Pages

Friday, February 09, 2007

Level 3 Water Severity? Talk to The Hand

James Caruso from County Planning, came to the LOCAC meeting last night to present portions of the SLO County Resource Capacity Study 2007, the report that declares Los Osos is in a level 3 (severe) water shortage (“severe” as in, right now 500 acre feet a year in overdraft, with salt water intrusions permanently ruining portions of the lower aquifer, more overdraft if building is continued to occur). And, naturally, the LOCAC members point out that they repeatedly “advise” against County Planning issuing building permits (homes outside the PZ and even some inside are still being built/remodeled & etc.) and are repeatedly ignored since County can’t do anything about anything, it’s the water purveyors’ job, and their in litigation now to try to figure out something, but meantime, Oh, well, nobody can do anything, well, maybe LOCAC could ask the Planning Commissioners and/or the BOS to slap on a “temporary” moratorium until the wastewater system is finalized and the water purveyor’s legal wrangling is finished???

In short, nobody’s in charge of anything except wasting time on a “Resource Capacity Study” that indicates a “severity” about which nobody can do anything, Oh Darn. And people outside the PZ but inside the Overdrafted Severity Level Basin are free to build and draw water out of the same overdrafted pool thereby overdrafting it more, while those inside the PZ can’t build diddly. Go figure.

Gloss! Gloss! Get Me My Gloss! But For God’s Sake, Don’t Send A Copy To Ron Crawford! We’ll Never Hear The End Of All The Déjà vu!

Got my really cool, high-gloss Brochure 1 on the “Los Osos Wastewater Project” put out by the Dept of Public Works. Very spiffy. In the center spread, there’s three boxes with cute little pictures and diagrams and arrows, showing how “Viable Project Alternatives” get developed. And in the center box, under the Prop 218 Viable Project Alternatives, there’s a picture of a hand calculator, some greenbbacks and two apples.

Two apples? Apples? I looked around for the oranges, but they’re not there. I suspect the apples were put in there as a graphic illustration of the word “General Benefit” as in apples are good for you hence a benefit? The drawings of greenbacks make sense since that portion of the graphic is referring to $$. But apples? Will the author please ‘splain?

At any rate, a copy of your way cool brochure should be in your mailboxes now. And you can sign up for reports and updates online. The brochure itself is pretty slim pickings because the engineers are still chug-chugging along gathering steam and figuring out which pieces of the track should get laid.

This community can only hope that County Engineering will make sure of their destination BEFORE laying track. After all, a prudent man does not decide to go to Fiji and then start immediately building a locomotive in order to make the entire trip. Just as the job determines the tool to be used, a wastewater system will take its shape and scope and placement from the final end-use plans. Get that right, and the rest falls into place.

Apropos of Ron, he’s posted another document over on his blogsite (http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/) “Why let silly little things like ‘facts and figures’ get in the way of a good sewer-park?” I emailed him to ask about the date of the publication he’s posted vis a vis the Coastal Commission and other reports on the Solutions Group solution. (documents and reports he has cached at his blogsite)

His reply: “ Cuesta Study = July 1998. The Coastal Commission comparative study that corroborated the Questa Study, and where [CC staff Steve] Monowitz writes, ‘Pursuit of the Solution Group alternative also has the potential to result in significant delays to the implementation of a wastewater treatment project for theLlos Osos area”[ was] October 1998. The “working Group” that included members of the County, RWQCB, CC, and Solution Group, where all those agencies were telling the Solution Group their plan wasn’t going to work = All through 1998”

The reason why I was curious about those dates, -- 1998? The Coast & Ocean article is dated Spring 2000. Huh?

It’s The Rock!

Latest copy of The Rock is out now. Here’s a few snipes from the front page:

“’Great Los Osos News Blackout’ Continues: Tribune ignores Ripley peer review report by NWRI panel and buries CDO hearings more than a week after the proceedings.”

“Ret. Judge Goldin on the RWQCB: ‘The Most Incredible Kangaroo Court I’ve Ever Observed’: Forty-plus years of experience in the law did not prepare Judge Goldin for the travesty of justice she witnessed at the RWQCB’s Jan 22 CDO hearing.”

“S.O.S. From Afar: ‘There’s something Going on in Los Osos – it’s Bad:’ David ‘The Waterguy’ Vehnuizen’s recent online thread on Los Osos provoked an array of responses from experts from across the U.S. . . . who are aware and watching.”

