Friday, April 27, 2007

Mad Hatter Tea Party Scheduled Again

It’s déjà vu all over again. The Regional Water Quality Control Board has posted their upcoming CDO hearings on May 10th, as well as staff recommendations for proceeding to a mass CAO auto de fe for the rest of the community. Totally missing from the staff report is information that I had sent to Paavo Ogren and Supervisor Bruce Gibson over a month ago. So far as I know, they did nothing with that information. I have sent another email asking that they contact RWQCB staff immediately, because the material I had sent involves technical problems that have already shown up with the Los Osos 45 CDO requirements to Pump, Inspect, Repair. It was a potential major problem for one particular person. Multiplied by the 4,500 homes that staff is recommending be slapped with a mass CAO and required to comply within a three-year period, it may well result in another ”Mad Scheme” that will result in another train-wreck.

Once again, we’ve got the failure of the left hand knowing what the right hand’s doing, a RWQCB staff that isn’t aware of a potential problem of their own making and so is not letting their Board know that the ground-work for this plan hasn’t been properly completed, and apparently County authorities turning a blind eye to something that is directly under their authority to deal with and/or refusing to coordinate with the RWQCB so as to avoid another “Mad Pumping Scheme” mess.

Once again, the Devil is in the Details, so people in this community need to attend to the fine print and be aware of the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Gail McPherson, PZLDF
805.459.4535 805-534-191

Notice Of Public Hearing:

Water Board Hearing Will Determine the Fate of Community
The Water Board targeted 45 of 4700 Los Osos residents last year in a regulatory 'test case' after the $163 Million Los Osos sewer project was stopped by voters. On May 10 the Regional Water Board is expected to rule that Cease and Desist Orders should be placed on the 2 more properties, decide if seven others should be heard, and determine the enforcement fate of the rest of the community.
Of the first 45 selected for prosecution the board has issued 13 orders. Twenty-three signed board approved settlement-Clean up and Abatement Orders. 14 parties filed appeals to the State Board earlier this year citing at least 94 reasons to vacate the orders.
Cease and Desist hearings for William and Beverly-De-Witt Moylan, and Charles and Norma Wilkerson were held January 22, 2007. They will likely join others including the Los Osos CSD in the appeal to the State in order to protect their property. Businesses, schools, and government facilities are all subject to enforcement.
The staff contends the only way to protect the groundwater supplies and Morro Bay Estuary is to hook up to a community sewer project. Few disagree with this. It is the enforcement action that many believe is counter productive to the community healing and working together.
Staff is also seeking to issues blanket Clean up and Abatement Orders to all remaining properties simultaneously without the benefit of hearings. This “Prosecutorial Efficiency” deprives citizens of their right to defend their property against regulatory taking, according to Gail McPherson of the Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund, a group organized to provide support, and defend property rights.
Differences in the Cease and Desist Orders and Clean up and Abatement Orders add huge risks according to the legal opinions of the Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund. Shaunna Sullivan of Sullivan & Associates is defending the appeal. Further, “any enforcement order that requires compliance measures that are not within the control of the citizen to comply with present unacceptable risks.” There is simply nothing to hook up to.
“Individuals can't build a project alone. They say they have already done everything possible to comply with the order, including pumping tanks to insure they are working properly, and paying for a sewer assessment, and have agreed to hook up when a project is available. Enforcement orders can destroy property values, and individuals may have to consider installing treatment systems on their own lots.” Says McPherson. This can hurt a community project.
Public officials, including Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee who put in place the legislation to move a project forward, and Bruce Gibson, County Supervisor for the area, and Paavo Ogren, the new project coordinator have expressed concern that enforcement may be counter-productive and can undermine the county project.
The meeting will be held Thursday May 10, 2007, beginning at 10:00 AM. at 895Aerovista Place, Suite 101, San Luis Obispo.
The public is encouraged to attend.
Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund meets every Monday at 7:00 PM at Washington Mutual Bank in Los Osos. Call 805-528-0229 for more information.
Other Contacts:
RWQCB: Michael Thomas 805/542-4623 Harvey Packard 805/542-4639

County: Paavo Ogren 805/781-5291

Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee 805/-549-3381

Listed below is the link to the Central Coast Water Board Agenda Notice for the Board meeting of May 10-11, 2007.

