Pages

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

PZLDF Attorney Dismisses Sorta Kinda (Where’s Roger?) ! Party Time! Paavo Speaks! Gotta Lobby! And Hats Off!

First, from a press release from the PZLDF:


PROHIBITION ZONE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND DISMISSES LAWSUIT, BUT BRIGGS AVAILABILITY FOR QUESTIONS WILL REMAIN OPEN TO CHALLENGE.
As a cost saving measure PZLDF has decided to dismiss, without prejudice, their Petition for Writ of Mandamus which was amended and filed on November 28, 2006.
The basis for the petition, filed by Alan Martyn, William Moylan, Beverly Dewitt-Moylan, Antoinette Payne, Bruce Payne, Rhian Gulassa, and Timothy L. Rochte, sought to have hearings continued until Regional Water Board Executive, Roger Briggs, could appear for a questioning.
Roger Briggs left on October 6, 2006 for a six month sabbatical, and although subpoenaed in advance did not appear for their deposition. Water Board chairman, Jeffery Young quashed the subpoena October 18. Although the request was first made to Regional Water Board staff in August, the lack of Mr. Briggs testimony and prosecution team documents made proper preparation for hearings impossible.
The Regional Water Board recognized Roger Briggs would be unavailable for either disposition or appearance at the quasi-trials if hearings did not proceed as promised after the April 28 hearing, but for reasons unexplained, Jeffery Young continued and then delayed the hearings for over 9 months, until after Briggs’ departure.
The lawsuit asked the court to vacate all orders requiring the hearings until after the completion of the deposition of Roger Briggs or to set aside the decision that quashed the subpoena and to produce Roger Briggs. Additionally defendants were not properly noticed and served chairman’s orders throughout the year long proceedings. The court found it was premature to challenge the enforcement or stay the hearings until after the issuance of the Cease and Desist Orders.
PZLDF had originally planned to amend the Petition after issuance of the Cease and Desist Orders but based on new delays by the Regional Water Board to complete the balance of the hearings until at least May, it is probably more cost-effective to dismiss the current petition and re-file it later, according to a spokesman for PZLDF. (There are at lease 7 property owners to be heard.)
PZLDF request for dismissal will be filed immediately to avoid possible dismissal or prejudice to their legal challenges. On January 16, 2006: 14 of the 45 residents and property owners in Los Osos targeted for enforcement filed a petition for the State Water Resources Control Board to review the actions of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control (RWQCB).
The appeal is brought on behalf of all individual property owners and residents of Los Osos who have been or will be subject to the issuance of individual Cease and Desist Orders, or who oppose the “lottery style” enforcement actions taken by the water board and issuance of CDO’s that could result in loss of property.
Representation for the legal actions including the appeal is by Sullivan and Associates. Petitioners include designated parties who were issued Cease and Desist Orders at the December 14 and 15 hearings before the RWQCB.
-End-



Party Time!

Mark your calendars. Time for a benefit for The Los Osos 45, you know, your friends and neighbors who have spent a whole year being hammered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and who are now appealing their CDO case to both the State Water Board and, if necessary, into a “real court,” in hopes that the rest of the community doesn’t have to go through what they’ve been put through. (See above for some of what they’re been going through – including the fact that the State Water Board can sit on their appeal for nearly a year, thereby tying them up in “administrative” limbo while preventing them from even going to a “real court” to get anything close to “justice.”)

It’s a BBQ, with Music, and prizes on Sunday, March 18, noon to 6pm. at the South Bay Community Center, 2180 Palisades. Cost is $10. For more information call 528-8408 or go to www.PZLDF.org See you there.

Speaking of Seeing You There, Where Were You?

Citizens for Clean Water-PZLDF had a meeting last night at the Washington Mutual meeting room; guest speakers Paavo Ogren and two of the project engineers on the wastewater project. So, show of hands: How many of you folks who regularly log onto this blogsite to whine and kvetch and lie and make stuff up and ask ME questions bothered to show up and whine and kvetch and ask PAAVO questions? C’mon, how many of you were there?

I thought as much.