Plus an extensive interview with Dana Ripley of Ripley Pacific company, which prepared the Project Update Report as well as a proposal for a STEP system/AgExhange Los Osos wastewater plan.

Too bad the County didn’t include a copy of The Rock tucked inside their glossy brochure. That would have been a more balanced diet: Eye candy AND a good chunk of nourishing information (besides apples?) for the citizens to chew on.)

(For readers who live outside the Los Osos area where The Rock is distributed, you might call them at 528-1224 or email them at TheRockReader@yahoo.com to see about having a copy mailed to you.)

HOORAY! For AGP Video

AGP Video donated a good chunk of its own time to make sure the citizens could view the “kangaroo court” proceedings of the January 22 RWQCB CDO hearings. If you haven’t already sent them a donation to offset that incredible Public Service gesture, please do so: Their address is: 1600 Preston Lane, Morro Bay 93442.

Meantime, Good Karma and Good Job: AGP Video won the contract to “tape and show state Coastal Commission gatherings on the Internet.”

Reported the Trib: “Sarah Christie, legislative coordinator for the commission, “This is part of a growing trend in state and local government to make public meetings available to the public over the Internet.”

Hooray!

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

Do you EVER wake up and see any good whatsoever in ANYTHING?

Anonymous said...

Churadogs,

Your comments on the County's first of several information brochures were weak, and expected.

It's obvious that this initial edition was basically an introduction for the thousands of residents who did not attend the December town hall meeting, and do not have the time, or inclination, to track the blogs.

Let's just give the process a few months and review what comes out of it, please.

Churadogs said...

Apples, I asked about the apples.

Anonymous said...

If the Trib and its local ilk were the watchdogs they're supposed to be we'd be getting this info there. Ann could then enjoy her retirement writing about dogs and Adirondak chairs.

Thank you, Ann - and The Rock - for telling the hard news that no one likes to think about and other news outlets don't want to report.

Anonymous said...

The Rock, is, always has been & always will be the only FAIR & BALANCED information that the Community of Los Osos will ever get. The news in the ROCK is always current, factual & non biased. Keep up your excellent work, Ed & Pam! Love you for all your hard work.

Anonymous said...

Well that's your OPINION!

Ed has proved himeself to be biased and not interested in another side of the story and Pam has so many misconceptions based on hearsay that she is just unbelievable.

Lisa Senet-Briggs said...

The impartial and unbiased analysis of the Ripley project essentially told us that their cost estimates were way off base. Consider the issues of denitrification, whether the Ripley plant was large enough to handle the capacity and whether the "in-lieu" recharge they promised would actually be appropriate for our aquifer and AG usage patterns ... they were selling us a wish so we would hire them to design a new plant down the road ... and they knew damn well the new plant would cost considerably more than what they told us.

Until you report that or mention it in your column it isn't really fair to criticize the Trib for not covering the issue ... because you haven't either.

Anonymous said...

Hi Ann,

Thanks for your plug for the new issue of The Rock.

Pam says "people don't read anymore." When I read, Anon 1:37 PM, February 09, 2007, "Ed has proved himeself to be biased and not interested in another side of the story," I had to score a point for Pam.

I have my biases like anybody else, obviously, but I jump through hoops to get every side of the story. I'll talk to ANY expert, professional and official who will talk to me -- and there's been plenty. Some people just don't read, don't want to know, and are content to believe their own propaganda.

In the latest issue you'll find such professionals quoted as Dana Ripley, David Vanhuizen, Pio Lombardo, Dennis McQuillan, Bob Rawson, Tom Murphy and Judge Goldin, not to mention a wide range of local voices such as Al Barrow, Chuck Cesena, Jeff Edwards, Maria Kelly, Joe Sparks, Julie Tacker, Lynette Tornatzky and Pandora Nash-Karner.

Does anybody read anymore? Does anybody think for themselves anymore?

Anon 4:49 PM, February 09, 2007 - You are just plain nuts. I prefer salty myself. If you're an example of what Ann has to put up with on her blog, I feel sorry for her. I'd rather be fighting crazies I can see.

Ed

Mrs. Pearl Seiberg said...

