Pages

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

IT’S A MYSTERY! AND A MIRACLE!

When last we heard from our own Los Osos Taxpayers Watch, they were before the LAFCO board asking that the costs they incurred with their dissolution efforts should be waived on account THEY WUZ BROKE! -- Poor, tapped out, no dinero, zip coin of the relm, impoverished, down & out, Boo-hoo – and requested that the costs associated with their dissolution efforts instead be stuck to the county taxpayers.

Next thing I know, here comes some costly flyers supporting their slate of candidates for the CSD.

What gives? A miracle of the Loaves & Fishes variety? Did a rich uncle die and leave them enough money to pay their LAFCO bill AND send out flyers? What?

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yes Ann, the same thought occurred to me. The response will be (predictably) that the group sending out the flyers is not Taxpayer's Watch! It's morphed into something under another name, I imagine. Marie Kelly acted highly pissed at being associated with Taxpayer's Watch - Ha! Same folks, new name.

Churadogs said...

For sure, there's all kinds of "shell" groups to act as cover, but the big red flyer I'm looking at has as a return address "Taxpayers Watch." The other White "slate" one lists "Citizens for Sensible Goverment, Concerned Senior Citiznes, and the Los Osos/Baywood Park Homeowners Association, Carol Moore Treasurer, but no return address or contact number. Hmmmm, interesting.

The fun thing about all this is these flyers and all kinds of stuff can be illegally sent out at the last minute and it does no good to complain about nefarious hit-pieces & etc.because by the time the complaints get heard, it's all over and the sleazy guys can just say, Oooo, my bad. And the Election Watchdogs (the Fair Political Practices bunch) are toothless and pointless.

Even more critical, the final quarter of campaign spending usually doesn't come out until after the election so you can dump all kinds of "secret" last minute money in at the last minute and the voter won't know until after the election and so it's too late.

Shark Inlet said...

Most definitely funny and ironic.

On the other hand, I don't think that anyone who supports the current board should complain about being stuck with a bill they didn't ask for.

Anonymous said...

We all knew this was coming from Ann. Yep Ann, it's kinda like saying you were bankrupt the minute you walked in the door by the other board, but still can find money to pay for all your lawyers, an incompetent general manager, and a Ripley plan. Did a rich uncle die here? Nope, not unless you consider the 5,000 property owners rich uncles.

Anonymous said...

Hello,
Comment on recent mailers - I am humbled by the outpouring of support. These "new" mailers are coming from people that I have not met and the people behind them are only trusting that Joe and Lynette and I will do our best in regards to "damage control". When all is said and done, I look forward to having an opportunity to know who they are and thank them. What it shows me is that there are many in our community who have made a decision in who to support and are organizing rapidly. Their work is appreciated because I don't have the money and time is rapidly running out. In regards to FPPC filings, I have and they are intact. If any of us receives a donation over a certain amount over the next several days we have to report within 24 hours. Go to the county and ask to check our form 460's that were filed on the 5th and 25th of October.
And Ann, you would enjoy the fact that it looks like Steve Senet doesn't have a committee and last time I checked, Chuck hadn't filed any paper work but it sure does appear that "the committee to re-elect Chuck and Steve" has spent a tidy sum with mailers and ads. This is not time for tit-for-tat, it is time to look towards our futures, all of ours. It is irrelevant to me if the FPPC's teeth let them know that they missed the deadline, even though I know that they did, it isn't imperative to the business at hand.
Like I have stated many times, the margin of error in our house is slim to none. Regardless of how much any group spends on the behalf of candidates, it doesn't change the fact that my interests lie in supporting the community, of which I am a member.
Smoke and mirrors can't hide the facts and please, the community is just asking for the facts, we are finished with innuendo.
All I am asking is for people to vote because we all lose when voices aren't heard.
Needs of the community first!
Thanks,
Maria M. Kelly

Anonymous said...

It seems that Chuck and Steve are consistant anyway. They don't follow CSD rules regarding money on the board - and they don't do it with their campaigns either. Yeah, let's re-elect these guys - NOT!!!

Wiser Now said...