Had you attended the meeting you may have heard Paavo’s comments and replies to many questions. Some of the more interesting comments:

For those of you who keep stating that the community could have had a sewer years ago paid for by the federal government, Paavo would beg to differ for the following reasons: Resolution 83-13 wasn’t passed until 1983. That meant that there was no regulatory perception of a “problem” and by ’83 the county was working on a sewer but by about ’85 President Reagan had de-funded federal funding for such projects (it was the “Reagan Revolution” of cutting government programs -- to Reagan,” the government didn’t solve problems, the government WAS the problem -- so by the time the County had a project ready, there were no federal monies available to pay for the project, which meant the cost was “unaffordable” even in ’85.

Since Paavo was the first interim General Manager for the original CSD, he had a unique seat at the table, so to speak and some of his comments as to what went wrong here should be made mandatory listening and it had to do with what he called ‘Institutional Effectiveness,” that is, Does the institution (i.e. a CSD, any CSD) responsible for dealing with a project, have the resources to actually solve the problem?

In the case of our CSD the answer clearly was: No. When the original Ponds of Avalon failed to materialize, (and Ron Crawford has documented that the Solutions Group knew before the CSD formation that they wouldn’t be approved) the CSD simply lacked the resources needed to do a serious alternatives analysis. What happened instead was what I call the Tar Baby Syndrome: by sticking tightly to the [Tri-W] site they were forced to do A which led to B which led to C and so forth until the tracks they laid bit by bit headed off the cliff. (A tidbit: According to Paavo, as of now, MBR technology is off the table. It was mandated by sticking to the Tri-W site because it allows the treatment plant to fit into a very small footprint, but it’s expensive and an energy sucker and if that tiny footprint is no longer required, the technology is too wasteful to be considered. It’s an excellent example of the Tar Baby Syndrome.)

Paavo’s comments about “Institutional Effectiveness” is also an excellent reminder that it’s highly likely that this entire project was doomed from day one and its fate totally sealed by Regulatory pressure (FINES!FINES!FINES! Unreasonable TSOs, more FINES!FINES!FINES), bad information or lack of information (remember the tape of an early discharge site selection meeting of the original CSD wherein it was pointed out and acknowledged that the CSD didn’t have enough information to make a proper decision yet one had to be made that night or else face FINES!FINES!FINES – the worst kind of decision making process possible). Add on some key failures by the oversight bodies (Coastal Commission and BOS and County Planning) and you have the perfect mix for a perfect train wreck.

More comments: To Paavo, the RWQCB’s CDO date of 2011 is “unreasonable.” Apparently, most everybody except the RWQCB and their Grand Inquisitor understands that a project cannot be completed by 2011, the “drop dead” date they insisted be kept in the CDO and “Settlement Agreements.’ Paavo also expressed a hope that the RWQCB would follow the wording of AB2701, the point of which was that all parties “stand down,” something everybody except the RWQCB understood and neither did Governor Schwarzenegger, whose signing statement appended to AB2701 may also bollix up things.

Plus, interestingly, Paavo raised the fact that the RWQCB is faced with an interesting problem: The cost of complying with their regulations BLOWS OUT ALL AFFORDABILITY GUIDELINES, federal, state, all of ‘em. KaBoom! Out of the water. Which raises this issue: Does regulatory compliance legally require a community be destroyed in order to “save” it?

In a demographic chart passed out at the meeting, (based on the general census, not the PZ itself, which means the chart is skewed “richer” than the PZ reality) about 43% of the community are 55-75 with Median Houshold Incomes in the $35,00 range, which means that for them, even the $205-a-month Tri W sewer estimate would have gone beyond all Federal “affordability” ranges. Which gets back to: Does regulatory compliance require a community destroy 43% of its residents in order to “save” itself?

And finally another important comment by Paavo: Regulators can hurt or help AB 2701, that is, actions taken by the RWQCB could end up bollixing up AB2701 and making completion of the project harder, something apparently everyone except the RWQCB understands. Sigh.

