Pages

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Yes, It’s Another RWQCB’s Presentation of "Torquemada’s Mad Hatter Tea Party & Auto-de-fe Public Beheading & Traveling CDO Show, Part, Oh Heck, I Can’t Remember, There Have Been So Many Of Them. "

The following three texts were read into the record by Los Osos CDO recipient Beverly De Witt-Moylan at the January 22 continuation of the CDO hearings. Naturally, everything she had to say to the RWQCB was ignored utterly.

This is a long posting, but I urge you all to read it very carefully, both for the objections as well as for an understanding what 45 of your friends and neighbors have been put through for a whole year while many of you, Dear and Gentle Blog Readers, have either laughed or turned away in indifference.

The continued hearing had a few noteworthy events: (1) The Grand Inquisitor, Reed Sato, fought like a tiger to keep “evidence” OUT of the hearing record. He has fought hard since day one, which should prompt a question from everyone in this community: Just what is so fearful in those documents that they must at all costs be kept OUT? If they’re irrelevant, a “real” court of law will find them so. And if they
are relevant, a “real” court of law will need them in. Interesting, no? (2) Please consider the irony of a RWQCB so broke on these pointless Show Trials that they didn’t have any money to pay AGP Video to tape it so the public could watch. Instead, many of The Criminal Los Osos 45 and members of the general public actually interested in Public Access, had to take up a collection. In addition, AGP Video donated a good chunk of their time to make sure the hearings were taped and so would remain available to the public who cannot attend. And (3), while the RWQCB has spent a whole year prosecuting The Criminal Los Osos 45, (with another couple of months of hearings still needed to finish up on this batch), nitrate levels in Morro Bay’s drinking water (the town has been sewered for 50 years) spiked beyond what is to be found in the upper aquifer of Los Osos, yet the RWQCB has not issued a single CDO to the farmers in the Morro Bay watershed valleys, the implications of which should require some serious thought.

Bev’s comments:


Part I:

TESTIMONY
January 22, 2006

We who reside at [redacted] Street in Los Osos, California are not guilty of polluting the waters of the State of California. In fact, we have done everything within our power to protect the waters of the state, including pumping our septic tank within the last three years, paying a regular sewer assessment, and signing the settlement proposed by Sullivan & Associates, which indicates that we will hook up to a WWTF when one is available. We have submitted documentation in evidence to that effect. The prosecution has presented no credible testimony or evidence to the contrary.

I incorporate by reference every shred of futile prior evidence and testimony and all the objections presented thus far. I incorporate by reference all the heartache and all the tears shed in this room and throughout the whole year of this tragedy. I incorporate by reference all the confusion, all the consternation, all the sleepless nights, all the fear, all the desperation, all the grief, all the excruciating indignation, all the numb disbelief, all the humiliation, all the physical, mental, and emotional distress, and all the time lost, never to be retrieved, brought before this Board.

I incorporate by reference all the trembling hands, all the shaky voices, all the thumping hearts, all the tight throats, all the shallow breathing, all the constricted chests, all the high blood pressure, all the heart conditions, and all the recurring medical consequences of this proceeding thus far. I incorporate by reference all the health costs, all the health lost, never to be recovered.

I incorporate by reference the horrified paralysis, the persistent nausea, all the pain, and all the anguish in the bodies of each member of the 45 families randomly selected for the senseless, relentless, ruthless progression of this Board, as though by a kind of reptilian programming, to a single, inexorable goal. I incorporate by reference all the profound trauma, all the deep emotional wounds, all the hopelessness, and all the duress that have come before this Board in the course of these proceedings. I incorporate by reference all the damage wrought to families, to marriages, and to the children of the Los Osos 45 by the actions of this Board of unelected appointees and employees. I incorporate by reference all the lives changed forever.

I incorporate by reference all the logic, all the reason, all the wisdom, all the determination, all the courage, and all the trust in the authority of our constitutional rights that brave defendants have brought before this Board thus far. I incorporate by reference all the truth spoken to power in this room up to this point. I incorporate by reference all the simple, sensible solutions brought before this Board and rejected in the course of this proceeding. I incorporate by reference the supremacy of right over wrong, the power of integrity over intimidation, and the force of facts over fabrication, manipulation, and prevarication. I incorporate by reference all the common sense, all the ingenuity, all the compassion and all the dignity of ordinary, hard-working people in the face of a cynical, hypocritical regulatory body bent on using with impunity its authority to harass, stalk, and break unsuspecting, law-abiding citizens to bend their political will.

I incorporate the suggestion by prosecution staff that we need to “rally the citizens” to save our homes. I incorporate by reference the self-serving lecture by Chairman Young on December 15, as though chastising some corporation’s board of directors for failing to develop a unifying vision statement, linking our voting record to our predicament. I incorporate by reference Chairman Young’s inability to explain when this Board has ever taken responsibility for its actions. I incorporate by reference this Board’s impotent hand wringing, bemoaning the conflict between hearts and heads in deciding the identical, predetermined outcomes of each case, when they themselves had set the scope of this prosecution and the range of our defense.

If this Cease and Desist Order is merely a tactic to wake up a town, it is a failure. We meet Prohibition Zone residents every week who do not know what a CDO is. A government regulatory body that singles out a tiny group of citizens in an irresponsible, ineffectual, disgraceful experiment simply to put a town on notice has exceeded the bounds of common decency and humanity.

We reject the notion that the RWQCB is legally constrained by the narrow, self-imposed boundaries of this proceeding from doing the right thing. Perhaps you believe that you are right, but you have an obligation to do right. This prosecution team had a duty to Los Osos. This Board had a duty to Los Osos. The costs have been enormous for 45 families. The future costs to Los Osos are incalculable.

The prosecution team and the Chairman defend the notion that property is not at stake in this action brought against us. Yet not a single approved method of compliance, short of vacating the premises, is available to us. Our property is at stake in this CDO enforcement action.

Already targeted by this prosecution are at least four special educators. I am familiar with six others who also live in the Prohibition Zone. We alone are ten highly qualified individuals with specialized degrees and training who live in homes with septic systems fully permitted by San Luis Obispo County.

How many other educators and support personnel, who work with children inside and outside Los Osos have been affected already by the CDO enforcement and how many more await CDOs? If the RWQCB decrees in 2011 that Los Osos has failed to make “reasonable progress” toward a WWTF, and we all must cease discharging, how many will be forced to “vacate the premises?” Where will we go when we “vacate the premises?” Who will replace us? I don’t know, but the RWQCB should know.