I have NOT read anything that even comes close to the TRUTH about what is happening here in Los Osos in any of the "local tabloids", such as the Tribune, Sun Bulletin or even The Bay News. Finally, Mr. Ochs comes out with a local newspaper for our Community that is factual & unbiased in every way. He seems to be the ONLY truly responsible journalist in the entire Community & yet, there are some folks here that are only HAPPY WHEN THEY CRITICIZE THE ROCK & ITS PUBLISHER. I always knew that Los Osos lacked sophistication, but NOW I realize that so many of the NAY-SAYERS even lack intelligence.

Anonymous said...

Personally,I have thoroughly enjoyed my new found friend in Ed Ochs. Do we agree on every issue? No. Is he willing to discuss the issues? Yes. Thanks to Ed & Pam & Aaron(sp?) for sharing what they have to contribute after analysis. Ed does not hold it against me personally for sharing my opinion. Community is about mutual respect and trust. I don't have to agree, I just want the opportunity to have the discussion. We are off to the Merrimaker-anyone want to join us?
Have a great weekend.
Cheers!
Sincerely,
Maria M. Kelly

Lisa Senet-Briggs said...

Ed,

Are you saying that the Ripley cost analysis was realistic? If so, please explain why even the Ripley team members noted the denitrification and gallons per person per day problems?

Anonymous said...

Dear LSB,

I'm not saying that the Ripley cost analysis was realistic -- or unrealistic. I asked Mr. Ripley some questions I picked up the from listening to the county and community, and he responded. Whether you like the Ripley Report or not, Ripley does a great job of explaining himself, injecting some clarity, dispelling a few myths along the way. I think it's safe to say that only the most dedicated will ever crack the binding on the Ripley teams's 2"-inch thick "Los Osos Wastewater Management Plan Update." But the Ripley in-depth interview will, at the very least, provide residents with easier access to the thinking behind the Report, which successfully passed per review in December by a National Water Research Institute panel headed by the esteemed Dr. George Tchobanoglous.

This is not me spinning it. This is how it happened and who did it. If you see a black hole in the Report, please send a concise note clearly detailing what that specific hole is to therockreader@yahoo.com -- and I'm sure Mr. Ripley would be very glad to answer. I'll print it, of course. I found him to be honest and forthcoming.

I'm just trying to level the playing a little bit, that's all. Most people seem to know that and understand it, and take it from there. But I do not play sides when it comes to treating people respectfully in print (OK, except Chairman Young), especially when so much is on the line. This is no joke. I want as many intelligent points of view as there are professionals, experts and officials willing to step forward and lend their expertise to our information-starved community -- so we can make solid informed decisions. And I have never been accused of misquoting anyone.

You can SEE what I'm tryting to do. I'm not running for anything, don't crave the microphone or spotlight, accept input, appreciate expertise, and, whatever you do, wish you a great weekend.

Ed

P.S. The Rock will get distributed to every home in Los Osos -- after the rains pass. Now, if you get it and don't want it, please throw it in the recycle garbage can instead of calling me early in the morning and screaming at me. Or, if possible, at least wait til 10.

Churadogs said...

Lisa-Senet-Briggs sez:"The impartial and unbiased analysis of the Ripley project essentially told us that their cost estimates were way off base. Consider the issues of denitrification, whether the Ripley plant was large enough to handle the capacity and whether the "in-lieu" recharge they promised would actually be appropriate for our aquifer and AG usage patterns ..."

What "impartial and unbiased analysis" are you speaking of? The so called "peer review" report workshop by the NWRI panel? I read that report and it didn't do an in depth analysis of any particular system, but looked at a general overview and focused on issues that would be critical in selecting any system. They did say that STEP was a viable alternative in use in many places & etc.and noted that the Plan Update "provided an extremely valuable service to the Los Osos community .. ." etc., and as for the nitrate issue, wasn't that a specific request by the RWQCB? And the report then noted, "Effluent disposed by land application (.ie. spray irrigation) will not need to undergo nitrogen removal when applied at agronomic rates."

As I read that report, it was clear that what the workshop focused on was a clear overview that could guide the County in a general direction, with caveats to beware of.

I hope everyone in town does get a copy of The Rock and reads the Ripley interview. Very interesting info in there they need to think about.

Ron said...