Maria Kelly and Lynette Tornatzky will be hosting county representatives Thursday night March 1, for more questions on the 218 vote at the little schoolhouse at 6 pm. before the CSD meeting (wherein maybe we will learn that the 2.5 million that was held by the judge has now been released to the CSD without a peep from the papers and apparently no battle from the County which argued that that money should come to them as part of the wastewater funds so maybe Thursday night we’ll get some more info or a WWF Smackdown fight over the dough?) So, to all the folks who spend endless hours on this blog, at least go to Kelly’s meeting and ask Paavo your questions.

Hats off to Cal Poly Student Intern, Katherine Hamby.

If you got your swell February Brochure #2 on Proposition 218, there’s a note in there that informs us that the Los Osos Project Brochures are being designed and prepared by Cal Poly Senior, Kathy Hanby. Another great example of Cal Poly’s “hands-on” policy of education – students getting a chance to put their education to work in the real world with actual real-world projects. It’s a real win-win: the student gets invaluable experience, we (the “client”) get a brochure that cost less than 70 cents to produce.

Lobby, Gotta Lobby

At last night’s meeting, I posed a question that I intend to keep asking (it’s called Lobbying and I’m going to be doing it until I see a firm date set) and here it is: Will the county set up a workshop and invite the so-called Peer Review Group (i.e. National Water Research Institute) to come and “peer review” the Process and whatever systems float up to the top for final consideration and issue a report?

The answer was Yes. Dr. George Tchobanoglous had expressed an interest in returning for just such a look-see as well as Valerie Young, AICP, Environmental Planner and Water Reuse Specialist.

This is good. None of the folks at the Water Research Institute have a dog in this fight. Dr. T wrote the textbooks that all of the engineers building this project were taught from while in engineering school, so nobody can say he’s some doofus with a spoon. In short, we can have the benefit of the top experts in the world vetting whatever project is in the running so that the community can have confidence that there were no non-engineering thumbs on the scale (i.e. “political stuff” that has nothing to do with engineering and best practices). My hope is that such a vetting and report will go a long way in bringing the community together that whatever project they finally pick will, indeed, pass muster.

27 comments:

Shark Inlet said...

Two quick comments ...

Your quibbling over the date of 83-13 versus the drying up of federal funds is misleading. The Los Ranchos neighborhood got a sewer in about that time for a fraction of the real cost because of federal grants (i.e. a gift). Los Osos was also eligible for those funds at that same time. The date of 83-13 is not relevant to whether the funds were available before then ... which they were.

You also mentioned that the RWQCB's 2011 date was unreasonable. How did they pick it? Please remember that the original "drop dead" deadline was 2010 and was set because the CSD assured the RWQCB that they would have a plant online by that point in time. It was entirely unreasonable for the CSD to promise something they could not deliver (yet again).

Los Osos could become the new example of SNAFU. The Solutions Group had some questionable choices in the past that laid the groundwork for our mess. Even so, they did get a project to the construction stage ... even if it wasn't a "perfect" project. The desire to change from TriW "no matter what it costs" will be viewed down the road as even more costly than the choices the Solutions Group had made.

Anonymous said...

Hi SharkInlet,

Nice to see your back and blogging again. Where have you been?

Anonymous said...

In response to Shark Inlet's comments:

If by the "Los Ranchos" neighborhood, you mean the San Luis County Club area, I have a different understanding of how that sewer system, which I think was constructed about 1988, was funded.

It is my understanding that in the main part of the County Club development, the developer paid for the treatment facility and the collection system. The plant also serves an old community septic system that already had some collection lines, as well as some individual properties that were on seperate septic systems. The County sold revenue bonds to pay for the cost of tying in the old community septic system and the individuals to the new plant. The sewer bills for those areas were higher than those in the County Club area since the developer constructed theirs (and they paid via their lot purchases).

These bonds were refinanced at least once, and I believe that they are now paid off and the sewer bills were lowered to reflect that. So, by my recollection, there were no grants, but the developer paid the costs for the plant and the collection system in the new tract.

Anonymous said...

I appoligize for twice saying "County Club" instead of the correct "Country Club" in the above post.

Anonymous said...

"Speaking of Seeing You There, Where Were You?"

I'm guessing the majority of people don't want to have anything to do with Gail McPherson.

Let's see if the meeting set up by Maria and Lynette is better attended. If it is, you will all know what a detriment Gail McPherson is to our community.