How many children, able-bodied and disabled, live in the Prohibition Zone in homes with septic systems fully permitted by San Luis Obispo County. I do not know, but the RWQCB must know how many children will be forced to vacate the premises in 2011 if it decides that we are not making “reasonable progress” toward the installation of a WWTF. Where will they go? Who will shelter and protect them? Who will take their places?

I don’t know how many health care practitioners, health care support personnel, and caregivers live in the Prohibition Zone in homes with septic systems fully permitted by San Luis Obispo County, but the RWQCB should know. What will happen to health care in this county if in 2011 the RWQCB decides that Los Osos has failed to make “reasonable progress” toward a WWTF, and these health care workers, who work in all parts of the county, must vacate the premises? Where will they go? Who will replace them?

How many fragile elderly and disabled people live in the Prohibition Zone? When they must vacate the premises, where will they go?

How many thousands of workers, business owners, professionals, retirees, working students, and people from all walks of life who contribute to the infrastructure of this entire county who live in homes in the Prohibition Zone with septic tanks fully permitted by San Luis Obispo County must walk away in 2011 if the RWQCB determines that Los Osos has failed to make “reasonable progress” toward a WWTF? I don’t know how many, but the RWQCB should know. Where will they go? Who will replace all these citizens who help weave the fabric of community in San Luis Obispo County?

If you cannot answer these questions about the outcome of your 2011 deadline, you have no authority to destroy an entire community.
Senator Susan Collins of Maine said, “The first obligation of government is to protect our people.” When raw sewage flowed through the streets of New Orleans, the result of gross government ineptitude, neglect, abuse, and failure to act following Hurricane Katrina, Senator Collins did not place the responsibility on the citizens for that health and safety disaster. She held the government accountable.

Citizens across this country demonstrated on November 7, 2006, that they no longer support public officials who, with cynical impunity use blame, cover-ups, obfuscation, baseless detention and prosecution of innocent citizens, and protestations of moral authority to mask a broad range of incompetence, malfeasance, and failures.

We have been “on call” to the Water Board for eight days short of a year. Throughout this time, whenever a conflict with the Board’s tentatively scheduled business has arisen, we have had to modify our plans. We have been forced to justify our personal business and professional responsibilities like convicted felons on parole. This interference with the lives of law-abiding private citizens over this span of time is abusive and unconscionable.

Sitting here today are the very individuals we trusted to maintain the waters of the state for our protection. They accuse us of not fulfilling our obligation to keep the waters of the state clean. These same individuals argue today that simply by living in the Prohibition Zone, we along with thousands of others have recklessly, knowingly, and willfully polluted the Basin for years.

We expect you, as public servants, to maintain a clean water supply to ensure that we may live confidently, safely, and comfortably in our community. We expect you to have the expertise, experience and judgment to work with local governments, to make wise and prudent use of public funds, and to do what is necessary to protect those you serve. We expect you to do it well enough that we don’t have to think about it. That is what infrastructure means, that we entrust public servants with managing the network that supports our community, so that we may go about the business of our lives.

Board members have demonstrated repeatedly that they have the power to vote only YES, to support the prosecution team. You DO, however, have the power to stop being helpless pawns of this prosecution team. You have the power to require that this prosecution team make wise and prudent use of public funds. You have the power to throw this case out. You have the power to require the prosecution team to follow this agency’s own regulations for levels of enforcement and environmental justice. You have the power to broaden the parameters of this case to include a re-examination of the Basin Plan. You have the power to make certain that the actions you have brought and plan to bring today will, to the best of your ability, promote the highest level of benefit for the waters of the state while protecting the welfare of all the people of the state.

Does any one of you dare to admit that when your heart is in conflict with your head something is fundamentally wrong? Examine the parameters you yourselves have set for this case. Ask yourselves if the core of this case is to “protect our people.” Ask yourselves if Roger Briggs, whose absence is the most imposing presence in this room, brought you this case because he wanted to protect the people or because he wanted to punish the people. Ask yourselves if this case is truly about improving lives by improving water quality, or if it is simply about winning, no matter the human expense.

You have power to affect profoundly the lives of thousands of families in the Prohibition Zone of Los Osos. With that power comes grave responsibility. As public servants you have the power, the duty, to abandon this adversarial posture and to cultivate a cooperative relationship with the citizens of Los Osos, dedicated to resolution instead of retribution. You have the power to abandon your allegiance to making a point at all costs. You have the power to make a difference. You have the obligation to protect the people.


“The first obligation of government is to protect our people.”
-Senator Susan Collins of Maine




I reserve further comments for my rebuttal and closing arguments.



Part II: [Note, the January 22 hearing was not a full Board hearing, as was offered to the previous defendants, but merely a panel, sub-hearing, whose recommendations would then have to be brought back to the full board at some unknown time. The missing board members would have to review the written transcript or the video (ironically supplied via donations by AGP and the people of Los Osos) but would not be able to ask questions, yet another unfair disadvantage to those two people being “tried” on the 22nd. Unless, of course, one is cynical enough to think that the Board’s vote on these CDOs is and was all predetermined from day one?]


January 22, 2007


PROCEDURAL OBJECTIONS

I OBJECT that a sub-hearing abridges our right to equal protection.

I OBJECT that we are being treated differently from all other Proposed CDO recipients whose cases were heard and voted on by a quorum on December 15, 2006.

I OBJECT that when we are referred to as defendants, then the property is NOT the defendant, and each of us is entitled to fifteen minutes of testimony.

I OBJECT that any part of the record, which I might use for appeal, has been severely limited by the attack on my due process right to have sufficient time to be heard.

I OBJECT that SWRCB lawyer, Ms. Helen Arens’s assertion, on page 2 of her OBJECTION, REQUEST TO QUASH AND OPPOSITION TO “EX PARTE APPLICATION OF PETITIONERS FOR ISSUANCE OF ALTERNATIVE WRIT OF MANDATE” of December 8, 2006, in reference to my request for a continuance constitutes a deliberate distortion and a warped description of the facts.

I OBJECT to Chairman Young’s repeating to the Board Ms. Arens’s erroneous portrayal of my request for a continuance, having already received the twenty-page document I submitted at his request to provide substantial justification for a continuance.

I OBJECT to Mr. Young’s deliberately disrespectful reference to my name near the close of the December 15, 2006, hearing, particularly given that I was not present.