You know what's bugged me for years? No one knows the exact date that the project switched from ponds at Tri-W to an industrial sewer plant at Tri-W. We're talking about a distinct change in projects, two completely different projects, and no one can name the date when that change occurred. That's totally unacceptable. In one of my posts awhile back, I referred to that transition as "quiet." Monowitz would later tell me that he agreed with that description.

If you CDOers want to see some fireworks at one of those "kangaroo" court hearings, try and get someone to nail down the date of that transition. Ask them: What day did the ponds fail?

Ann wrote:

"Got my really cool, high-gloss Brochure 1 on the “Los Osos Wastewater Project” put out by the Dept of Public Works."

Is there a staff box in that newsletter that says something like:

Written by: So-and-So
Graphic design: So-and-So

etc?

I guess what I'm asking, and I'm sure many already know where I'm going with this, who put that newsletter together? Any signs of behavior-based-marketing? Two apples? I'm not liking the sound of that.

An Anon wrote:

"Ed has proved himeself to be biased and not interested in another side of the story..."

There's another side to "bait and switchy?" What is it?

Maria wrote:

"We are off to the Merrimaker-anyone want to join us?"

Oh, hell yea.

Ed wrote (good post):

"I'm not saying that the Ripley cost analysis was realistic -- or unrealistic. I asked Mr. Ripley some questions I picked up the from listening to the county and community, and he responded. "

Watch how fast Ripley's answers become your "opinion" around here, Ed, just because you asked the questions.

For example, I revealed that Monowitz wrote in 1998 (before the election that formed the CSD):

"Pursuit of the Solution Group alternative also has the potential to result in significant delays to the implementation of a wastewater treatment project for the Los Osos area...”

And a lot of my haters think it's my "opinion" that he wrote that perfect prediction.

"Now, if you get it and don't want it, please throw it in the recycle garbage can instead of calling me early in the morning and screaming at me. Or, if possible, at least wait til 10."

Funny. They can also shred up a portion and use it to start a fire in their wood stove. That's what I do with New Times when I'm finished with it... works great.

Ann wrote:

"I hope everyone in town does get a copy of The Rock and reads the Ripley interview. Very interesting info in there they need to think about."

If it's not too much trouble, have Ed e-mail you the text and then post it on your blog, I'd be interested in reading that article. If he wants, he can e-mail it to me (I believe he has my e-mail address) and I'll post it on my blog.

The only time I've heard the Ripley team is when a couple of them were on Congalton a few months back, and just before the end of the interview, they said there was "no comparison" between their project and the Tri-W project that required "bait and switchy" to make it happen.

Really? No comparison? Imagine that.

Also, real quick, the Questa Study is spelled with a "Q." It comes from Questa Engineering based in the Bay area.

Anonymous said...

Once again, The Rock has given my tired eyes some satisfaction. The content is definitely refreshing for the mind and spirit.

Ron said...

I went and downloaded a pdf version of the "glossy" newsletter (figured... rainy Saturday morning, what the hell, huh? It's interesting stuff) and I'm fairly confident that it is behavior-based-marketing free. No one in Los Osos that practices that brand of marketing and has a history with the formation of the LOCSD in 1998 would have included the following quote in their newsletter:

"They (the county) also recognize that countywide taxpayers had previously spent about $5 million prior to 1999, without any reimbursement when the LOCSD was approved by voters in November 1998."

That goes straight to that "$5 million apology" I mentioned in Three Blocks, when I wrote that the Solution Group's marketing tactics not only gutted Los Osos, but cost county taxpayers a bundle, too. Two years removed from that article, and eight years removed from that election, I still stand by that statement: The Solution Group owes county taxpayers a $5 million apology.

Think it'll be forthcoming anytime soon?

It's good to see that am not the only one that remembers that $5 mil. I've heard county staff mention that figure a number of times during supervisors meetings recently, and now they are including it in their own newsletter. (Translated: County officials still have a bitter taste in their mouths about the way the LOCSD was formed in 1998... and they should. It's understandable. The Community Plan cost county taxpayers $5-plus million, and the Community Plan failed.)

Also, in the Q & A portion of the newsletter, someone asked:

"WHY…is the Tri-W Project still “on the table?”

Excellent question, especially the "WHY" part. Can't wait to see their answer in a "future brochure."

Anonymous said...