If Maria and Lynette had actual experience making peace, or cleaning up messes I'd feel alot better. They don't. In fact those out-pouring moneies are from the one's that laid the mines and blew up the district. Lynette and Maria either don't get that or they don't care. Either way...they are a bad bet.
Now the field has been cleared by the guys, (fought dissolution, supported AB2701 & delivered alternative project). Now "Joyces-Choices" want to dance in and resurect a old project. And that is exactly what these novices will do -just by being themselves. Inexperienced with the community stakeholders & not making any peace so far, They have no clue about CSD rights or responsibilities with the water board (which the lod CSD violated), State authority limits, alternative financiing for a project, or how to work with the County to deliver anything but TRI W."take back Pandora's town" They sit in Albright's dark shadow, fed the half-truths from her TW web site, and have no grasp of the current sitiuation on claims, fines, or finance.
How about just living in Los Osos a second year Girls? How about putting in some time serving on a CSD committee? How about getting with the LOTTF or CCLO to learn the "other" facts?
I urge voters to say NO to untried and inexeprienced leadership, no matter their "good intentions" they mouth the old agenda for Legros (who has his own history with fraud and bankruptcy!) and Hensley (mister "destroy the CSD with lawsuits or dissolve them all")
Now these neophytes are funded by new "shell associations"...under the fundraising by T.W.Better look closer...
Albright is encouraging individuals to file more lawsuits on an already failed case in small claims court-which unsuspecting citizens will find out the hard way-- is abuse of the media and courts, and LO taxpayers foot the bill-again. Stop the war!
I thought Maria and Lynette stood for settling lawsuits? How? With even more bogus lawsuits for the CSD to defend? Oh yes, they will file new lawsuits against the current consultants if elected...that is skilled peacemaking!

If Maria and Lynette have any intregrity at all...they should run, not walk away from the groups using them to force their old worn agenda. And be sure to file their "outpouring of contributions" with the FPPC in the meantime.Its ALL reportable!

Anonymous said...

And I say "NO" to allowing those that created the bankruptcy to continue to sit on a board overseeing the bankruptcy. I mean, really, our vote in essence is a reward. A vote for Senet and Cessina means we reward them for bankrupting the community; losing the SRF loan; bringing fines and CDO's to the community; and alienating every governmental agency this CSD has come in contact with. This all after campaigning last year on "We won't lose the loan; we won't get fined; the water boards don't have the hairs to issue CDO's, and we have a plan we're ready to go; $100.00 per month" And the lies continue with "we're almost there; $154.00 per month...."

I instinctively know the majority of Los Osos voters will not fall for that crap again. I certainly hope not.

And Anon 11:13, as obviously a supporter of the current CSD, using the word "integrity" is dicey indeed.

Anonymous said...

I don't support these newbie ladies and indeed feel sorry for them. They are about to get shredded to bits if elected, IMHO. Does anyone know how long they have lived here? Does anyone think they truly grasp what has gone down in Los Osos? That this community has been working for YEARS to get the facility out of town? I guess they think they can come in and save us from ourselves - fat chance!

Shark Inlet said...

To our most recent anonymous friend ...

You make the argument that continuing with crappy leadership is better than getting new leaders who happen to be less experienced than the current ones.

If you really felt that way I presume that you voted against the recall.


Aside from your argument about experience ... could you please explain why we should consider voting for Steve and Chuck ... even though it was their leadership that bankrupted the district. Even if you think that the previous board left them with a financial mess, they should have gone to the property owners asking for more money to pursue an out of town plan before they went and spent money they didn't have to develop that plan. The plain fact is that this board made some very unwise choices ... perhaps because of inexperience. The Solutions Group board did the same thing and we are suffering because of the hubris of both groups. If (as you suggest), Maria and Lynette are just mouthpieces for LeGros, it would be a good reason to vote for them ... it would bring balance to the board. Maybe we could get some compromise between the two camps in town.

Anonymous said...

"They have no clue about CSD rights or responsibilities with the water board (which the lod CSD violated), State authority limits, alternative financiing for a project, or how to work with the County to deliver anything but TRI W"

What does any of this have to do with the CSD after January 1, 2007? You know, you tipped your hand with "to deliver anything but Tri-W." As a property owner, what the county will give me is a 218 vote, and an advisory vote whereby I can voice my opinion on the best and most affordable project---and that, my friend, just might be Tri-W. Might not. I have no idea. But hopefully the county will shield us from you no-sewer (ooops, move the sewer) obstructionist/fanatics and give us a fair assessment of ALL options, something you seem to admit your boys (Senet and Csssina) won't do.

Anonymous said...

Wiser Now apparently didn't attend the Finance Committee meeting on Monday - you can pick up the info at the CSD office however.