I OBJECT that, after ignoring me for months by omitting my name on any and all correspondence, only in very recent months has my name been included in RWQCB correspondence and when it is included staff consistently renders it incorrectly.

I OBJECT that cases have not been heard in the random order of the CDO selection, which the Board itself said indicated their efforts toward fair treatment of all defendants.

I OBJECT that the use of alphabetical order as the order of presentation, instead of the random order of the Cease and Desist Order numbers discriminates against individuals who share the same Cease and Desist Order number but do not share the same last name and constitutes yet another example of de facto gender discrimination by this Board.

I OBJECT that simply by our position in the order of presentation we are prevented from incorporating by reference all testimony presented by all defendants.

I OBJECT to Chairman Young’s statement on December 15, 2006, following the testimony of defendant #1034 and prior to the decision regarding the issuance of her Cease and Desist Order that defendants had not taken responsibility for their circumstances.

I OBJECT that the Chairman in the above context indicated that the way we vote had something to do with our circumstances.

I OBJECT that after an entire year no other recipients of Proposed Cease and Desist Orders have been targeted, violating our right to equal protection under the law.

I OBJECT that the water board has attenuated the CDO hearings well beyond what a reasonable person would consider an acceptable disruption of the lives of private citizens who are not accused of any criminal activity.

I OBJECT that the RWQCB continues to fail in its duty to extend due process to all citizens of the Prohibition Zone by failing to provide notice to them that they reside illegally in the Prohibition Zone.

I OBJECT to the secrecy of this enforcement action by singling out randomly, without observers, 45 out of almost 5000 households and by failing to reveal a Master Plan for enforcement.

I OBJECT to this Board’s failure to provide a comprehensive explanation of the phrase, “reasonable progress,” in reference to the Los Osos WWTF beyond its requirement of passage of a 218 vote by June, 2008.

I OBJECT as a taxpayer to the waste of government funds in salaries, expense accounts, and infrastructure to conduct a protracted government proceeding that has already gone on for a year with no Master Plan, no framework, no exit strategy, and no end in sight against a statistically insignificant number of citizens chosen as subjects in a reprehensible experiment, all at taxpayer expense.

I OBJECT that my participation in these hearings directly affects my future retirement income.

I OBJECT that Roger Briggs is not present at this hearing to allow us to face our accuser.

I OBJECT that this agency has engaged in public waste by failing to utilize mediation.

I OBJECT that the settlement agreement was negotiated in secret among two Proposed Cease and Desist Order recipients and Mr. Sato, and is, therefore, essentially a limited agreement meeting the needs of those three individuals.

I OBJECT to the prosecutor’s statement that cooperative dischargers are those, and only those, who sign the prosecution’s settlement agreement.

I OBJECT that the Cease and Desist Order proceeding has been from inception to culmination here today a sordid example of government ineptitude and abuse of power.

I OBJECT to the completely arbitrary, capricious, and abusive disregard for our civil rights as demonstrated in all of the above actions of the RWQCB.




Part III [Mr. Reed Sato objected to the settlement agreement being referred to as something being crafted by” one or two citizens.” Moylan was not allowed to reply or explain or expand her statement. From what I have been told, many of The Criminal Los Osos 45, were not aware of the negotiations and had no opportunity to participate in the crafting of the document. So Mr. Sato’s attempt to try to imply that this settlement was some community effort to craft an acceptable document in some sort of win/win situation, or even as a Los Osos 45 effort, was misleading. Moylan’s statement that the negotiations were broken off early so these show-trails could begin illustrates yet another tragedy in this saga: What Moylan calls the “triumph of expediency over justice.” I would add , “triumph of expediency over common sense.” The failure of the Grand Inquisitor, who is self described as a negotiator who believes in settlements, further calls into question what the real motives of the RWQCB and staff are. At any rate, the “settlement” was not something the public was aware of, and clearly was not something the full 45 were involved in.

Also of interest, the settlement was offered as an “alternative” to getting a CDO, but copies of the settlement were only available shortly before the Dec 14 & 15 hearing ,and presented as a take-it-or-get-a-CDO proposition. In addition, some of The Criminal Los Osos 45 phoned in or sent notes the day of the hearing promising to sign even before they had a chance to read it – circumstances that a normal person would call “duress.” But not the RWQCB.

More interesting, apparently a few of The Criminal 45 who agreed to sign have since informed the RWQCB that after reading the document ,they have changed their minds and won’t sign. That doesn’t sound like a “settlement” to me. .” I mean, aren’t settlements something you participate in, agree upon, read carefully and are satisfied with BEFORE you sign? What Sato crafted and rushed to closure so the show-trials could go on sounds more like some high-pressure, used-car-salesman’s contract. The State of California at least gives the buyer a three-day “cooling off period.” Not Mr. Sato or the RWQCB.]



2007



SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT STATEMENT

The settlement agreement was developed by one or two citizens, with Mr. Sato, essentially to assist those particular citizens to avoid the unintended consequences of a CDO.

That this settlement agreement does not carry with it those three letters, C D O is its only advantage. By signing this statement, citizens give up their right to appeal based on a vague promise of future consideration and special treatment when the drop-dead date comes and they must cease all discharges.

This settlement agreement is unattractive, because it is a CAO without the letters and retains the January 1, 2011, drop dead date. Negotiations for this agreement were begun in secret without input from other citizens. When an agreement was worked out, a few citizens were informed they could attend an informational meeting.

In the intervening months since Mr. Shipe proposed negotiating a settlement for himself, which was later offered to others, citizens have begun to approach the one-year mark in the CDO process. Many are old, tired, sick, occupied with family and personal responsibilities. Many need to resume the normal conduct of their lives. For that reason, some of the former proposed CDO recipients have signed your settlement agreement.

Please do not flatter yourself, Mr. Sato, that this settlement agreement appears so attractive that the smart people have signed while only the most incorrigible, recalcitrant dischargers reject it. It is no “agreement.” Its negotiation was never authorized by me nor entered into with my consent on my behalf. I have not spoken to one person who says they signed because they thought your settlement was fair and just. This is what I know. People have signed your settlement agreement because this process has gone on much too long. Some defendants are elderly and need to move into assisted living. Others need to be able to sell their houses so that they may complete plans for their own lives. Settlers have many reasons for signing, but I have heard no one say that they signed because they thought the settlement agreement was worthwhile.