In the agenda you can click on the item of your choice for a staff report and attachments. Audio files will be added after the Board meeting.


Anonymous said...

I am getting confused. Would the CAOs allow the water board to build Tri W without an assessment vote? At any cost? Accepting any bid? At our expense? Who is profiting from this rape and pillage? What is happening to our country? Has this become acceptable behavior for government officals entrusted with the protection of the environment?

Mike Green said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Green said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Where is the class action lawsuit against the county for permitting septic tanks??

The Regional Water Board knew all of this. The county built so many homes knowing the tanks were illegally discharging and THE COUNTY IS LIABLE!!!

If the case against the county would prevail (and it would) the Regional Water Board could not do this to homeowners. It's criminal really.

Why isn't anyone "thinking" here?


Come on folks!

Anonymous said...

Remember "Not a dime for PZLDF?" Lawsuits cost money, even when a lawyer pro bonos tens of thousands of dollars worth of hours. Right now there's a request for the administrative record on the Los Osos enforcement. Copies cost money.

Only the very tiniest minority of citizens in this town have contributed anything at all toward the situation we're in. Before you can get a lawsuit you have to defend yourself against enforcement. Before you can defend yourself, you have to exhaust all administrative remedies. Welcome to what a fraction of the population of this town has contended with for over a year.

Anonymous said...

Let's all take up the challenge and show that RWQCB that they have absolutely no say over how we mangage our water here in Los Osos!!!

First, let's all stop using any water in our homes. No water, no discharge.

An alternative might be to drill sampling wells at the corners of every parcel within the entire community and then prove we are not discharging waste into our drinking water. No spotty sample, every corner of every property must have sampling wells to provide an indisputable scientific study.

Another alternative might be to install sealed waste holding tanks on each parcel and have them pumped every so often. Remember, we only discharge a hundred or so gals of waste water per day, so the tank wouldn't have to be very big. We could even put in larger tanks on vacant properties to make cluster collection tanks like for the Bay Ridge Estates

Second, let's all go change California Law and remove the State Water Board as a government agency.

Look at all the evidence against the Water Board that we've accumulated over the years we've been fighting, this should be simple. Everyone in California would benefit with lower taxes from not having to pay for a board of lawyers who accomplish nothing. We are the government and we can change those agents we find to be counter productive to the will of the people.

Isn't it wonderful to live in California where we can live as free as we want! Hugs all around everyone! Kumbaya, Amen!

Anonymous said...


"Totally missing from the staff report is information that I had sent to Paavo Ogren and Supervisor Bruce Gibson over a month ago. So far as I know, they did nothing with that information. I have sent another email asking that they contact RWQCB staff immediately"

My God, isn't anyone listening to you Ann?

Or maybe they are?

Anonymous said...

The County's narrow responsibility and authority under AB 2701 is to try and get the community to agree to build a sewer, not legally challange the RWQCB.

They must respect their separation of powers, and have made that clear many times. I agree with that.

Anonymous said...

The county has a history with this issue. They cannot just delete that historical record and start fresh. Deletion is what exactly what the RWQCB has been attempting to do with their own historical record throughout the prosecutions.

Settlement deletes the record. We accept responsiblity for mistakes of all parties, we pay whatever whatever cost the powers assess. With a lien on our property, the basic need for shelter is no longer within our control.

Anonymous said...

Before I'm prepared to accept such open-ended comments with no reason or fact such as "Deletion is what exactly what the RWQCB has been attempting to do with their own historical record throughout the prosecutions", I would also want to see the historical record of the spokesperson behind this sort of comment. That's the "process", checks and balances.