On the front page of the summary it clearly states that bond counsel has advised that the proper use of the Pre-Assessment funds is to pay legal, consulting and tax expenses. I wonder what percentage of that money will go to tax expenses? And which percentage to Burke, Williams and Sorensen? Perhaps this sort of information has spurred TW to advise those who prepaid their bond assessment to file their claim with the bankruptcy court. The judge merely ruled that the prior court case was premature - looks like now's the time to try again before BWS cleans out the pot.

You might also note from that same document that in Account 100, Admin, one quarter of the way through the fiscal year, there is only 36% of the money left to pay for legal fees. But don't panic. Under Account 600, the Waste Water Project, there is still $490,298.83 left for legal services. And I thought the Waste Water Project was going to the County in January - that's what Chuck said. Interesting budget allocations, that's for sure.

Did Wiser go to the County to see what the "girls" had spent? And where the money came from? Not a penny from TW or contractors, look for yourself, it is public information. Wiser will NOT see what Chuck and Steve spent. There is no information there. They didn't follow the rules, they didn't bother to file.

Wiser, you sound panicked! With your style of writing, grammar and spelling errors, you are most probably Gail McPherson. So everything that you have written here is a strong endorsement to VOTE FOR Maria and Lynette.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"I don't support these newbie ladies and indeed feel sorry for them. They are about to get shredded to bits if elected, IMHO. Does anyone know how long they have lived here? Does anyone think they truly grasp what has gone down in Los Osos? That this community has been working for YEARS to get the facility out of town? I guess they think they can come in and save us from ourselves - fat chance!"

If you watched the forums, they are supporting the County to get a WWTF built. The VOTERS will decide which of the plans presented by the County that they want, NOT the CSD board. The platform they are running on is to manage the bankruptcy. That is the main task ahead.

The ladies are at Farmer's Market every Monday, why don't you stop by and ask them your questions if you wish to be an informed voter. Don't rely on second-hand advice and guessing to determine your vote.

Anonymous said...

GOOD GRIEF!!!!!
The spell checker, sentence structure Police are back!!!! Run for your Thesaurus and your Grammar 101 text book. We can't have all this bad spelling and poor sentence struture on Anns' Blog. What are we......a buch of illeterates or what?
SHARK, You just can't seem to grasp the fact that the bankruptcy thing started with the old BOD, can you? I wonder what it will take to prove to you that the present BOD, although in office when it came up, but they are not totally responsible. True, they may have made some bad decisions (due to bad advise) but they did not bring on the bankrupcy all by themselves. I almost wish the old majority hadn't been booted, then you would see the REAL cause. All you can repeat, over and over, is that TR-W was approved, permitted, etc. It doesn't make it the RIGHT choice. Why do you think that it was the ONLY answer?

Anonymous said...

Anon 2:58:
I'm curious about something, and was wondering if you could set me straight. If Tri-W is the wrong choice, and I'm surely not saying it isn't, but if it is wrong, why has this CSD and their supporters gone absolutely lunatic (which IMHO is nothing new for these people) concerning the sale of the property. I would assume, if the site and project was as bad as this CSD, and their supporters constantly say it is, the county would quickly abandon the notion of putting the project there. I have been a bit suspicious of the fervor of the anti-Tri W stalwarts in their desire to have that property sold, thus taking that option off the table for the people of Los Osos. So what gives?

Anonymous said...

How long have you lived here? The voters, one year ago, voiced their opinion that they didn't want a sewer next to the library and the community center that cost $200+ per month. They had been begging the old board to reconsider the choice they had made but to no avail. What is it about that that you don't understand? Of course we want it "off the table" we have for years! We want an energy efficient facility SOMEWHERE ELSE. I will not have any further input on this blog.

Anonymous said...

The County will abandon the notion of putting it there. It's a horrible place for a sewer!

Anonymous said...

Well, what is it about this that you don't understand? Many, many , many of those people who voted for the recall did so not so much for the location as they did the cost. And they believed certain "promises" of the recall proponents that turned out to be, uh, untrue, or just plain lies. Now, knowing what they know now, especially about the COST (as it appears quite certain the cost will be quite higher than $200.00 per month), you think they would do the same thing? My guess is no.
And to Anon 3:52, I'n not so sure the county will abandon the notion, or at least not add it to the list of options we property owners are given. But if it comes up too expensive, it's a gonner for me. I'm not married to any sight or system, nor opposed to any, as long as the cost is best.

Anonymous said...

Right on Anon 4:08. Personally I feel most of the property owners in the PZ would agree. But will they vote? This is the big question right now.

Anonymous said...