The reasons I have heard cover this span. Their family life is disintegrating. They have lost touch with children who have begun having problems in school. Their marriages are threatened. They cannot focus at work or at school. Their health is impaired and deteriorating. They are physically unable to go on. They see no hope against the unfettered power of this agency. They simply do not have the emotional stamina to continue to fight for their rights any more, no matter how bad they think your agreement is. They simply cannot take it anymore.

Do not flatter yourself, Mr. Sato, that you have brought the Los Osos 45 to the table. What you have accomplished is the gathering of an anguished, distraught, harassed, desolate, desperate collection of people isolated deliberately from their community by being singled out in a tiny group from the entire population of the PZ ghetto.

You rejected the possibility of negotiating a better agreement that many of us had developed with counsel. You, who believe in settlement, determined that it was better to go forward with the hearings than to work out a better settlement agreement that we could all sign and avoid the enormous cost and waste engendered by a hearing for which we had waited most of a year that had now to be rushed into, a hearing which this Board cannot afford pay AGP Video to broadcast and record.

Following your failure the worn out assemblage with whom I am familiar have dragged themselves to your table, because they believe they have no other choices. If this is not duress, then I do not know the definition.

To demonstrate our good will and cooperation we have already agreed to, signed, and submitted as evidence the settlement agreement developed by Shaunna Sullivan, the aborted agreement, which you stated you did not have time to finish, because you, who believe in settlement, had these hearings to attend.

We believe in settlement. No one is more motivated than we are to reach a settlement, to get you out of our lives, out of our home, out of our heads. On January 30, 2006, the RWQCB moved in with us. We have not had a moment alone since. You crowd our dinner table. You sleep between us. You meet us in the shower. You sit with us as we spend sleepless nights staring at just one more document.

We believe in settlement. We believe in fairness. We believe in justice. We believe in humanity. We believe in truthfulness and disclosure. This current settlement agreement is ample evidence that the prosecution team, which developed it, and the Board, which approved it, fail to understand any of those concepts. This settlement agreement is a triumph of expediency over justice.

61 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hat's off to Bill and Bev! I was so proud of my community yesterday.

Anonymous said...

While I feel sorry for the Moylans and I'm sure they spoke from their hearts, it sounded too theatrical.

The whole reason for this show is that our damn CSD was too stupid to build the sewer. They should all be thrown in jail for all the suffering they have caused.

My 80 year old parents are also sick of the lies and threats that they and their friends have suffered through from the move the sewer at any cost bastards.

Lisa and Julie have been the major antagonists in this damn mess. We should stop pusst footing around and demand they be prosecuted for creating this obstruction.

Build the damn sewer and quit ruining peoples health and finances! Build it now!

Anonymous said...

Jeez Ann

Did you write the script for Bev?

You sure got it all in print in a hurry.

Churadogs said...

Anonymous said:"Jeez Ann

Did you write the script for Bev?

You sure got it all in print in a hurry."

Uh, have you ever heard of WORD document, wherein prepared statements can be emailed to the press instantly or a blog to be dropped in STET? apparently not. Did I write this? Nope. If you've been reading this blog, you've read stuff Bev's written before.

anonymous sez:"Build the damn sewer and quit ruining peoples health and finances! Build it now!"

Uh, am I missing something here? The county IS "building the sewer now." last time I looked? Or do you not believe they're moving ahead with this project? More interesting is that the CDO's have nothing to do with the sewer. They've not taken on a pointless life of their own and if your parents are sick and scared as you report, of what the RWQCB has in store for them, then were you at the hearing? Have you been working with PZLDF to try to protect your parent's legal rights? Have you been following the CDO paperwork from day one to educate yourself as to what the RWQCB has been up to how how they keep morphing this thing from month to month, violating any semblance of legal rights? If not, then all you're doiing is venting uselessly on this site. For the sake of your parents you need to get involved.

Churadogs said...

re anon above, a typo: wrote "They've not taken on a pointless life of their own and "

meant: NOW TAKEN ON A POINTLESS LIFE OF THEIR OWN

Anonymous said...

Bev and Bill are heros. They did not choose this fight. They have had no part in dividing this community. But they when were called, they stood up for our community. Those of you who continue to degrade the Moylans and others who are trying to defend our homes ought to be ashamed.

Anonymous said...

The REAL CRIMINALs are the 5 CSD Directors; Schickter, Tacker, Cesena, Senet and Fouche.

They stopped the sewer, they have divided this community, they bankrupted the District. They lied to everyone of us. They had no plan, no concept, only to delay any sewer until it would be too costly for the average family in Los Osos. They should be the ones on trial.

The first 45 CDO recipient's are not criminals. The RWQCB are not the bad guys. The real criminals are the 5 CSD Directors who created all this totally unncessary misery in our community.

We had a sewer, they threw it away for the sake of their own agenda. We will be paying for their wanton distruction for the rest of our lives while they move to some other town, maybe down to the south county. Most of us though, can't afford to move.

My wife and I hope Lisa knows the damge she is personaly responsible for!

Anonymous said...

Shameful? Here's what I think is shameful. The lawyer who compared these CDO hearings to 9/11. I lost 3 very dear friends from my hometown in that very real tragedy. Maybe the dramatists here in Los Osos should talk to their families. Shameful? How about David Dugan comparing poor Los Osos to Nazi Germany. Six million Jews slaughtered, and Dugan compares this sewer fiasco to Nazi Germany. Shameful? How about someone comparing Julie Tacker to Ghandi.

I too am an educator. And I can assure you that doesn't make me special. What it allows me is perspective, something sorely lacking in this misguided community. Maybe everyone should take a trip to the Ninth Ward in Louisiana and ask those people if they'd like a sewer in the middle of their town. Or anywhere for that matter.

Snowy Plover said...

We love you Bill & Bev!,
Down wth petty Tyrants and Trolls.
3 elections told them no in a year and a half.
But who needs democracy, when you can have buracracy?
Trumped up bad science, hyperbole, and fear. These are the ruling elements of the regional board's policies.
I figure a lot of this latest trolling are the frustrations of cruel minded neo cons and/or Pandora's bunch of ditzes who are percieving that their power is on the wane. Kafka would be proud.
A lot more Los Osoans love you than hate you Bill and Bev.
Bless you.
You too Ann.

Anonymous said...