"THE ROCK" & publisher Mr. Ochs, have done it AGAIN! He gets all the FACTS out with NO SPIN whatsoever. He is to be congratulated for his honesty & sincere caring for this Community. I just don't understand why the "OBSTRUCTIONISTS" are always trying to KILL THE MESSENGER just because they don't like the MESSAGE. If I owned a business or were self employed (such as real estate agents), I would NOT HESITATE for one moment to place an ad in Mr. Ochs paper, "THE ROCK". Keep up your excellent coverage on the Los Osos TRAGEDY.

Anonymous said...

Ann, is Ron saying that Pandora Nash Karner put out that Piece of fluff "newsletter" that the county sent to the home owners in Los Osos? It was completely irrelevant & gave us NO REAL INFORMATION at all. True to Pandies "style". Hasn't this one woman done ENOUGH DAMAGE in this Community? When will she STOP? The majority of residents here are offended at her MEDDLING.

Ron said...

" is Ron saying that Pandora Nash Karner put out that Piece of fluff "newsletter"

Just to clarify, I said it seemed, "behavior-based-marketing free," maybe it would have been clearer if I wrote, "free of behavior-based marketing."

I don't think she had a hand in it, but I agree, the newsletter is fluffy.

Anonymous said...

To showcase the complete paranoic mindset of many who blog here, someone actually thought the evil Pandora had anything to do with the newsletter from the county. Might be the funniest thing I have read so far.

And this:
"The majority of residents here are offended at her MEDDLING."

And you're comfortable with Ron's meddling, or worse yet Richard Margetson's? Last I checked Pandora actually lived here and had a stake in the community. And those two?

Anti-Obstructionist said...

The "Rock" controls the content of their paper just like Ann Calhoun controls her content. Heaven forbid that they would ever publish complete content and views from others that did not disagree strongly with their positions. And simply consider that Pam Ochs filed suit to stop the sewer by chalenging the decision of the Water Board in giving us a low interest loan. The result of the "Rock" faulty journalism has been a 41 million dollar bankruptcy, and a large increase in the potential cost of the sewer. It would have been nice if they ever published both sides of the story.

I do not think the Goldins have served this community well. They live out of the Prohibition Zone in Cabrillo Estates. There will never be any project that ANN, Goldins, Maggot, Racano or the other obstructionists will not try to nit-pick to death. The major problem is that we have ALL been dragged into a sewer of idiocy, and those left on the short end of the stick financially will pay a terrible cost in human suffering. Moving is a terrible price to pay.

Hard Shell said...

ANN, you, the Ochs, Crawdaddy, McPherson and their buddy Racano have just been given the NUT WATCH award for excellence in 2006. You have done a fine job of promoting stupidity. Not since Jimmey Carter have we seen a finer example. Thank you for your efforts to promote nut cases.

Signed,

Alfred E. Newman (What me worry?)

Pam Ochs said...

DEAR ANTI-OBSTRUCTIONIST ABOVE,

Your information above needs to be corrected. The Los Osos Taxpayers Association filed the lawsuit. The recalled CSD did not allow the Los Osos taxpayers (homeowners) their Constitutional Right to Vote to be taxed on a project (Prop 218) before the project started. The suit was not filed by just me as you state. (Paavo stated in writing that the CSD and county MUST have a Prop 218 too.) The State Water Board had to have a dedicated source of revenue (secured funding) by law before any SRF money is distributed. The state did not do what was required by law, and THAT ultimately cost Los Osos the $40 million in debt. The Attorney General's Office admitted that to the judge in bankruptcy hearing. The project could have waited until a Prop 218 vote, and could have waited until the recall election was over. Why didn't that happen?

MORE importantly, the suit was to show that if the CSD (now the county) was following the law (218), then everyone who benefits pays from a wastewater project. EVERYONE, not just 5,000 homeowners would have to pay to clean the bay and for clean groundwater. This includes ALL stakeholders in the bay, from the state to federal government -- that's everyone who has their "finger" in the bay... NOT just 5,000 homeowners picked to pay because of an artifical boundary.

The Los Osos Taxpayers Association wanted the law to be followed and the cost spread to everyone and every stakeholder.

Ed responds. You said: "The "Rock" controls the content of their paper just like Ann Calhoun controls her content... Heaven forbid that they would ever publish complete content and views from others that did not disagree strongly with their positions... It would have been nice if they ever published both sides of the story."