Good question Anon 4:16. I haven't a clue. If you're a property owner in the PZ and have paid even a passing interest in how this board has pissed away money this year by their horrendous decisions and actions how could you NOT vote to change the direction of the board? But who knows. Tough dynamics here, or "paradign" as John Seitz would say. And then there's the renters. And then, as Ann is wont to point out, there's those "asleep at the switch." But I'll tell you what. If Cessina and Senet are voted back in, I will personally apologize to Ann for all the times I took umbrage at her "asleep at the switch" comments. Yes I will.

Shark Inlet said...

To our 2:58pm friend ... I do understand that the bankruptcy is the result of both boards and their decisions.

My question ... do you realize that the bankruptcy is primarily the result of the actions of the new board? After all, had the recall not occurred or the new board continued with TriW, no bankruptcy would have happened.

The key here is that this board was the group in charge. If they got bad advice, it is their fault. The buck stops with the board. Had Blesky and McClendon and Biggs, their employees, given them better advice they may have made better choices. On the other hand, I wonder whether the professional help was hired more to give advice the board wanted to hear than to give advice they needed to hear. Again, the buck stops with the board.

Your suggestion that I think TriW to be the only answer essentially shows that you've not read very many of my comments here or that you've not read those comments very carefully. For some time now (over a year) I've essentially said that moving the project is just fine, but that it should only be done if it won't cost too much to do. If you can explain how out of town will actually save money or why out of town will be less expensive, I would be the first on the bandwagon. The fact that no one has been able to explain how any possible savings will overcome the inflation caused by additional delay would seem to show pretty clearly that while TriW might not be the best plan (in some universe where money doesn't matter), it is the best plan for our community chock-full-o-middle-class-families.

So then ... how again will somewhere other than TriW save us money? Be sure to include inflation and delay and design costs in your numbers ... otherwise you will be comparing apples to zebras.

Anonymous said...

SHARK,

I cannot supply the numbers you are looking for.....and either can you or Richard. No one will know that number untill the county gives it to (literlly), just like no one know the finacial situation until the audit. No one knows who's to blame for what, until the lawsuits are settled. No one knows the ammount of the fines until they are imposed. No one knows if the CDOs can be enforced.Everyone is throwing around these numbers and estimates without any REAL facts....just opinion and guessing. Inshort, nobody knows nothing, so you should all relax and see what the NEW BOD comes up with....don't you think? TRI-W was/is a mistake for many reasons brought out here by many who REALLY understand why? I don't think you fully understand why. All you can say is it was "permitted and approved...etc" and was cheap. May I remind you that it would have been alot cheaper had you not been "spun" by Pandora & Co., plus we would be flushing into the Countys' CHEAPEST WWTF offered thus far. Yes, Shark, I have read just about every word you have written (many) and no matter what you say, you still come right back to TR-W. Why, no one knows that either.;-)

Churadogs said...

Anonymous sez:"And then, as Ann is wont to point out, there's those "asleep at the switch." But I'll tell you what. If Cessina and Senet are voted back in, I will personally apologize to Ann for all the times I took umbrage at her "asleep at the switch" comments. Yes I will"

There is no need to apologize, since all you have to do is look at the voting history: On the original write-in, pencil-paper homeowners Quasi assessment for "design" work, 40% of those ballots never were returned. I opined at the time that apparently 40% of homowners apparently found it too onerous to pick up a pencil, make a mark on a piece of paper, then stick a stamp on the provided envelope.

Then, during the hotly contested Recall/anti-recall election -- clearly one of the loudest in Los Osos History -- 40% of the registered voters didn't bother to vote.

See the asleep=at-the-switch pattern here? Yeow! And I'm not talking agree or disagree with the choice, I'm talking people who didn't even bother to show up at the dance in the first place.

Anonymous sez:'As a property owner, what the county will give me is a 218 vote, and an advisory vote whereby I can voice my opinion on the best and most affordable project---and that, my friend, just might be Tri-W. Might not. I have no idea. But hopefully the county will shield us from you no-sewer (ooops, move the sewer) obstructionist/fanatics and give us a fair assessment of ALL options, something you seem to admit your boys (Senet and Csssina) won't do."