8:30 am
In your eagerness to slam the CSD your ears and eyes must have suffered a closure, and you missed a couple things. 1. The excellence and truth of the Moylans presentation, and 2. The fact that the CDOs and the WWTF are two separate issues. The CSD members you want to see jailed are but a small part of the problem which shouldn't be of such concern to you, since reguardless of their actions, the COUNTY is going to build you a WWTF.
The BOD you hate so much were just doing what the MAJORITY of the voters wanted and what they told you BEFORE they were elected.
NO WWTF IN THE CENTER OF TOWN!!!

Anonymous said...

If you can't see that the direct actions to halt the WWTF by the CSD has brought on the CDO's, then it is you who are deaf and blind!

There is a direct link to the mismangement of the CSD to the Water Board having to step up the enforcement of the Clean Water Acts.

The weak argument of hiding behind the majority and Measure B are only diversions. The CSD knew the majority they won with was slim. They could have proceeded with caution and grown support for a change, however they chose to stop the project rather than modify, even move it. They should have stepped up with a reasonable plan of action, but they chose to throw rocks at the RWQCB instead of working with them. They accelerated the pace of the conflict with the predictable consequence of bringing on administrative enforcement which included the CDO's.

I never took a side in the location, but now I am so tired of the battle, that I hope the County puts the treatment plant right in the middle of the sandpile you call the middle of town.

Those of us with CDO in hand or hanging over our heads don't need a laywer, we need the sewer we paid into the assessment! The Moylans made an excellent and emotional presentation. We all feel that way, but don't make the Water Board out to be the criminals! The crimials are those still trying to fight just to delay and make this the most expensive sewer in the USA!

Anonymous said...

The new CSD board divided this community? Hello? How long have you lived here?

Anonymous said...

To Anon. at 7:45 AM on Jan. 23...
The Moylans are HARDLY THEATRICAL! What they are showing are very REAL HUMAN EMOTIONS, such as FEAR, TERROR & DISGUST. Keep up the good work Bev & Bill! The entire Community is behind you 100%

Anonymous said...

How dare you call the Moylans "theatrical"! I didn't see you up there, did I?

Anonymous said...

The Moylans did a very good job, spoke the truth and from the heart.

Ms. Sullivan did an excellent job. An attorney was always needed.

The Regional Water Board members are the criminals. The county has the project, so why can't they just let the county did it's thing. The CDO's are nothing more than electioneering to get a 218 vote. NOTHING MORE! Their case won't hold up in a real court. There are civil right issues and due process.

How can the RWQCB give CDO's for the sewer project stopping when their lead agency gave out an illegal loan (making it an illegal project) -- and then punish the people?! No, the criminals are these agencies, not this CSD board, and certainly not the homeowners.

What goes around, comes around.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:59am said:

"The weak argument of hiding behind the majority and Measure B are only diversions. The CSD knew the majority they won with was slim."

They also knew that slim majority included renters. Had the recall and Measure B vote been up to property owners, we'd have a nearly complete WWTF and none of this ridiculous hand wringing and gnashing of teeth.

The voters of Los Osos were warned about the consequences of a recall by everyone under the sun. They chose to ignore that warning - and yet they have the nerve to be surprised that they're being targeted for enforcement!

You made your bed, Los Osos. Now you're gonna have to lay in it.

Anonymous said...

9:59AMsaid....."throwing rocks at the RQWCB instead of working with them."
Are you really that naive to think that the RWQCB wants to "work with" anyone? Wait until you get your CDO and see how the RQWCB is going to "work with" you!
It will take a "real court" to make them do anything to help the community, which by the way, is suppose to be their function. they may not be crininals but, their actions certainly are.

Anonymous said...

Did you hear Sorrel Marks say that the people of Los Osos voted to have the sewer moved into town in 1998? That is an outright lie! We never had a vote on the location! Duh! That's one reason why we're in this freakin' mess. Thank god the meeting was taped so we have documentation of her mousey lil miss innocent voice LYING to the RWQCB.

Anonymous said...

Sorrel Marks wasn't lying.

The Solution Group's campaign material supporting the formation of the District was very specific.
Sadly, you (and others) just weren't paying attention.

If you voted to form the District in 1998, you voted for a ponding system on the Tri-W site. If you didn't know that's what you were voting for, then you are either blind, deaf, or both.

At the very least, you were an irresponsible voter, and now you (and the rest of us) will have to live with consequences.

Anonymous said...

To 11:43

The CSD did not divide the community. The RWQCB divided the community when they used falsified well data to establish a Prohibition Zone that excluded those of wealth and power.

To 2:08

The Solution's Group told many lies. They said that the 218 was a vote for a sewer, not a location. They were still implying that ponds would be included if the Tri W site was chosen (through Pandora's propaganda survey), even though they knew the idea would not get RWQCB approval. Lies and deceit. The current board has tried to clean up their messes, an enormous task.

Anonymous said...

Boo Hoo Hoo

This whole hearing fiasco is very much cheap theatrics! We have known about the possibility of enforcement if something wasn't done. Well nothing has been done for 30 years, unless you count the full planning, designing, permitting, contracting and start of construction. But you people up there crying are only dupes in this game. Stay off the stage and keep the hand wringing for the worthless CSD Board Meetings!

The people who should be in front of a Judge are the five who knowingly stopped the legal sewer project and created the stage for all the poor old citizens who have been lied to and who believed the lies of the Board and the silly hangers on.

Toss Schicker and Tacker in jail for 3 years! Then the theatrics will melt away and a real sewer will be installed without all the hysterics.

Anonymous said...

The Solution Group never held a 218 vote, or any other vote for that matter. They were not a government agency.

The vote that was held by the County in 1998 was not an assessment vote, but a vote to form the LOCSD, and the point of forming the LOCSD was to put a ponding system on Tri-W.

Whether you like or not, the Solution Group plan very clearly identified their intention to use Tri-W for the project they were pitching to the RWQCB.

Stop making the rest of us pay for your failure to know what you were voting for.

Anonymous said...

To Anon @ 1:47,

Ms. Marks lied under oath twice then. She also said the RWQCB sent out information on the illegal discharges in 2002.

She was sworn to tell the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

She just couldn't do that!

Anonymous said...

Did anyone watch the BOS today? Paavo says that they're looking for grant money. What a salesman. He should be looking at the state and federal government to pay their share of cost for a wastewater project. Lisa said this at the last CSD meeting. It's the law. But Paavo didn't mention that at all. He's trying to portray that the county will do everything to get us money to help us out, so why hasn't he mentioned anything about the state & federal kicking in TO CLEAN THEIR WATER & BAY?
If he was really trying to make it half way affordable he would be discussing this!