Anonymous said...

12:44
If what you say about the low turnout for Paavo's presentation is true, what a a sad example of biting off one's nose to spite one's face...

Anonymous said...

MBR is off the table for sites other than tri-w....
just a clarification.

Anonymous said...

Ann,

You wondered why some didn't show at last night's meeting. For one, it wasn't publicized. Most people didn't know about it.

Were the darlings of the CSD board there? Was Gail?! I heard they weren't -- they dropped their supporters like hot potatoes. Even Julie Tacker stopped pretending that she cares. All no-shows, I guess it's okay for them that the county wants a blank check for Tri-W and the PZ people will pay so much for a sewer, they won't know what hit them.

Look's like it will be gravity and most likely the Tri-W site. Pandora calls the shots!

Anonymous said...

I come here every once in a while to get entertained, and rarely am I disappointed. Anon 7:30, what possibly happened to you in your life that you have so much fear for a little woman, and give her extra-ordinary powers? Pandora's calling the shots! I'm laughing so hard I can't type. Thanks for not letting me down.

Anonymous said...

Bev. De Witt-Moylan here:

Three meetings all dealing with the County's update on THE PROCESS, including the 218, have been occurring between last Thursday and this coming Thursday. I was able to attend Paavo's presentation last Thursday when he and three others from the County project came to Bruce Gibson's bimonthly office hours.

Others attended last night's PZLDF-sponsored presentation. Still others will be able to go this Thursday to the schoolhouse meeting.

None of the presentations was as well publicized as they might have been. I wonder how many people in this town, outside those who keep track of such things, are even aware of Mr. Gibson's regular gatherings, which Paavo attends? The other two meetings with Paavo's group scheduled for this week have also had limited resources for publicity.

What is an effective and cost effective way to publicize such events community-wide, aside from sending out fliers to every household? PZLDF hand carried 5000 flyers door to door in the Prohibition Zone last spring, an exhaustively labor intensive project, to encourage people to attend the April 28 CDO hearing, which had also not been well publicized. Out of those 5000 flyers, an estimated 300 people attended the hearing, including those of us who "had" to be there.

It's admirable that Paavo and his group are willing to put such effort into making themselves available to residents of this town in meetings that appear redundant, but which allow a cross section of residents to fit into their schedules the opportunity to question those responsible for developing the sewer project.

From my own discouraging experiences with the RWQCB this past year, I have come to appreciate more than ever before the value of consistent communication and accessibility in fostering a functional relationship with a government entity. Paavo and his staff are making the effort to be personally available and to be as candid as possible.

Perhaps the County with its level of access could release public service announcements regarding these important local meetings so that more residents of Los Osos can attend and obtain first-hand, up-to-date information. Such announcements, especially for those of us without computer access, would increase public awareness of these meetings making them more accessible and a more effective and efficient use of County staff time.

Anonymous said...

Bev, I guess that you didn't hear the comments at the BOS meeting today from the Los Osos "public." Many railed against the cost of what the County is already sending out to inform us as to what they are doing. I don't think the nay-sayers are going to sit still while even more money spent to inform the public of - public meetings!

I couldn't agree with you more however. Public access to information is exactly what we need, and I am very, very pleased with the job the County is doing to inform us.

Burned out with fools! said...

The fact is that nobody cares. When rape is inevitable, one might as well lay back and enjoy it.

Churadogs said...

Anonymous sez:"Anonymous said...
MBR is off the table for sites other than tri-w....
just a clarification."

You're correct, thanks. As Paavo noted, an out of town site doesn't need it. In-town on a tiny footprint, yes. Out of town on a larger footprint, too expensive and unnecessary.


Shark Inlet (Welcome back) sez:"Your quibbling over the date of 83-13 versus the drying up of federal funds is misleading."

and also sez:"You also mentioned that the RWQCB's 2011 date was unreasonable."

Inlet, Inlet, Inlet. What am I going to do with you? Please go back and read my original posting. Your quibble is with Paavo. I was noting what HE said at the meeting. He felt this myth about all this free money raining down from Washington was just that: a myth. (I happen to agree: by the time of the original county project & CSD formation, there was no free money raining down from anywhere to be had) And he also felt that completion of a project by 2011 was "unreasonable." (I also agree. Heck, even the Peer Review group described it as "somewhat arbitrary.")