HOW the discussion is framed out of the box will determine WHAT you will or will not get to see. There are many powerful "thumbs on the scale" now, with powerful vested interests at work to see a pre-determined outcome. Thinking the County would be immune to such pressures and blandishments is a mistake. IF you actually do want a FAIR assessment, then you and everyone else in this community need to make sure you've got CSD members absolutely committed to seeing that all the thumbs stay off the scale. And you, as homeowners and citizens, need to monitor those thumbs very carefully. Remember the SOC that Ron Crawford's been on about for years, that phony "strongly held community value?" He who writes the new SOC (and other such documents behind closed doors, in "advisory committees," over coffee, little tet-a-tets down at county, etc. ) will determine WHAT you will be offered.

That's why being asleep at the switch could cost this community dearly.

Anonymous said...

Anon 5:53:
Your poor spelling and grammar and insipid smiley face exposes you once again as the infamous franc/oldduffy/coalbus of the TT blogs. Since you have stated you do not live in Los Osos, please now take this opportunity to explain why you have such an interest in the sewer, and how you can continue to have the gall to tell property owners to "relax" as they potentially face grave economic duress.

Anonymous said...

I recently heard a rumor that "move the sewer" Vick, who supports Senet and Cesna, had been promissed a planing commission seat by Gibson for her support of his campaign. IF HE WINS! I would like a clear statement from Vick and Gibson on this.

Ann may be absolutely correct about back room deals. Sometimes "loose lips sink ships". I wonder what has been promissed to McPherson?

Shark Inlet said...

Darn right ... had we never formed a CSD our bills would likely be lower and we would have stopped the pollution of our groundwater already...

Even so your assertion that we just don't know the exact real costs of every possible option is a lame reason for pretending we don't have a very good idea that out of town will cost a buttload more than in town.

As I've said for over a year now, out of town is a good choice if it will be that much better. The questions really are "how, exactly, will it be a better plant?" and "how much more will it likely cost?".

You've made the assertion that it will be a whole lot better. Maybe you refer to the Ripley conceptual plan. I'm not convinced that the Ripley plan will actually work. The plant is undersized for our community and there isn't enuf AG land for the in-lieu recharge of our aquifer. The "$154/month" is not true ... it is considerably higher ... even if the RWQCB does allow only some denitrification. Furthermore, Richard showed that the inflation alone will result in the Ripley $154/month actually costing more than TriW ... even without considering fines and CDOs and the like.

So ... considering you're asking me to spend more ... it would be awfully polite to explain exactly the benefits and costs before you ask me to spend more. To refuse to provide even a sketch of those details is simply asking me to trust you.

Seems pretty clear to me that while TriW does have some drawbacks, it might not be worth the additional costs of moving. Sounds like you are convinced the cost of moving will be low enough (even though you have no idea of what that cost might be) that you are sure the move will be worth it. Sounds like you are richer than me.

Asleep at the switch? Yes our community was a year ago when those asleep either didn't vote in the recall election or didn't vote against the recall. The information was out there ... anyone paying attention 14 months ago knew that there was no way that the recall candidates could deliver on their $100/month promise and that it was likely going to cost even more.

That you are trying to tell us today that there is any doubt about costs increasing is beyond the pale. If you really believe that there is even a chance of the costs dropping, give us a reason for hope.

Ron said...

An Anon asked:

" ... if the site and project was as bad as this CSD, and their supporters constantly say it is, the county would quickly abandon the notion of putting the project there."

On 10/16/06 (10/16!), I sent county engineer, Paavo Ogren, the following question, among others. (I tried to interview him over the phone, but I was told to e-mail my questions, because that was the preferred way of communication for the public works department on this story... that was more than two weeks ago.):

- Is the county considering the Tri-W site as a location for the treatment facility? If so, why?

Other questions in my e-mail included:

- Is the county considering adding public amenities like an amphitheater and play field to its treatment facility for Los Osos?

and

- I read in a recent staff report that you were the interim G.M. at the LOCSD. Can you please give the dates of your tenure there... from when to when?

Ogren has yet to answer, despite several follow-up e-mails from me.

Ann said:

" I opined at the time that apparently 40% of homowners apparently found it too onerous to pick up a pencil, make a mark on a piece of paper, then stick a stamp on the provided envelope. "

Ann, you're funny.

Aren't blogs great?

Anonymous said...

Ron:
If Tri-W proved to be the most cost effective or one of the most cost effective options for Los Osos, why shouldn't it be considered as an option for the porperty owners of Los Osos? I ask this also of "community activists" Bo and Lacy Cooper, they of the "it's economic-cleasning- the cost is too high-so let's continue to elect candidates who will continue to obstruct-so the cost continues to rise even higher" vein.

Spectator said...