Anonymous said...

There was an article in the Tribune today about Morro Bay's plant and the RWQCB. It's incredible how the RWQCB allows Morro Bay to dump what it does into the ocean, yet goes to extreme measures to punish the people of Los Osos.

It makes it more clear that the RWQCB works with Pandora and the county on a way to rid the town of working class families for their "tear down" homes! The land is just too valuable They want this property bad and figured out how to do it a long time ago. Look at the extreme measures that they've gone through to get people out with a huge public works project that only have some pay for. Sam Blakeslee joined in on the party too.

Yes, it's all about the land, and a "food chain" of people who will make money off the people who are forced to leave -- developers, realtors, and on it goes! Party time for them.

Anonymous said...

All you whiners make me sick. The Moylans were the drama queens of the day! The Water Board hs doing its job, nothing more. Why can't the whiners of Los Osos understand that they have to conform to state laws and regulations?
You will change nothing, except add to the delays, which will add to the costs!! You hard-headed cretins are going to end up costing us $500 per month or more! Why the hell don't you move away?

And, hey! You know WHO wants the Los Osos land, cheap? Well, you morons, the DEVELOPERS behind the Board behind the DELAYS! All along you fools believed the smoke and mirrors when Lisa and Julie said it was the Tri-W people who were backed by the developers, but the opposite was true! The DEVELOPERS wanted the whole community to go on the skids, so they could pick up the shacks in the PZ for CHEAP!!!!!! All you "Julie" supporters, listen up! YOU have been sold down the river!

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous 7:45 AM, 8:30 AM, 8:42 AM, 9:59 AM, 1:40 PM, 2:08 PM and 8:38 PM:

Absolutely the truth! This silly Board of Directors has played into the hands of the very developers they said the Tri-W group represented! SO WRONG! This BOD is a bunch of deluded, dull-witted proselytes, who would buy the Brooklyn Bridge from a fast-talking "developer" type.

The BOD needs to go to jail for giving public funds to assholes (lawyers, moron IGM, Pork Barrel hangers-on, "consultants") and the community needs to DEMAND the repayment of these "GIFTS of PUBLIC FUNDS" to the PEOPLE of Los Osos!!

They have cost some of us, our very homes!!

Anonymous said...

Go ahead Los Osos. Kiss the butts of those theatrical presences. You are only showing what fools you be. You embrace the very people who want to make your homes unavailable to you. The developers with their Julie, Bev, Bill. You stupid renters should not be allowed to vote. You can up and move, and we are stuck with what you voted for us. You need to go someplace else. Los Osos would be a lot better without the likes of you.

Anonymous said...

Hey, 6:47pm: Your stupid Lisa Board screwed the project up; Your stupid Lisa Board went bankrupt; Your stupid Lisa Board couldn't find its' collective ass with both hands; and now YOUR stupid Lisa Board is bitching and griping because the County official appointed to bail your sorry asses out, didn't jump through some imaginary HOOP you put up??

Chutzpah!!

You are like the kid who killed his parents and threw himself on the mercy of the court because he was an orphan!!

This is not admirable Chutzpah, but disgraceful Chutzpah!

Anonymous said...

Anon's above:

You Pandora People!

Why is it that you feel compelled to say anything, do anything, even probably commit suicide on the Tri-W -- if Pandora pointed in that direction?!

Tri-W was NEVER $205 a month -- that was a lie then and Tri-W was never the preferred site, according to the same firm the county hired recently. So, jump up and down like a bunch of chimpanzees in a hurricane, all that will get you is blown away -- but not Tri-W.

Pandora people -- keep spinning, lying, to sell your Tri-W. I still say "don't save the dream" -- "move it."

Anonymous said...

I agree. There is nothing that will make these people appreciative and supportive, no matter who is doing what. It is really pathetic.This is what has me thinking about moving, not the high cost of the sewer.

Anonymous said...

What are you so worried about? Chairman Young is gathering up all our 218 votes, and we may not even need a 218 vote. By then, he'll have collected at least 2,250 CDO recipients "yes votes" on 218 by forcing them to surrender their proxy votes, which is illegal. And won't hold up in court. So why go through the charade of putting on a phony 218 vote in the first place, other than put on a good show!

Anonymous said...

What a bunch of cry-babies live in Los Osos, the Sewer-by-the-Bay!

Pack your your tissues and move back to Orange County or Riverside!

You "move the sewer" folks have delayed progress as long as you can, now we're going to get a sewer and you better get over it or move out quick!

Just quit the whining

Anonymous said...

Pandora who?

Take a look at our poster playmate, Mrs. Julie Tacker.

Could someone explain what she is trying to do for Los Osos?

When will she resign? We can be sure that will come amidst many tears about not being effective in moving away from the Tri-W site which she wants to develope with her 'friend' Jeff Edwards. We can be sure she will make a dramatic exit, kicking open the door as she flies away on her broom.

Churadogs said...

Anonymous wrote:"The Solution Group's campaign material supporting the formation of the District was very specific.
Sadly, you (and others) just weren't paying attention.

If you voted to form the District in 1998, you voted for a ponding system on the Tri-W site. If you didn't know that's what you were voting for, then you are either blind, deaf, or both.

At the very least, you were an irresponsible voter, and now you (and the rest of us) will have to live with consequences."

Instead of this name-calling, I suggest that all of you click over to Ron's blog (www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com ) and hunt down his Bay News Viewpoint, written a few years ago, about the history of the CSD Formation Vote and most especially about the critical documents and DATES on those documents issued by the RWQCB and others BEFORE the election. His viewpoint was written in response to Gary Karner's "History" (of the CSD and Solution Group, etc) viewpoint. I presume Ron's got both cached. What's critical to understand are the dates of the CSD formation election, the linkage of the Ponds of Avalon to that CSD formation vote and the DATES on the offical reports concerning thefate of Ponds of Avalon.

Head Asshole said...

Ron's blog is all OPINION. He be big time pissed off because nobody listened to him. He spins BIG TIME. Can't believe a word he says, besides, he is LOST in the past. Calhoun is in the same mode, trying to appologise for FOOLS. They both take on the regulating body who are definitely NOT fools.

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"I suggest that all of you click over to Ron's blog (www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com ) and hunt down his Bay News Viewpoint, written a few years ago..."

Here ya go.

An Anon wrote:

"The Solution Group's campaign material supporting the formation of the District was very specific."

