune. It does not exist in that it has not been accepted by the bankruptcy court! Do not dissolve! There is a grant from the Arabs that will pay for everything, and Caesar Chavez from down below is contributing. Do you think this board is stupid for stopping the expensive sewer? They know far more than you do! They CANNOT disclose the negotiations. I know because I have been party to the negotiations. Trust me.

In the meantime I am running out of funds and wish everyone to send as much money as they can to support my efforts. Buy my book on activism! If you are a renter, double your contribution. If you cannot pay for a sewer, triple it. Only Joey Racano can save you. Send money, I need a place to stay, I am homeless and indigent. Ann, can I move in? You have helped the cause with words, but now action is needed. Gail doesn't like me anymore: kicked out.

I lick and give kisses better than dogs. To the fags, Richard and Gordon, this is heterosexual. I love my dog and take care of her, as she does for me. Ann?

Fuck all the scumbags that have fought to build a sewer. The poor deserve to live for free! It is the capitolistic bastards that suppress the poor and do not give them a free living. The poor are human and deserve it, especially me. Nobody should own property, it should belong to the people. The government (us) should provide everyone with healthcare, a small car, housing, free dope, and an income.

If there is not enough housing, let the government force those with big houses take in those less fortunate for free and provide for their needs. Return California, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona to the Mexicans! The gringos stole the lands originally.

Your children deserve to pay for your sins of greed. The hell with your children, send money to me, and especially those fighting the CCRWQCB. There is not pollution here! It is a figment of THEIR imagination. Ann Calhoun knows of what she writes! Sikes, Cessna, and Senet will save you!

Joey Racano

Churadogs said...

Sewertoons sez:"Ann said:
"Ironically, the new State Revolving Loans now require a Prop 218 before they’ll get out the door. So, what does that tell you about how the Tri W loan was set up in the first place?"

Maybe instead of that hypothesis, they changed the rules because of what happened in Los Osos????

A loan was accepted for a specific project, the new board chose not to accept the conditions of the loan (by approximately 20 votes, one third of the community NOT VOTING, property owners NOT allowed to participate), and claimed the loan illegal, all the while asking for the money from the loan? Think that schizoid behavior might have played into the State's decision??"

If memory serves, this loan was unusual because it had no dedicated revenue stream. That was all to be in the future, when the plant was built and the "service fees" were levied. Whay that got really problematic, is that the Biggest chunk of the repayment of the loan was in those service fees, not in the original design assessment. If memory serves, the loan (i.e. SWB) was being sued becasue it was a loan that was not secured by a Prop 218 vote (the LOTA lawsuit.) The questions remain: Why did the SWB set up the loan that way when it was so unusual. Since federal funds were involved, did/do the Feds require such loans of their money be secured? When the CSD went to Sac. to ask for $40 million MORE, needed because of the huge increase in bid costs, etc, why didn't the SWB then realize they were getting into weird waters, and say, Fine, but you'll have to secure the $40 mil more via a Prop 218 vote? Those questions really should be answered.

Sewertoons also sez:"Funny. Had Tri-W continued, the old board would have met the time schedule for a completed project no matter how difficult that would have been. Then there would be no CDO's - no 2010 looming to punish us…"

The point I was trying to make, a point that Bruce certainly made, is this: The "unreasonableness" of the TSO helped, in my opinion, to run this train off the track. For example, without Briggs point that gun to the CSD's head constantly, what wuld have happened if the request by the Coastal Commission that the CSD present a real, honest side-by-side comparison of In-town/ out-of town and then those two plans were presented to the propertyowners for a Prop 218 vote and then everyone proceeded ahead with the project the homeowners picked, would this trainwreck have happened? I don't think so. What kept the CSD from doing just what the Coastal Commission asked: Near as I can tell, two things: The hidden agenda of the old board to get TriW, no matter what (bait & switchy, the phony SOC, Ron Crawford's mantra of the missing "overwhelming community values" of wanting a tot lot next to a sewer plant, etc. AND Roger Briggs' TSO gun to the head. No delays or we'll shoot you AND your little dog.

If the last poster pretending to be Joey Rocano is indicatative of some of the people who log on to chat on this blog, then God help us all. Dishonest, Sophomoric and ironically, ultimately counterproductive. A previous poster hollers Same!Shame! at me of "allowing" such nincompoops to post, but this particular blog is set up by Greg of Newsmission to either accept postings or not. I"ve emailed him to see if some way can be set up to fileter out the idiots, but am still waiting his response. In the meantime, caveat lector. Most of you folks posting stay within the bounds of civil discourse and I get the feeling you actually enjoy spending time e-chatting. I would hate to slam the door in your faces just to shut up a few fools. So, for now, I'd suggest you ignore and skip past the potty mouths and phony posters.