Score another point for Pam's contention that "people don't read anymore"...and are brainlocked on issues. This anonymous is in worse shape than most... a dedicated "volunteer" smear artist on the front line of blogging dis- and misinformation. She gives me a headache But that's her job, and I've got mine.

As far as "both sides" --"sides" is one of my most unfavorite words. There are either thousands of "sides" or we are ALL on the same side and too dumb to know it. Pick one.

Anonymous said...

Attention Los Osos: We're dumb and we know it. At least I do.

Anonymous said...

I just read The Rock and it was extremely informative. I don't know about this whole "nut watch" business but I don't think that squirrels should be talking about any sort of "nut watch." They're already nuts as is.

Anonymous said...

People who like Tri-W naturally won't like The Rock. The Rock provides lots of good information, alternative viewpoints, and is locally owned and operated. One is required to THINK through the issues when reading a publication like The Rock (unlike The Tribune which gives those nice little CNN-style bites).

Anonymous said...

Now here is an interesting twist! I don't think that Tri-W was all evil incarnate and I like The Rock and I enjoy the Tribune. Hmmm, does that mean I lack the ability to be discerning or maybe I like my facts to be fact based with bias. Let's face it, propaganda is propaganda, news in many forms is propaganda and depending on who distributes it will depend on the bias. I expect my information to be biased and then allow me to make some assertions. Plus, I enjoy the flair of individuality and I don't like liars and cheats. Neither The Rock or the Tribune would fall into the class of liars or cheats. Now I know there are many who disagree with either of those but when you meet the Oz behind the curtain it's worth a chuckle and smile of appreciation for the presentation.
After following almost every step of the board for the past 8 months, I for one was very appreciative of Sona Patel's article.

As a property owner and a potential CDO recipient, I know that it will be my choice to appeal. If I should chose to appeal, I would not ask my neighbors to pay for that. I would like some member of the appeal process to cut the us free and make the statement. Please also clarify how many of the original 45 are actually appealing. If Mr.Cesena and Mrs.Schicker believe that they are doing the right thing for this community then I will ask them to step off of the bankruptcy committee because it is evident that they are more concerned with furthuring a personal agenda than representing us in bankruptcy.

Mr.Cesena is very close to a CDO recipient who is a part of the appeal process and again the line of personal benefit is being crossed. I do not want to pay for anymore attorney fees for any self-interest group unless on a voluntary basis.

Sincerely,
Maria M. Kelly

Pandora Crawford Monowitz-Edwards said...

Why is TriW still on the table?

Because (not matter what Ron says) it is the most thoroughly studied site and most thoroughly designed plant.

View it as the "worst case" option, Ron, and you'll feel better.

If another site proves at least as good as TriW, you have no worries.

If no other sites prove as good as TriW, prepare yourself to write a scathing article about how Julie and Lisa screwed our community by insisting on something other than TriW even though they had the information available to know better.

Anonymous said...

Hopefully, Pam Ochs has "clarified" for "anti-obstructionist" the merits of the Los Osos Taxpayer Assoc. lawsuit. Mrs. Ochs is to be commended for all her efforts. That SRF loan WAS illegal, we DID NOT get a vote on whether or not we wanted to tax ourselves for a project that was NOT affordable & that 99% of the residents did NOT want because of the cost & technology involved. Pam is to be commended, NOT VILLIFIED.

Anonymous said...

Ms. Kelly

I enjoy your posts immensely! And I commend you for taking an active role in community issues. But when you start mentioning people's personal lives, doing the gossip thing (which is easy to do here) I have less respect for your mostly refreshing thoughts. I would understand if you found my comments offensive...just a head's up if you want to unite folks, like I admire you for trying to do :)

Anonymous said...

Mrs. Kelly,

You say: Mr.Cesena is very close to a CDO recipient who is a part of the appeal process and again the line of personal benefit is being crossed.

You are quite the little hypocrite. You seek revolution? Emotionalism and innuenedo is exactly what you criticized your opponents for in the election, yet you now resort to the same tactics to rally your drunken troops. You've exposed yourself as a shrill dillitante bucking for a raise. This is what we get from someone who just pulled into town on a turnip truck. I can hardly wait for the next CSD election to cast my vote for absolutely ANYBODY who you run against, even Julie Tackey with all her pompous baloney and conflicts of interests. You are just sooooo wrong for Los Osos. Stop undermining our elected officials, even if you don't support them. You have become as divisive an obstructionist to the elected government of Los Osos as those you accuse of bankrupting "your" town, as those who walked in your shoes before you... Legros, Hensley, Gustafson -- all recalled and now buried alive in the Los Osos Hall of Shame.