A "settlement" is not "stealing our homes" as some of the vocal folks want us to believe. The RWQCB does NOT want to force any of out of our homes. However, if we wish the enjoyment of real property ownership, then we also must accept the responsibilities that come with ownership.

Look back over the last 18 months to see just why State and County Government are being forced to take enforcement action. "We" as a community chose to halt a legal waste water treatment project. "We" elected the CSD which flushed away all funding and never came up with a viable project. The CSD completly failed us and has left the legal authorities few options. This 30+ year debacle has got to stop. It is incredululous that this broke CSD would fund yet another lawyer to continue fighting. We have to sit and witness a Board Member continue to arrogantly proclaim she's there to move the sewer. She really does not give a damn about the community. Where does all this serious lack of concern for the individuals by our local CSD fit in any solution to the enforcement of Clean Water Acts by the RWQCB. The RWQCB has a job to do and apparently some members of this community are willing to fight rather than recognize that we locally have failed so miserably, that outside authority has to take over. "We", as a community has spent the past 18 months throwing away a piece of our property rights by allowing the CSD and a few vocal activists to corrupt the process of social responsibility.

Anonymous said...

"This 30+ year debacle" that is all the CSD's fault???

If the RWQCB is so pure, why did they send Briggs out of the country?

I want a sewer too, but not at the expense of lining the pockets of corrupt government employees that left incompetent fools to do their job.

Anonymous said...

I've heard that "why did they send Briggs out of the country?" crap too many times.

How do you KNOW that Briggs was "sent out of the country"? That is just another bull$hit rumor developed by one of the ass's that want to fight any sewer any where. You really don't have any facts or know what the Briggs story is. Just another Los Osos myth! You've listened to Ann's half truth too many times!

Shark Inlet said...

In the comment section of Ann's April 25 entry, she quotes me saying "I guess Ann is just waiting until tomorrow or Friday to clarify or correct her earlier comments where she accused TW of not being willing to pay."

Then asks "Please show me the quote where I said TPW was unwilling to pay what they owe LAFCO. If I recall correctly, I noted that they were correct in appealing the case to get the amount changed a bit because LAFCO jerked everyone around with the delays on this issues. and I wondered if the CSD would add on their own bill since the hearings cost them a pretty penny. But, please find me the quote where I said they refused to pay -- they didn't refuse, they balked and appealed, which was their right."

I replied saying that it was in the November 2006 blog entries where one can find these comments. On the other hand, perhaps Ann was asking for an exact quote because maybe she actually believes what she's written here ... that she didn't criticize TW and that she actually commended them in their request to have the amount lowered.

I bring you selected quotes from Ann's main blog entries of November 2006. (While there may be additional quotes might be found in her replies to the comments of others, I didn't want to bother digging through all that.)

On November 1, 2006 Ann wrote "When last we heard from our own Los Osos Taxpayers Watch, they were before the LAFCO board asking that the costs they incurred with their dissolution efforts should be waived on account THEY WUZ BROKE! -- Poor, tapped out, no dinero, zip coin of the relm, impoverished, down & out, Boo-hoo – and requested that the costs associated with their dissolution efforts instead be stuck to the county taxpayers."

On November 9, 2006 Ann wrote "After LAFCO refused to dissolve the CSD, Taxpayers Watch asked that the costs for the whole dissolution process be waived (i.e. stick it to the county taxpayers) on account of They Wuz Broke!"

Then on November 27, 2006 Ann wrote (about TW) "All the while, of course, decrying fiscal irresponsibility on the part of the CSD, while they themselves still owe LAFCO some $27,000 in county costs for bringing their failed dissolution case against the CSD."

Now don't get me wrong. I am still not decided about whether dissolution was a good idea or not ... but it is rather clear from Ann's tone that she is being exceedingly critical of TW for not paying their bill and trying to "stick it to the county taxpayers". (As a side note, I wonder aloud whether Ann has ever worried about people trying to stick it to the County taxpayers in any other context?)