Inlet sez:"Los Osos could become the new example of SNAFU. The Solutions Group had some questionable choices in the past that laid the groundwork for our mess."

Paavo would agree with you. Me too. Also, Ron Crawford who made the humerous observation that regulatory agencies exist to prevent Los Osos from happening and "Friends don't let friends build sewers."

Bev sez:"What is an effective and cost effective way to publicize such events community-wide, aside from sending out fliers to every household? PZLDF hand carried 5000 flyers door to door in the Prohibition Zone last spring, an exhaustively labor intensive project, to encourage people to attend the April 28 CDO hearing, which had also not been well publicized. Out of those 5000 flyers, an estimated 300 people attended the hearing, including those of us who "had" to be there."

Couldn't agree more. I know what an enormous effort Rob Shipe and a handful of volunteers, including the Moylans, made in getting information flyers out to the community, quite literally walking door to door. Yet only 300 people cared enough to ven get off their duffs to find out what was heading their way?

I have always found it incredibly bizarre that even when faced with a direct hit on their own pocketbook, an enormous number of citizens will sit helpless and do nothing. It's a kind of "learned helplessness," I suppose. Or a carefully trained and inculcated child-like behavior, i.e. Sit down and shut up, Big Uncle Daddy will tell you what to do. Don't bother your dim little brain about it. Do as you're told.

Then you have another poster demonstrating the childish cutting off of his nose to spite face,"Eeeuuuu, I'm not going to go get information directly from Paavo because he's been invited to speak at a group Eeeeuuuuu I hate. (Wonder if these same people would refuse to go hear him if he were speaking at Bruce Gibson's "afternoon meetings" if they Eeeuuuuwww hate Bruce?) and yet another poster whined above about getting raped so he/she's going to do nothing, just give up.

The irony of all this can be found in answering a simple question: What would have happened to the Tri W train wreck if 2,000 people had showed up at the County Planning meeting when they signed off on Tri-W? Or the BOS meeting when former Supervisor Bianchi noted that she thought the whole mess stunk but was going to vote for it anway. What would have happened had 2,000 people showed up then and said, BAD IDEA, move this sewer out of town? (Remember supervisor Mike Ryan's comment that HE wouldn't vote to put a sewer plant in the middle of HIS town, BUT if that's what the people of Los Osos wanted . . . .

Or what would have happened if 2,000 people had showed up at a CSD meeting and said, WAIT for the recall vote before pounding our tax money into the ground? Since starting the project at that date was NOT required, and the recalled Board COULD HAVE CHOSEN to wait a few weeks, what would they have done if 2,000 members of The Community had gotten off their duffs and showed up to deliver that simple message in person? Out of a town of 15,000, 2,000 isn't that big a turn out. But they never showed up. Why not?

Paavo has stated very clearly, He wants to hear from the community because at this early date, input from the community may well influence WHAT ends up on the table. So, where is "The Community" when they have a chance to actually influence what will happen to them and their pocketbook?

It's a question I've been asking for years.

Anonymous said...

"Or what would have happened if 2,000 people had showed up at a CSD meeting and said, WAIT for the recall vote before pounding our tax money into the ground?"

Or 2,000 people showed up and demanded the new CSD NOT stop the project, subjecting the property owners to a lost SRF loan; individual CDO's; lawsuits from contractors; ever spiraling costs of whatever project eventually gets built, and bankruptcy.

Anonymous said...

I watched the Board of Supervisors meeting yesterday and the people who complained about the County providing information to the community via their project brochures were rediculous.

If the County was not sending out information to the people like this, this same group would be at public comment to critize the County staff for not keeping the community informed. Unbelieveable!

Anonymous said...

I haven't seen the meeting yet, but I would guess it was the same, small group of people who attend the CSD meetings. Complaining about things, anything, is a drug for these people. Rest assured the county is aware of their presence, their agendas, and tolerates them only because the Brown Act says they must. I know the county does not believe these yahoos represent the community as a whole at all.

*PG-13 said...

