Yes, It’s The Department of “I Can’t Believe He Said That.”
In his Jan 15 article in New Times, Patrick Klemz discusses the Los Osos CSD vote to join forces with The Los Osos 45 and sign on with Los Osos attorney Shaunna Sullivan who is filing an appeal of the CDOs at the behest of some of the 45 to the State Water Board. That vote earned the ire of CSD Board Member, Joe Sparks, who wrote a Tribune “Viewpoint” (Feb 15) His objection appears to be a district spending money on legal fees “without having the funding source identified.”
Interestingly, what seems to have gone missing is the fact that – please correct me if I’m wrong here – the CSD was granted status as a Designated CDO recipient and had its kangaroo court “trial” and can now file an appeal. Furthermore, the CSD has to prepare an appeal of its ACL “trial,” a good amount of which can be appealed on the same basis as the CDO appeal, plus most of the CSD’s “trial” evidence was incorporated by reference by other CDO recipients so the CSD and The Los Osos 45 are indeed joined at the hip. (The Regional Water Quality Control Board has already clearly linked individual residents and the CSD together, which is why they have targeted everyone inside the PZ for a CDO. This makes claims of citizens somehow being “private” absurd. To the RWQCB the citizen IS the CSD and vice versa.) And if the CSD is already paying one attorney to handle their CDO/ACL appeal, and there’s another identical appeal from citizens and both are on one track, (and to the Water Board, citizen & CSD are one in the same) does it make financial sense to join those appeals? Apparently, Yes to the majority of the CSD Board and No to Mr. Sparks, hence we now have (again) Governance By Tribune “Viewpoint.”
Oddly, if the appeal is successful either with the Water Board or in a real court of law, the rulings could apply to the entire process and hence could affect all The Los Osos 45, the entire Prohibition Zone AND the entire CSD, including those outside the PZ. Plus, efforts by PZLDF (Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund) has already raised private donations to move the appeal process forward, so whatever work has already been done and paid for would also benefit the CSD’s appeal. In addition, Ms. Sullivan was quoted in the NT article as saying, “The CSD hasn’t paid me for anything yet. . . . Most of what’s been done so far as been on my dime. It’s been frustrating donating my services to a cause and getting ripped for it (in the media)”
Getting ripped for donating services to Los Osos? Par for the course in what Klemz deliciously describes as “the nitrate-crazed bedroom community.”
Well, presumably the CSD Board will figure out what jar to take the CSD’s CDO/ACL defense fund out of (Hint: The CSD’s regular attorney would have to bill for time spent on that appeal, so instead, why not assign that part of his budget to Ms. Sullivan?)
Well, as NT notes, “This is just another item for the grand jury,” said former [recalled] board member Richard LeGros.”
Which gets us into the I Can’t Believe He Said That portion: Re the CSD’s vote to hire Sullivan, “They’re populists – they have no problem using public funds to fight activist battles, “LeGros said. “It’s a gross violation of government code.” . . . said the man who had no problem voting to unnecessarily gamble AND LOSE gazillions of dollars of nice money that belonged to those “populist” taxpayers when he voted to start construction on Tri W weeks before the recall election that removed him from office.
Yep, just another item for the grand jury, especially if they’re asked to consider issues of “due diligence” in governing.