ANN sez:

" I opined at the time that apparently 40% of homowners apparently found it too onerous to pick up a pencil, make a mark on a piece of paper, then stick a stamp on the provided envelope. "

If this is true, 60% opined. In the last primary election only 38% of the registered voters voted. That means 62% chose not to vote.
Now there is a big question: How many LOCSD homeowners never got the poll through the mail? How many were received back by the LOCSD for undeliverable?

60% in this day and age seems pretty good. I wish that every registered voter in Los Osos will cast votes in this election. I hope they vote for Joe, Lynette, and Maria. They will be open and not protecting the malfeasance of current incumbents. We will get what we deserve, although I feel that the damage is NOT repairable. This will be a bankruptcy board, left without a lot of options.

Consider the consequences of your vote, and vote!

Anonymous said...

I hope they are left with zero options. How dare they try to dissolve our CSD! If our voters reward them for that kind of behavior then guess what - I GIVE UP.

Anonymous said...

I have a suggestion for you, Killer. Take the bucket down to TRIW and set up a commode right next to the library. That's what you want, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

Everyone must vote! Let your voice be heard! Our choice must be very clear this time.

Anonymous said...

Annon 8:00AM (shouldn't you be at work,or are you and using the companys' computer for private use????? Shame on you. Hope you don't work for Cal-Tran.)
OH M'GOD, I'VE BEEN ASSAILED BY THE SPELL CHECKER AND GRAMMAR POLICE!!!!HAVE MERCY ON ME.
But worse than that, I am accused of being some folks I never heard of? Should I be pleased, or what?
It's none of your friggin' business what interest I have in Los Osos. If you weren't such a woory wart cry baby you would understand why I say "relax". You are getting yourself (and others)all in a lather over stuff you have no control over, anyway, so why don't just stuff it? Wait and see is what you should be doing, and oh yes, get off your dead behind and vote this time. You might have a whole new bunch to pick on. Won't that be fun?
SHARK.....I'm not asking you to "spend more", nor am I asserting anything, other than for you to just WAIT AND SEE. You ask me for answers, so now I want to ask you something. What good has all your whining, hand wringing and cost estimates done so far?....other than making you and others upset. Just vote your choice or your gut or heart, which ever suits you. Maybe you will be right.

Anonymous said...

Ann,

Early in this blog you addressed the issue of smear campaigns at the last minute.
Have you forgotten the ugly smear campaign waged at the 11th hour by those opposing Gustafson, Hensley and LeGros waged by the (no sewer) Move the Sewer venom-spewers?

All of them were filled with hate, lies and innuendo. Talk about a Poison Pen!!

It was only a little over a year ago. Have you forgotten??

Anonymous said...

The CSD may dissolve all on its own due to the incompetance and negligence of the current board. They could have put the sewer out of town if they'd played their cards right and asked us for a 218 vote to fund that. Instead, they appear to be on the same side as the dissolvers, as without money, our CSD may well be cooked. Wish they'd thought of THAT before they went on their spending spree and burdened each one of us with a huge debt and no sewer to show for it.

Shark Inlet said...

Fair 'nuff. Waiting will give more information. The problem here is that in my studied opinion, waiting costs us money and that we've been waiting far too long and that anyone who proposes more waiting for more facts should darn well have a good argument that the additional waiting, whether for more facts or another project, will reduce our bills or raise our quality of life ... or both.

Spectator said...

Anonymous said...
The CSD may dissolve all on its own due to the incompetance and negligence of the current board. They could have put the sewer out of town if they'd played their cards right and asked us for a 218 vote to fund that. Instead, they appear to be on the same side as the dissolvers, as without money, our CSD may well be cooked. Wish they'd thought of THAT before they went on their spending spree and burdened each one of us with a huge debt and no sewer to show for it.

1:52 PM, November 02, 2006

Chapter 9 of the Federal Bankruptcy code is fraught with problems. There have been lots of recommendations as to how to correct the Federal code and the State code concerning Municipal Bankruptcy in light of the Orange county bankruptcy, but with my research, none of these recommendations has been codified into law. I simply have not been able to find anything, however something in law revision may exist. Without changes in law, the Orange county model may prevail, but this was based upon loss incurred by trading derivitives of securities ( puts and calls) by one person authorized to do so. This person had been sucessful, but the market turned on him, and large losses became reality. The person responsible received a $100,000 fine and house arrest for one year. The company handling the transactions, brokerage outfit, settled for better than $850,000.

There is much written on the Orange County bankruptcy, many opinions, and the results are a matter of case law, due to judicial decision. Precedent. There are many opinions on correction of the law. You can google this.