Shark Inlet > Los Osos could become the new example of SNAFU.

Wow, if not for this blog I would not know as much as I do about Cargo Cults. And now this. Yeah, I already knew about SNAFU - and FUBAR too (blush) - but what I didn't know until now is the vast etymological and fascinating cultural & historical background of each. If ya wanna waste a little time and want to learn more than you ever wanted to know about these acronyms check out this FUBAR citation on Wikipedia. There is also a good list of other military slang acronyms for SNAFU almost all of which can be used to describe Los Osos and our sewer here. For the potty mouths among us - or those who just want to spice up their comments without becoming a potty mouth - I recommend that list.

But did you also know about Private Snafu?

In the 1944 U.S. Army animated short The Three Brothers (directed by Friz Freleng), a character named Fubar is a brother of Private Snafu and Tarfu. Private Snafu is the title character of a series of black-and-white American instructional cartoon shorts produced between 1943 and 1945 during World War II. The character was created by director Frank Capra, chairman of the U.S. Army Air Force First Motion Picture Unit, and some of the shorts were written by Theodor "Dr. Seuss" Geisel. Although the United States Army gave Walt Disney Studios the first crack at creating the cartoons, Leon Schlesinger of the Warner Bros. animation studio underbid Disney by two-thirds and won the contract. ..... The Snafu shorts are notable because they were produced during the Golden Age of Warner Bros. animation. Directors such as Chuck Jones, Friz Freleng, Bob Clampett, and Frank Tashlin worked on them, and their characteristic styles are in top form. P. D. Eastman was a writer and storyboard artist for the Snafu shorts. Voice characterizations were provided by the celebrated Mel Blanc (Private Snafu's voice was similar to Blanc's Bugs Bunny characterization).

Frank Capra, Dr Suess, Mel Blanc, ..... dang, who knew? You hafta check out some free playable Private Snafu downloads here. I especially enjoyed Private Snafu - Booby Traps (1944). Although Private Snafu - Homefront (1943) stars Technical Fairy First Class and is especially noteworthy for its use of the Televisor in 1943.

Hey Mike, maybe we could show some Private Snafu cartoons at the cargo cult party at the Tri-W site on April 1?

Mike Green said...

PG! Great post!
Nice to get a funny sidebar going especialy if its sorta on topic.
Keeping with the acronym theme,
Is the CSD perched on an edge,
One BCH wide?
or
One RCH wide?
These are somewhat official terms of measurement.
(Sorry if I offend anyone)

Mike Green said...

P.S. I'm ALL for a Cargo Cult party!!!!!

By the way, noticed "Lake Pandora" has quite a few mallards frisking about in the water like ducks do!
Too bad the view is obstructed by the fence, looks like a prison,
makes you think about the statement at the kangaroo court descibing the German opression.

Personaly, I'm going to make my sacraficial WWTF into a hat


Bow and Chant!

Anonymous said...

A real WWTF with "Wave Wall" and a park with a duck pond would look a lot better for the money being wasted by our CSD.

What a wonderfully intelligent CSD we have working "for" us. On one hand they are going to hire yet another sewer lawyer with funds they don't have and on the other we are asking for contributions to run a cleanup program. Sounds more like a clean out our pocketbooks program!

When will these people get it through their heads that they have bankrupted the District! They really should be thrown in jail!

Anonymous said...

Bev,

A simple email blast to people would have gotten the word out (even list serve would have worked) about the Paavo/CDO meeting. The CSD board didn't show. One of them could have at least shown up in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

To 7:51PM,

If you are laughing about Pandora calling all the shots then you don't know what she's done from the very beginning until the recall. Either you are stupid, or Pandora herself, or just in denial and are trying to protect her and keep her hands clean when they are not. It's dirty -- like mother like daughter I guess in her case. She's not a nice person, and I wouldn't ever want to be the kind of person she is, I wouldn't want her millions either if I had to be the kind of person!

Churadogs said...

Anonymous said:"Or what would have happened if 2,000 people had showed up at a CSD meeting and said, WAIT for the recall vote before pounding our tax money into the ground?"