I also noticed that during the month that Ann commented three times on how it was sooooo wrooooong for TW to try to wiggle out of their debts she didn't comment at all about how TW was right to appeal the amount due to being "jerked around".

So ... Ann, do you now understand why the casual reader who takes your words at face value would think that you were being critical of TW? If you don't agree with me, I would love an explanation of why the regular reader should have read the above words as being anything but critical of TW (who you in another blog entry refered to as "the bad people"). If you would be so kind, I would also appreciate you letting us know exactly where you wrote that TW was right to appeal the amount. I didn't find it.

Anonymous said...

Yes Ann, as the Shark inlet has asked, when are you going to admit that the TW did have a right to appeal and were able to sit down like adults and negotiate an acceptable agreement. You should be made aware that the process was followed as prescribed by law.

You really should at the very least acknowledge that TW was following a legal process.

It appears TW is a lot more solvent and fiscally responsible than the LOCSD. Let's see if the CSD will make some realistic movement toward resolving their self created bankruptcy and start showing some fiscal responsibility of their own.

Anonymous said...

Maybe we could have TW take over the legal defense of the CDO process? Worst case being they might actually be able to negotiate a reasonable agreement.

Makes more sense than the antagonistic and theatrical approach we've seen so far.

Anonymous said...

TW and its members have created so many of the problems that we face today, why would anyone think that they would look out for the interests of the average citizen of Los Osos?

Anonymous said...

What "problems" has TW created?

Just another deliberate misconception!

Shark Inlet said...

Perhaps we should compare the amount the LOCSD has had to pay lawyers when dealing with TW issues and the amount the LOCSD has paid lawyers dealing with CCLO issues. If the amount spent on TW issues greater than the CCLO amount it could reasonably be said that TW has caused problems.

So, what's the tally?

Anonymous said...

Re: 6:26AM 04/28/07:

Do YOU realize that the in order to drill a well, you have to have a parcel of one acre or more, in the County of San Luis Obispo. How God-damned stupid can you get?

Do you NOT know the regulations of the County of San Luis Obispo??

Additionally, do you realize that every other so-called "challenge" within your post can be construed as total BULLSHIT?


I have lived in the County for 18 years, and I can tell you that County rules and regulations MUST be adhered to, unless you want to incur a tremendous FINE!!.

WHAT is there about this, that YOU do not understand???

California Law is not to be changed within YOUR lifetime, nor mine.

Be advised that California LAW, and all the ramifications of California LAW, WILL be enforced, and of any of you recalcitrant morons who are within the site of the scope of the Califoria LAW, they will, indeed, be subject to the jurisprudence of the State of California.


The State of California is coming after YOU!

Anonymous said...

You seem awfully sure about the State coming after us. We've screwed around for the last year and a half and nobody's paid any fines or lost their house or even gone to jail. Figure we can keep this up at least 5 more years!

Anonymous said...

Los Osos doesn't need the State of Taxifornia interferring with the voice of the community. We don't need a mega-sewer, we don't need any sewer! The natural occuring micro-organisms in the sand are cleansing any minor polutants.

The real source of nitrates could be found by simply putting in sampling wells around the south and east sides of the community. You will see the source of nitrate is from the CMC, Cuesta College and Cal Poly, NOT from the relatively few septic tanks of Los Osos!

We are working with Julie to get the County to put in those sampling wells so we can put an end to the quessing by the RWQCB. We don't need outsiders telling us what to do! We have more experts in Clean Water and Waste Water Reclaimation in the Los Osos Valley than the entire State Water Boards.

Thank you to Dana Ripley for exposing the truth about the non-cooperative Water Boards. The Water Boards do not have the budget or personnel to bring everyone of us to some kangeroo court. Just let them try to take my property!

Anonymous said...

And there you have it folks. We are not polluting. We don't need any outside interference. We don't need a sewer.

As many of us in this community have said for a long, long time now, the "move the sewer" group is a sham. It's "we don't need no stinkin' sewer." For anyone who supported these people, and measure B, I hope you woke up by now and are supporting the county's process. So far they are doing it completely right (regardless what the "we don't need no stinkin' sewer" people will tell you).