Los Osos bankruptcy is unprecedented. Nowhere is there any information where a state regulating board (CCRWQCB) has had the ability to fine a district into bankruptcy. There is no information that the legal defense (costs) by a Municipality or district, against a state regulating board, contributed to bankruptcy. Nowhere is there any information how the costs of Municipal legal defense against a contract dispute or a proposition has contributed to bankruptcy. There is no precedent where a legally elected board, attempting to change contracts previously signed by a previous board, has the right to do so without consequences and voter approval, especially when unknown. Published threatened results from a regulating board that lead to bankruptcy, regardless of effects, do not appear .

Blakeslee's bill is also unprecedented. The rights of the district were removed by an act of the state legislature, without the vote of the property owners in the district. The actions of LAFCO, to avoid liabilities to the county by dissolution, is also without precedent, without calling for a vote of the property owners in a district. All are subject to judicial review.

In my humble opinion, we are in a terrible mess, dealing with unclear law, subject to the judgement of a bankruptcy judge or other judges, who have no precedent that is truely applicable to our situation. With any judge's opinion, he will be making law, and subject to appeal. At the same time he may appoint a receiver to handle the accounts of the LOCSD, who will determine our direction, and how or tax money will be spent. One man or woman in control. I DO NOT LIKE THIS.

Whatever happens, I know that judges come from lawyers, and lawyers protect their own, making sure they are paid. Regardless of the outcome, the lawyers always get paid. The question is simply how much will it cost the property owners.

I care not where the sewer goes. I care not about the distribution system. I care about the costs and water. If it costs more or less, let the property owners decide about site and system. I will accept their decision with a vote. However, I learned a long time ago that it costs a tremendous amount of money to fight city hall. I will vote for my pocket and the families who rent from me.

However, I will not vote to be assessed to bail out the LOCSD from bankruptcy. This will be a legal morass that will go on for many years. Let the county, who created us, who permitted our septic systems, and allowed the high density of homes, assume liability, as they should. Let the state that imposed the water law upon existing homes, and demanded a sewer system, assume liability. All of us should pay our share. It is about the "greater good". It is NOT about "individual benefit" as some wishing to avoid liability would have us believe. We are subjected to very bad law, with total disregard of property ownership.

Well, if you would believe that the state should regulate all property without payment for the costs of regulation for the individual, with total disrepct of property ownership, we have a classic case here in Los Osos. Vote for Gibson who holds this view. I would NOT! Vote for Prop 90, it WILL have consequences on our situation. Otherwise support Anderson who supports 90.

I am a person for the people of Los Osos, especially those who have not considered consequences, and are the least able to pay.
I am also considering my own pocket. We are in a terrible situation, and we will see where this leads us. But this is a political situation besides a legal situation, and I know that money is the milk of politics. We pays our money and takes our choice.

I always ramble. My name is here, I am who I am, just like Ann, Sharky, and others, I express my opinion. I do not hide behind an anon with no guts and possibily no self esteem of the value of their opinion. I sign my name. I hope you would respect my opinion and advice. I would also hope that people who opine would identify themselves. We all support the constitution, and I would be the first to take a gun off the wall to support your right to opinion and free speech, or anyone who would take that right away. I am who I am. Write on!

Jon Arcuni

Spectator said...

Ann:
I guess it simply comes to"people who do not have enough money to pay their LAFCO bill and then send out fliers".

Flyers are cheap, LAFCO bill is expensive. Will LAFCO have the guts to sue a citizens group and have a countersuit considered on the legality of their decision? I have no idea, but the LAFCO decision is unprecedented.

Regardless, the stuff in the mail is a democratic expression of free speach, and they may have gone into debt to put it in the mail. An association of property owners, supporting free speech, and property rights, going into debt!

How about that? Bankruptcy! The LOCSD is still spending lots of borrowed money. How about that? And what is your opinion on free speech, especially if it is against your spin and striped socks? Shame on you!

Nitpicking? Miracle? Thanks for bringing this up!

You definitely stimulate thought. Keep it up!

Why do you hate the property owners of Los Osos? Hey, we pay the bills and those who express concern for our welfare are entitled to every consideration.

Right, wrong, or in the middle, the property owners will pay the bill.

So they should not have sent the stuff in the mail to protect their interests.

Your attitude, in supporting the current LOCSD BOARD has put every one of the property owners of Los Osos into unknown costs of bankruptcy. I will say the same to you as the board: shame! We had a bird in the hand with known costs, now we have nothing but unknown expenses. Shame.