Also, a reminder to all posters. I write an OPINION column located on the OPINION page of the Bay News. This blog is called Calhoun's Cannons, and is my OPINION blog, which means I can write about Adirondack chairs (not rocking chairs, as noted above by someone apparently suffering from comprehension problems) or sewers or anything else I feel like blogging about. Posters are free to comment, or not. Their manners and credibility are their own. And their anonymooness too often allows their REAL character to come through. And it's often not a very pretty picture, is it?

Anonymous said...

Ann said: "Shouldn’t somebody have also filed the same lawsuit against Gordon Hensley, Richard LeGros and Stan Gufstafson, the recalled Board members who voted to pound millions of taxpayers dollars into the ground only weeks before the recall election even though they didn’t have to? Guess there’s “waste” and then there’s, uh, “waste?”"

The TW suit against the individual current board members is to recoup money settled on lawyers privately hired before any of these folks were on the board. The settlement was used to compensate Julie Biggs for writing a flawed initiative and for filing multiple failed lawsuits that never had a chance of succeeding. All of the legal work done by BWS prior to the recall (and any other firm representing CASE, CCLO, etc.) was supposed to be pro bono, but once the Foolish Five got into office, they discovered a deep pocket to pay off their privately hired friends. Even the courts and the grand jury had concerns about this payoff - enough to suspend any further payment to the lawyers. Of course, the new board circumvented that order by hiring said firms to represent them once they were in office - with even more disastrous results for the taxpayer's of Los Osos.

There was no lawsuit against the previous board because the expenditures they made resulted in a viable wwtf project that would have brought our community into compliance with the law.

BIG DIFFERENCE!

Joey Racano said...

Ann sez:

"If the last poster pretending to be Joey Rocano is indicatative of some of the people who log on to chat on this blog, then God help us all. Dishonest, Sophomoric and ironically, ultimately counterproductive."

Do I not reflect your views? I was just hoping to put things in proper perspective.

Mike Green said...

OK blogger kindergarden is open.
Number one, Ann is right, caveat emptor.
Dont believe anything you read from people unless you can corroborate it, Especialy Anons and name spoofers, (more on that later)
The registerd commentor or author of the blog has no control of the comment section except to allow or turn off all the comments.
Name Spoofing, the hijacking of the name of a commentor ( Its the big BLUE name at the beginning of the comment, for instance look at my name), can easily be revealed by clicking on that name. Try it. It reveals WHEN that person created their identity. This is easily compared to known comments and history. If somebody wanted to name spoof me they could easily create another mike green, but they could not create the information on my home blog page. (easily)he he.

Anonymous said...

sewertoons said "Gee anon 10:08, maybe I am a gay male. Making assumptions again I see."

Gordon Hensley, I know the whole time that you were sewertoons.

sewertoons(aka Gordon Hensley aka Dick Le Gross' "I HAVE FUCKING BALLS" buttboy bitch said:"I happen to live in the PZ - was I asked if I wanted the CSD to defend me? Got the financial fallout of their "legal action" though, didn't I?"

Funny, every single CDO recipient I know, supports the current CSD and their legal team's defense and support of them. I guess you must of missed the April 28th CDO hearing where the CSD and BWS and the CDO recipients that you fucked over with your campaign for CDO's ....I guess you missed it when they all kicked the living shit out of the RWQCB so bad that they decided now they want to erase everything and start over. I, honest to God, can't wait to get the RWQCB in a REAL courtroom. In real courtrooms, when you get your ass kicked you're not allowed to startover. The CDO's are a complete joke. By the way, if it wasn't for you idiots starting the project before the election and your best buddy bitch PANDORA campaigning for FINES AGAINST THE CITIZENS OF LOS OSOS, we wouldn't be in the mess would we? Did anybody tell you that you lost the September 27th election? Did anybody tell you that on September 27 this Community voted against your fucked-up center of town sludge factory? Did anybody tell you that Santa Maria is no longer accepting sludge so your stinky fucked-up center of town mess is no longer viable? Did anybody tell you that if it weren't for YOU AND PANDORA AND ALL YOUR FUCKED-UP BUDDIES, WE WOULD ALL BE HOOKED UP TO AN OUT-OF-TOWN SEWER AND BE PAYING $50/MONTH?

Yes, I'm sure of it. There is a very special place in Hell reserved for all the members of Taxpayers Waste.

Have a nice day:)

Joey Racano said...

Mike, you are absolutely correct, but I decided to come out of the Anon closet. So did you think of this? Your concept has faults. Just look at F**king balls. All the Taxpayers Watch pricks are here.