Not Chuck's Mother

Anonymous said...

Dear anon 3:56, I don't find your comments the least bit offensive. Honesty is appreciated and frequently missing. If I cross a line, I'll admit it but in this situation, my concern is that the board is not thinking these issues through and there are genuine liability concerns and protocol that is not being followed. The public has not been notified in advance. The filing of the appeal letter was on January 16th and states that Shaunna Sullivan would be representing the district yet she wasn't formally hired until after that date and at that board meeting, there was not contract and as stated in the paper today, still no clear details. People need to recognize what is happening and not just from the passionate emotional response but from fact. I also never stated names, that would be crossing the line and inappropriate. Mine are just observations and not based on idle gossip. Comments and criticism are welcome.

Dear anon 3:59,
I wasn't referring to anyones mother and thanks for your non-support. I doubt I'll ever have the opportunity to run for a seat on the CSD as it will be completely insolvent in 3-6 months and has proven to be incapable of establishing any policy in the past 15 months that truly represents the district. Please vote however you see fit but I doubt I lost your vote, it was one I probably never had. I don't come on the blogs all that often because it's so repetative but I may have to start checking in more, there seem to be some new personalities and that will be refreshing.
I'm not sure how I have underminded our elected officials! If I did I must be far more powerful than I ever imagined! It's absolutely my responsiblity and right to pay attention to the current fragile situation of our CSD. If I don't think that Mr.C and Mrs.S are doing a good job representing us in the bankruptcy I can state that and I've never done it disrespectfully.
Thank you for paying attention to what I do and say, it's good to know that somebody is.
Thanks too for the head up into how I am perceived, I've never been called a "dillitante" and I'm appreciative of the image.
As far as name calling goes, not too bad and I accept no matter how out of character.

I don't hide when I do pop in and out, I'll stand behind what I say and put my name on.
Sincerely,
Maria M. Kelly

Anonymous said...

Mrs. Kelly,

You say: "I also never stated names, that would be crossing the line and inappropriate. Mine are just observations and not based on idle gossip."

Your comment that Chuck "is very close to a CDO recipient who is a part of the appeal process and again the line of personal benefit is being crossed" contradicts what you have stated above.

If you are connecting Chuck and a friend appealing a CDO as Chuck's reason to hire the lawyer, that is sheer, unvarnished innuendo, devoid of any factual basis, and a cheap shot. Not using a name doesn't make you more responsible, just a louse. If you know something, spit it out. Otherwise, keep your mouth shut. How far you have fallen from your "ideals" of respect and fair play. You are pathetic.

Here, let me turn it back on you, since innuendo is OK with you. The only reason you are running off your mouth is because you're broke and you're looking to climb aboard Legros' gravy train, you work for Hensley's attorney, your husband works for Cal Poly -- and you all stand to gain financially from the old rotten gravity project digging a big hole at Tri-W.

You are just another Dreamer Schemer knee-deep in corruption and conflict masquerading as goody-two shoes, playing the blame game, further dividing the community, while you wait for your pay day... That is plain disgusting.

Anonymous said...

anonymous 5:54 PM

You are so sweet, you can kiss my ass anytime you wish. Aren't you also sleeping with Jeff Edwards?

You really don't know what you are talking about, do you? Just more trash talk, hope you like the Tri-W WWTF that you'll get to help pay for!

Anonymous said...

What if I am sleeping with Jeff? What's it to you? Who are you sleeping with -- Paavo, Pandora or Richard? -- because only they would know it's definitely going into Tri-W.

How do you know? How are you privy?

If you're sleeping with Paavo, and that's how you get your information, how sad for him it's come down to you.

If you're sleeping with Pandora, and that's how you get your information, how sad for her that it's come down to you.

If you're not sleeping with anybody, that's one big step for mankind.

However, if you're sleeping with Jan DeLeo because Pandora's tied up, then you've finally found a match.

Churadogs said...

Well, that was a short run straight down into sheer silliness. Sigh. Commentors must be having a bad hair day or something. The discussion usually doesn't devolve so quickly or so stupidly. Sigh.