That was, and still is, a huge part of the problem. That material, all professionally packaged by Nash-Karner, said things like, "Maximum monthly payment of $38.75." Sorrel Marks, like many others, is confusing a vote for "Maximum monthly payment of $38.75" with a vote for a downtown sewer plant. Big mistake.

The moment $38.75 went out the window, Tri-W should have went with it. But, as we all know now, it didn't. Instead, the early LOCSD, in an effort to save face over the circumstances that led to the formation of the CSD in the first place, decided to play "bait and switchy" with the California Coastal Commission over the next four years. Big mistake.

Which leads me to my next point... I've got a crisp, new $20 bill that says exactly 100% of the people that say things like this:

"If you can't see that the direct actions to halt the WWTF by the CSD has brought on the CDO's, then it is you who are deaf and blind!"

Can't answer this question:

Why did Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, call the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004?

attorney said...

To RON:

Why did the fools stop the sewer without looking at consequences? We have a bankruptcy here! Idiot!

Anonymous said...

Who gives a rat's ass what some has-been guy wrote in some yellow rag YEARS ago? Ron's writings are the ravings of some lunatic who doesn't even live here! And Ann, you sound just as bad.

I don't even know Pandora, but I can form my own opinions, thank you. What makes you idiots jump to the conclusion that everything against you, is Pandora-driven? How about outrage-driven? We look at the community of Los Osos, with all the pimps, broads, hidden agendas, manipulations, bullies, thugs, morons, idiots, proselytes, etc., and we don't HAVE to know anyone named Pandora, in order to feel outrage, at this whiney-ass Board who expects the County to bend over backwards and give in to the Board's childish demands! We look at the gift of public funds to your pork-barrel cronies, the overpriced attorneys, the so-called IGM (haha) and the"consultants" that have milked the coffers of the CSD, into bankruptcy!

How can you defend this?
How can you think everyone who notices this, and demands some accounting of this, is led on by Pandora?
NO, we are led on by common sense. Something that seems to be in short supply, in your quarters!

Anonymous said...

The CSD was well on the way to bankruptcy prior to the recall. Don't try to pin that one on the current board.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:20pm makes more sense than Ron or Ann ever did. Kick out the whiners.

Anonymous said...

No, asshole poster 4:27PM, the previous CSD had a A+++++ credit rating, and the SRF funding on board. They had the sewer under construction. They were solvent. They had every anticipation of continuing to BE solvent. They had their expenses under control, they had their revenues secure, and they were not the stupid spendthrifts like the current bunch.

Can you read a balance sheet? Probably not. How about a Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes (called an Income Statement in private enterprise)? I doubt you can read that, either.

Unless you know something about municipal finances, everything you say is conjecture.

Oh, I know, you will probably come back on here and claim to be a CPA, or an MBA, you had 40 years running a municipality, but we all really know you most likely are a some old dried-up real estate lady, or drive a truck.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:27 PM said "The CSD was well on the way to bankruptcy prior to the recall. Don't try to pin that one on the current board."

Are you really that stupid?

How about you providing some proof? All we have heard is your kind of innuendo with not one shred of proof. Don't give us that shit about Lisa "thinks" there was $2,000,000 missing, that's pure bullshit!

Come on, provide anything! We have all be asking for an audit of this CSD, if it was ever done, the results have never been published. Do you have the results to prove your "opinion"? Why should I ask, all you have to offer is more whineing!

Ron said...

An Anon wrote:

"Anonymous 4:27 PM said "The CSD was well on the way to bankruptcy prior to the recall. Don't try to pin that one on the current board."

Are you really that stupid?

How about you providing some proof? All we have heard is your kind of innuendo with not one shred of proof."


Ask and ye shall receive...

"I have no doubt that if I or the then board majority stopped the project that the LOCSD would be exactly in the same position it is now, only sooner. I claim sooner for If the WWP had not commenced, the LOCSD would not have received the $6.4 million SRF draw nor would you or the new BOD had the 3.9 million in SRF money to use when you and the BOD took control. In short, the LOCSD would have been facing bankruptcy much earlier (around March)."
-- Richard LeGros

Anonymous said...

Ron,

Did you not telephone me several months ago about that quote you atribute to me?

Do you forget what I told you?

Do you forget that I told you that the pre-recall CSD was poor, but no way approaching bankruptcy?.

Have you forgotten that I told you that without the SRF loan that the CSD would have survived without bankruptcy as long as the 2005-2006 budget was adjusted to reflect the loss of the SRF revenues AND that CSD spending stayed within the constraints of the adjusted budget?

Have you forgotten that I told you that the new CSD board spent the CSD into bankruptcy because they FAILED ADJUST THEIR SPENDING in light of the loss of the SRF loan and FAILED TO ADJUST THE 2005-2006 BUDGET.

Have you forgotten?

No, you haven't forgotten a thing....you just omit my comments as they get in the way of your whinny spin on reality.

Richard LeGros

Ron said...

[Well, this is kind of interesting... I just wrote the stuff below, and then I came in to post it and saw Richard's post... gotta love blogs, huh?]

Real quick... after I posted that LeGros quote above, it reminded me that I had some interesting e-mail exchange with him last fall regarding that quote.

At first, when I asked him if he wrote that stuff in an e-mail to Julie Tacker last year, LeGros responded:

"No, I did not write that statement. There is no doubt that once or twice someone has signed my name to a blog that I did not author."

Then, when I pressed, "So, your position is someone else wrote that and put your name and e-mail address to it," and then showed him the entire e-mail, he responded:

"I do not remember writing to Julie.....maybe I did.....I just do not recall (pun?) However, the letter has my tone; so I could have authored it."

Then he added, "The LOCSD was financially sound and solvent at the time of the recall with or without the SRF loan."

Nice.

So, let me see if I have this straight? According to LeGros, "the LOCSD would have been facing bankruptcy much earlier, around March" (before I got a hold of his e-mail)... or not (after I read his e-mail).

Richard, here's a little help with your "recall"... the e-mail to Tacker was from you.

Anonymous said...

Ron,

What part of your full of crap do you not understand?

I told you during our telephone conversation exactly and clearly my description of the financial state of the pre-recall CSD during our phone calls. The CSD was fianically sound as long as it stayed within the confines of a budget.