I have come out to let these people know that I am important and that my opinion rules! After all, I want a statue erected to me! I deserve it because I have saved this community from sewer sludge and a really foul smelling plant in the middle of town. The LOCSD board members are heros! Ann is a hero!

I cannot understand why she has taken me to task NOW for all the opinions that I have publicly stated in the past. I do not care an iota what all you rich bastards pay in Los Osos. Environment rules!

Joey Racano said...

To anon, 7:50 PM:

You are totally correct. Anyone who disagrees with your facts is a fool. The CCRWQCB is composed of fools and their decisions will never pass the test of court. They are corrupt! You are smart, and your comments will go down in history as the absolute truth! Listen to Ann, she knows about the corruption, and has just been afraid to print it because of fearing suit for liable. Where the hell is the ACLU to defend her?

In the meantime, I need money, we need to eat. Save my dog!

Gordon Hensley said...

Ok, I admit it. I'm Sewertoons aka Gordon Hensley and, as I noted in my 10:10 post, I am a gay male. What I didn't mention is that, I like my men young, very young. I need to dispel the rumors that Richard "I HAVE FUCKING BALLS" Le Gross and I are having a sexual affaire although I do let him fuck me up the ass on occasion. p.s. his balls aren't very big at all, I really don't think he has any balls and his dick is soo small I can't even feel him in my gaping and cavernous stretched out and worn asshole. We do have meetings and Pandora does like to lick Richard's cum out of dirty stinky asshole. I use to also post as Shark Inlet and Sewertoons unitl they locked me up in the hospital. Remember when I posted this from my padded cell?..............


Ok, I'm going to take Mike Green’s advise and reveal to everyone my true identity. I am..........SHARK INLET!!!!!!!!!
Want me to let you in on another little secret? The last "anonymous" who commented in this post was actually me, sticking my head between my legs and kissing my own ass. Yes, it's me Shark Inlet a.k.a Spectator. Last night, a rabbit with a clock came hopping thru my house. The rabbit told me his friend with the big hat was having a tea party. The rabbit was in a hurry but invited me to join him and told me to follow this trail of "smart pills" that I have been telling you all about. I guess I was just suppose to follow them and not eat them. Oops. I was so ashamed that when I first told you about them I posted as "anonymous" and pretended I was someone else. Anyway, when I woke up this morning, I was in a straight jacket and a padded cell. Thank God they didn't get my laptop. I let the invisible cat stick it up my ass. And, yes, I'm sure it's obvious to everyone, they took away my "smart pills" when they checked me in here last night. The doctor asked me where I got them. I said, I got them from a talking rabbit with a clock that was in a big hurry. Then, the doctor told me the "pills" were rabbit shit.
I asked the doctor if I could have another one, but he wouldn't let me. I am feeling much better now. The realization and clarity of the truth was much too painful. I totally fucked over the community of Los Osos eight years ago when the County was all ready to build us a sewer. I told them "cheaper, "better", "faster". It wasn't too long after the painful guilt of this lie set in that, I started seeing talking rabbits and invisible cats.
Don't worry about me. I have a multiple personality disorder. Don't worry about my alter ego that is suffering from the withdrawal of me not taking the smart pills. The doctor took us off the smart pills but now we’re on lithium, prozac, pimozide, azt and my boyfriend Publicworks snuck me in some viagra because the toys here in the adolescent unit aren't very much fun to play with. Don't worry, we(me and the people living inside me) aren't suicidal yet. But, when I get out, I may hire someone to kill me. If you guys find out who called emergency last night to send the "white coats" will you thank them for me. While I'm in here it's going to be kind of hard to continue my campaign for a DIVIDED community via the dissolution movement. But, I'm sure all my pissed off, asshole friends will pick up the slack. They can't stand it that the community is starting to realize how badly we fucked over Los Osos. When the people start getting hit with the CDOs and do research they will find out that eight years ago the County was ready to build a sewer in Los Osos and I said NOOOOO!!! I can do it "cheaper", "better", "faster".......and after eight years all I had to present to the community was a sludge factory next to the library and across the street from the church for $205 a month????? Fuck, I'm so screwed. Does anybody know a good "hit man"?

Anyway, now that the County has control of the project and they take a look at the sludge issue and the fact that the sludge trucks get about 3 miles to the gallon and that TRI-W will do nothing to clean our water but only add extra pollution and noise to our air. And that guess what? The sludge trucks have nowhere to dump their sludge. And guess what else? The ripley project will cost about half as much over time as TRI-W. Well, anyway, I tried as hard as I could to fuck over the Community of Los Osos. I guess the people who live here just won't let me do it.
I'd kill myself now but I probably go straight to Hell. Oh well, sucks to be me:(

Mike Green said...