Or 2,000 people showed up and demanded the new CSD NOT stop the project, subjecting the property owners to a lost SRF loan; individual CDO's; lawsuits from contractors; ever spiraling costs of whatever project eventually gets built, and bankruptcy."

EXACTLY, AND voted against measure B and the recall. My point exactly. Where was everybody at the critical times when it counted, BEFORE this train was at the cliff's edge. Where's everybody now, at the formation, so to speak, when their input is critical? Are we seeing a repeat of this whole SNAFU -- the vast majority of the community out to lunch, waiting until somebody tells them what to do, sitting on the sidelines while other people make decisions for them, then they'll wander in when it's too late and whine about the results? Lord, I hope not.

Steven said...

Ann,

It sounds like you are close to admitting that the recall didn't achieve the desired results and that things have gotten worse since then. That you are saying that if our community was paying attention they would have voted against the recall and we could have kept this mess from getting worse ... just like we could have back in 1998 by voting against the formation of the CSD.

Could you clarify?

*PG-13 said...

Mike Green said > By the way, noticed "Lake Pandora" has quite a few mallards frisking about in the water like ducks do! Too bad the view is obstructed by the fence, looks like a prison, ....

No, no, no. Haven't you ever seen a zoo before? Although I suppose a zoo looks a lot like a prison from the inside. The prison is a just a short way up north. This is the Los Osos Wild Animal Park. (On topic alert: See Ann's newest blog.) The LOWAP will also double as a dog park.

Ann Said > What would have happened had 2,000 people showed up then and ......
She said again > Or what would have happened if 2,000 people had showed up at a CSD meeting and said, ....
And again > ..... what would they have done if 2,000 members of The Community had gotten off their duffs and showed up to deliver that simple message in person?

Well, one thing that would have happened is we would start holding the meetings somewhere else. I don't think 2K of us would fit in any of the rooms where these meetings were held.

All of which harkens back to a previous comment I made to Ann's blog of Feb 17, “I’m vilifying you, for God’s sake. Pay attention.”, where I referenced a comment about Thomas Jefferson's suggestion that a healthy society needs a good revolution every twenty years or so:

> ... people can stand only so much disruption of their everyday lives. They want to live quietly while making incremental gains. They want to have secure jobs and good health care for themselves and their family members. They want their children to have a chance at a good education to prepare them for a slot in the bureaucracy or at least a good factory job. So they stop backing those who favor "permanent revolution" or "bombarding the headquarters" and settle for the bureaucrats who are quiescent almost to the point of lifelessness. Then, of course, health care gradually worsens and becomes unaffordable; jobs are much less secure; and educational opportunities are more restricted. People become dissatisfied with that and the cycle starts again. It seems to me to be almost impossible to avoid this. Even if you don't have "victorious minorities" in charge, even if you have democratic majorities and a participatory system in place, after a while the great bulk of folks will rather watch TV or send e-mail than participate. And it's then that the faceless bureaucrats take over. Perhaps that's why Thomas Jefferson said we needed a revolution every twenty years. (citation

Ann, maybe you should give up getting 2,000 of us to attend a meeting and encourage that same 2,000 to march in the streets. I'll bet'cha The Triv would cover that! Might even get the RWQCB's attention too. Especially if the cops come out to quell the march creating a riot. Hey, it worked in Isla Vista. And Berkeley. I suggest we march on the TRI-W site, tear down the fences and claim it People's Park. No need for a new Parks Department to squander years and bukets of money. Kinda gets the sewer movin' too. And the people off their duffs. I suggest we take to the streets - rain or shine - on April 1 immediately following the Cargo Cult party celebrating the demise of the CSD. Is this a great idea or what?

*PG-13 said...

Oh, yeah, sorry, almost forgot ..... Power to the People! (closed fist logo here)

Although I think perhaps, this being the Los Osos Sewer/Park/Picnic Area/Ampitheater & Concert Hall a better symbol to use is the mobius loop.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, only when thousands of people get that big bill in the mail for $400 sewer, $100 imported water, maybe $100 extra for fees & charges, then a few hundred for storm run-off public works project. It will be too late then though. People just don't realize what they're in for financially. They won't be able to sell their homes for many years either.

Thanks to old board, new board -- all idiots for selling us out.