New socks are in order. Sold socks, showing reality!

If it were not for you, I would not be on your blog. Love your fuzzy socks thinking!!!!

Jon Arcuni

Churadogs said...

Inlet Sez:"Asleep at the switch? Yes our community was a year ago when those asleep either didn't vote in the recall election or didn't vote against the recall."

It goes back further than that. Considerthe Coastal Commision's asking for a side-by-side comparison of in-town, out of town, consider many in the community asking for an advisory vote on both choices, consider the key points at which this trainwreck could have been averted IF the community had been paying attention and demanded thubs off the scale, a real (not phonied up) SOC, a Prop 218, even an advisory vote, a real choice & etc. None of that happened because the community was asleep at the switch.

Jon sez:'I always ramble. My name is here, I am who I am, just like Ann, Sharky, and others, I express my opinion. I do not hide behind an anon with no guts and possibily no self esteem of the value of their opinion. I sign my name. I hope you would respect my opinion and advice. "

Amen and good on you!!! You are more than free to make fun of my socks. As a matter of fact, because you put your name to your opinions, you can fire away all you like at my socks.

spectator Jon sez:"I guess it simply comes to"people who do not have enough money to pay their LAFCO bill and then send out fliers"."

Actually, it's funnier than that: TPW has been self-righteously huffing on about how the CSD can't pay its bills, filed for bankruptcy, is wastefully spending, irresponsible spending etc. Huff! Huff! Huff! Then it turns around and wants to stick the county taxpayers with the LACFO bill because TPW is broke, THEN sends out campaign flyers? It's the phony self-righteous chuffing that I find hypocritically silly, not their "free speech" rights.

Hope everyone read CSD Schicker's Viewpoint in the Trib today. If I get a chance, I'll post it here. Bears careful reading, especially in view of the embarassing "Editorial" of 10/27 by the Trib, the editors who know better but deliberately decide to distort the facts. Typical Trib tactic.

Spectator said...

Not funny Ann. TPW is no more funny than the "doomed 45" starving for funds. People just don't put their money where their mouth is, and let others carry the burden.

Yes, I wish every one to read Schicker, and find out what self-rightous really sounds like as the old blame game with unfounded statements and no figures is displayed.

After all, Schicker told us we that there would be no consequences to moving the sewer. "The voters decided".

So what? What are we going to do now?

Jon Arcuni

Churadogs said...

Jon sez:"TPW is no more funny than the "doomed 45" starving for funds. People just don't put their money where their mouth is, and let others carry the burden."

And there you have it. Let others carry the burden. Name of the game.

Anonymous said...

Since every resident of the PZ faces the same “processing” by the water board, it might be more accurate to say the “doomed 4500 or so,” rather than simply the “doomed 45.”

PZLDF (the legal defense fund) is set up to provide funds to defend, not only the original 45, but every citizen who has to face water board prosecution for living in the PZ. Unfortunately, CDOs are the best-kept secret in Los Osos right now.

In the book, THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY, by Douglas Adams, there’s an invisible spaceship. The invisibility is powered by SEP. SEP stands for “somebody else’s problem.” This town holds some of the kindest hearts I have ever met. If our citizens know what is going on, if they know what to do, they come through. Please help yourselves.

Get informed about CDOs, what they entail and what are the intended and unintended consequences of a CDO. Go to the water board web site – www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/ - and click on the link to Los Osos Enforcement Actions. You will find out a lot about what you face and what has been done already. Read the evidence, briefs, responses to briefs, etc., submitted by defendants, along with the prosecution documents, orders, and responses of the water board prosecution staff and Chairman Young.

Get involved by finding out about CDOs and informing others about them. Few people seem interested in discussing them except as ammunition against the current CSD board, against the previous CSD board, or against the CDO recipients, themselves, who some think brought this all down on themselves and their neighbors by how they voted on the recall and on Measure B. Of course, no one knows how anyone voted, since no exit polls were taken, as far as I know, and citizens inside and outside the Zone voted.

Contribute to PZLDF by sending a donation to PZLDF P.O. Box 6095 Los Osos, CA 93412 or by taking your contribution to Coast National Bank for deposit directly into the PZLDF account there.

Anyone with questions about PZLDF can talk to an officer or board member. If you don’t know any of them, you can call Bill Moylan. Our number is in the book.

Thank you for helping yourselves. It helps everyone.

Bev. De Witt-Moylan