Dear Anon "gordon hensley"

That was funny!!!!!!


Thanks.

Panama sounds better and better

Sewertoons said...

Fake GH,
Sucks to read your drivel, too. Click.

Anonymous said...

What a pathetic bunch of junior high dorks these guys are.

Hell, the discussions are better over on the Tribune website.

Ann, you need to set down some rules, or the above crappola is all you are ever going to get.

I'm outta here!

Anonymous said...

Going to Panama?

Mike Green said...

Ann,
Why?
What failure can we identify?
Was it the system, or the egos
that brought us all usunder?

Or are we not defeated yet?

Anonymous said...

Gordon Hensley said..."I like my men young, very young."

Now that's funny!!!

Joey Racano said...

Love this site! Gordon and F**king balls have finally come out! I feel redeemed! Everthing I have said and written about them through the years has shown to be true.

Joey Racano

Ron said...

Ann... not to turn you into the "Content Police," or anything, but...

I did a little checking on my blog, and it turns out that you can delete an individual comment, if you want.

All you have to do is log on with your username and password, and the blog will know that it's you, and allow you an option to delete a comment.

Once you're logged in you should see a little trash can icon at the bottom of each comment. Just click on it, and it will ask you if you want to delete the comment. Click on the "remove forever" box and the "delete comment" button... and viola... the comment is gonzo. I just tested it on my blog with one of Shark Inlet's old, inane posts, and it worked great.

Note: It didn't work on my Internet Explorer browser, but it did on my Opera browser.

Just an option...

Shark Inlet said...

Hey Ron ...

Thanks for deleting my comment!

Can you put it back now or at least let us know the location and the essence of what was in the comment. I noticed that a while back when you turned the comments section off on your blog, all of what had been written there as comments earlier had disappeared. It would be nice if you would put all that back as well.

Yes, you have the right to delete those comments and you have the technological ability to do so ... but I would imagine that a journalist should feel more than a bit uncomfortable deleting information that had been in the public marketplace of ideas.

After all, that would be rewriting history to suit your own motives rather than letting the reader see all points of view before making up her mind.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

If you are going to take Ron's suggestion and delete crude remarks, I would like to make the suggestion that you cut-n-paste the non-crude portion of those remarks into a new comment first. That way you could leave the portions of the comment which make points and you cannot be accused of trying to silence your critics. Ron might not care but I imagine that you would not want people's thoughts entirely deleted.

Of course, it would just be plain easier if those with foul language on both sides would simply make their points without using words and phrases that any self-respecting 18 year old knows are "off limits" for public discourse.

Mike Green said...

Ann, I suggest you do nothing.

Churadogs said...

Shark Inlet sez:'
If you are going to take Ron's suggestion and delete crude remarks, I would like to make the suggestion that you cut-n-paste the non-crude portion of those remarks into a new comment first. That way you could leave the portions of the comment which make points and you cannot be accused of trying to silence your critics. Ron might not care but I imagine that you would not want people's thoughts entirely deleted.

Of course, it would just be plain easier if those with foul language on both sides would simply make their points without using words and phrases that any self-respecting 18 year old knows are "off limits" for public discourse."

I just heard from Greg, who set up this entire Newsmission Blogsite and he's installed the nifty little icon Ron was talking about, the Trashcan Icon. I will consider your point and Mike Green's which follows (i.e. Do nothing, let people rant and swear) and will be posting my decision as soon as I get time. I do NOT want to "censor" ideas, since that's the whole point of this Newsmission blogsite. On the other hand, Potty Mouth Flamers are trying to be a deliberate distraction to any sort of discourse. Your suggestion to "edit" out swearwords, etc. would be a world-class time sucker, especially since the author is able to do that BEFORE posting, so I'm reluctant to spend time cleaning up people's act when they're capable of doing so themselves, So, I'll mull it all over and let you all know.

Shark Inlet said...

Don't get me wrong ... I don't think you should spend much time trying to "clean up" stuff. In fact, when folks post foul language comments it makes a very strong impression.

I was just suggesting that if you wanted to take measures to "clean up" various comments you should be sure to only remove the nasty bits and not the main content (if any). The main reason is that no one would be censored any more than necessary.

Mike Green said...

Who decides whats necessary?
Sorry, when it comes to freedom of speech, as long as its not shouting FIRE in movie theater, I don't even trust Ann.
It's unamerican.

Anonymous said...

and doing nothing..... Very american;)

Shark Inlet said...

Mike,

Are you saying that someone who trust Ann is unamerican?

Sounds a bit harsh to me.