SO GET IT THROUGHT YOU FAT ALCOHOL-CLOUDED HEAD....THE PRE-RECALL CSD WAS POOR BUT NOT BANKRUPT. EVEN WITHOUT THE SRF LOAN IT WOULD NOT HAVE GONE BANKRUPT. AS LONG AS THE 2005-2006 BUDGET (AND CSD SPENDING) WAS ADJUSTED TO REFLECT THE LOSS OF THE SRF LOAN, BANKRUPTCY WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURED.

THE FACT THAT THE NEW CSD FAILED TO ADJUST THE 2005-2006 BUDGET AND REDUCE SPENDING AFTER THE LOSS OF THE SRF LOAN REVENUE DIRECTLY CAUSED THE BANKRUPTCY.

IF THE NEW CSD HAD NOT RECEIVED THE SRF LOAN REVENUES, AND THE NEW CSD BOARD CONTINUED TO SPEND MONEY THE WAY THEY DID, THE BANKRUPTCY WOULD HAVE OCCURED MUCH SOONER.

REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU WANT TO SPIN THINGS, YOUR TAKE OF A QUOTE YOU WANT TO ATTRIBUTE TO ME IS PURE BALONEY.

GOT IT !

GOOD!

Richard LeGros

Anonymous said...

Ron will NEVER get it!

Too bad he doesn't live here and won't be able to vote for the 218 or even get to defend his very own CDO.

Anonymous said...

Questions regarding the bankruptcy:

What types of adjustments would have had to have been made by the incoming CSD to adjust the budget? Reduce sevices?

When the books were handed over to the new board, were the accounting practices used legal and/or standard practice so they could be easily interpreted?

Were all funds in the proper accounts?

I've heard many takes on this and I would like some clarification.

Anonymous said...

Hello Anon 4:48,

You asked:
"What types of adjustments would have had to have been made by the incoming CSD to adjust the budget? Reduce services?"

Answer:
With the loss of the SRF loan, the LOCSD lost 1/3 of the "tripod" those yearly provided funds to run the administration of the LOCSD. Specifically, the approved 2005-2006 budget for CSD administrati0n was about $690,000 per year (with about $240,000 coming from Fire, $200,000 coming from the Water Department, and about $250,000 from the Wastewater fund)

By the commencement of the Tri-W project all but about $300,000 from the Wastewater Fund had been spent (as outlined by the basement bond); with the intent that that future waste water fund contributions into administration would have come from initially from the SRF loan and eventually exclusively from the sewer user fees once the project was operational.

With the loss of the SRF loan, and the loss of future revenue from an operational wastewater project, the funds left to run the administration of the CSD (from Fire and Water) was about $440,000.

The 2005-2006 budgets should have been adjusted to reflect the new reality of lowered revenue coming into the CSD; and with the reduction in revenues the CSD administration costs would have to be cut correspondingly.

With prudent financial management (i.e. a competent General Manager) such cuts to CSD administration could have occurred without any influence on the levels of service being received by the community.

You asked:
"When the books were handed over to the new board, were the accounting practices used legal and/or standard practice so they could be easily interpreted?"

Yes, the accounting practices were legal and followed standard practices. This fact was clearly stated by the independent audit performed by Bob Crosby: and the CSD audits from 1998 to 2005 were declared "clean" (i.e. that the audits showed that the CSD accounting accurately reflected the true financial status of the LOCSD)

You asked:
"Were all funds in the proper accounts?"

Yes, all funds were in the proper accounts. The listing of these accounts is part of the LOCSD historical record; with all dollar amounts and their purpose clearly stated.

Regards, Richard LeGros

Anonymous said...

Thank you Richard. You are a saint!

Anonymous said...

Richard LeGros a saint? Are you nuts?
He is your God, but no saint. Evil maybe!

Anonymous said...

I'm so happy to hear Richard has been annointed for all his accomplishments and is now offically a saint. Since Easter is coming, does this mean Richard will be rising from the depths of disgrace to become the second mayor of Los Osos (after Pandora)?

Anonymous said...

You guys are great! Thank you! I put the "saint" out there to see the response. I was totally kidding. Are you serious? A saint? The man is a complete jerk.

Anonymous said...

Stop the name calling for just one moment and tell me if Richard's response is correct.

Anonymous said...

Hi Anon above,

Do not worry...I find it very amusing that many folks refuse to answer the issues I raise; instead resorting to childish name-calling. Their behavior or name-calling makes no difference to me as I have a very happy and fulfilling life outside the kerfuffle of the current LOCSD.

At the end of the day, those that try to taunt me still have been fined , sued , are in bankruptcy, and will pay far more for a wastewater project than they needed too. They, by stopping the project, got exactly what they wanted; a chance to fight, whine, blame, and lose against the State's right to enforce the law.

Regards, Richard leGros

Anonymous said...

Richard, you are by far the funniest fop on the block, by far! You would say the sky was blue in a hurricane, and that's not false optimism, that's outright bulldinky! It is what it is because you dropped the Big One on us when it didn't have to be...

Anonymous said...

The RWQCB has overstepped their bounds by prosecuting individuals. And the WBs have far too much to hide to ever let the courts expose their dirty laundry. They have tried lies, threats, and manipulations to stop the defense from digging into the buried secrets. I believe that their next strategy will be to stall individual appeals at the state level, while at the local level they will be pressuring the county to go with Tri W.

Tri W was wrong. The SRF loan was wrong. Considering that the new CSD, with no SRF loan, had to get another plan on the table, was there any way to avoid bankruptcy? If they had not completed the initial work on STEP / STEG, the county would never have considered this option. If the Tri W groupies had not mounted a legal assault, the CSD just may have gotten through this mess they were left with.

Sewertoons said...

anon 9:40 says:
"If they had not completed the initial work on STEP / STEG, the county would never have considered this option."

I thought it was Al Barrow and his promoting of Ripley early on and his later promoting of Orenco that got this to the County.

Ron said...

Richard said:

"I find it very amusing that many folks refuse to answer the issues I raise; instead resorting to childish name-calling. "

And he also said:

"(RON) GET IT THROUGHT (sic) YOU (sic) FAT ALCOHOL-CLOUDED HEAD..."

And he also said:

"No, (Ron) you haven't forgotten a thing....you just omit my comments as they get in the way of your whinny spin on reality."

Just wanted to point that out.

Rick, have you ordered your composting toilet system yet? If not, hold off for a few more days. I'm working on some deals with some composting toilet manufacturers, where if you mention "SewerWatch," you'll save big $$$!

Just trying to help.

Anonymous said...

"Rick" is the shortened name for Frederick.