Anonymous said...

The people living in Los Osos have a wide range of opinions on the sewer, both the issues that got us here and the path to solve the problem. It is wrong to clump everyone disagrees with the RWQCB tactics, both current and of the past, as anti-sewer. It is wrong to brand anyone who questions the county motives as anti-sewer.

If you need tangible evidence of the total disregard for the welfare of LO in the past, look at the lax enforcement of building codes 20 years ago. The County has as much to cover up as the RWQCB. Some people believe that evidence is still being manipulated to justify the sewer, as it was to qualify for funds when the PZ was drawn up. Others believe that a wastewater treatment facility needs to be built ASAP, but the RWQCB needs to come clean and only use valid data to determine actions. Others knew all along what was going on behind closed doors and need to cover their asses. And then there are the clueless. A solution to our problem is going to have to address the concerns of all the groups. Thirty years of burying the dirt has not worked.

Anonymous said...

The only way to end the contraversy is to put in the 1000 or 2000 sample wells someone suggested and prove just where the nitrate pollution is coming. That's the only way to obtain scientific data.

I believe Al. He is the only one who knows what system we need. Let the RWQCB just wait until we have the data. If we don't need a mega-sewer, then let the State fire Briggs and the rest of the worthless board. If we do need a sewer, then let the damn State fund it! We've been pushed around and threatened way too long by a bunch of bueauracrats.

4crapkiller said...

The ignorant spouts:

"You will see the source of nitrate is from the CMC, Cuesta College and Cal Poly, NOT from the relatively few septic tanks of Los Osos!"

An inquiring mind asks: How do you know, and who told you?

It would seem to me that the 4.5 Tons of nitrogen compounds emitted every day for years from the Moro Bay power plant would have some sort of cummulative effect. I have seen no study on this either.

Anonymous said...

To 4crapkiller:

It would also seem to me that the problem that Moro Bay has with nitrate in it's wells is also a symptom of the same "cummulative effect".

Shark Inlet said...

Watch out for trolls.

Our 8:03am anonymous poster is pretty clearly pulling our leg. No one in their right mind would think that the Los Osos aquifer nitrate levels are influenced by those at CMC, Cuesta or Cal Poly. Heck, the data even show that the nitrate levels are lower at the East end of town where the agricultural impact on nitrate levels would be seen (if seen anywhere at all).

This is all to say, please don't bother arguing with those who are clearly posting just to get a rise by their deliberate mis-statement of facts ... it just feeds their egos in an unhealthy way.

Anonymous said...

4 Stars for the Shark ****

Unfortunately there are some folks still putting out the smokescreen of misconception and there are those believing/hopeing for anything to discredit those designs/locations which aren't in their agenda.

Anonymous said...

Wait until the weeks prior to the 218 vote to really see the misinformation campaign ratchet up. It's going to be crucial this time to counter the lies and hysteria of those whose mission is to derail ANY project in Los Osos.

Anonymous said...

Yup, y'all better get on it. The delayers have been winning for 30 years. I wonder why?

Anonymous said...

They are better liars?

Anonymous said...

Guess so...and we formalized it in 1998.

Anonymous said...

...and really screwed it 18 months ago! Hope you like $200 to $300 per month sewer bills on top of the $200 water bill.

Anonymous said...

Yup, screwage started in 1998 and has been continued ever since then. Guess we'll be liking the bills together, brother. They've all lied to us.

Anonymous said...

It is now Monday Ann. We are waiting for your answer to shark inlet regarding TW. I'll bet you were hoping we'd forget. We didn't.

Anonymous said...

What is happening to this site. All this petty fighting, and no one is taking a hard look at the lien that the RWQCB is proposing to place on your property. It is time for you all to learn exactly what a CAO entails. You will soon have to determine your own individual course of action. Stop screaming at each other and pay attention.
My fate has been determined, and it is now your turn to steer the ship.

Anonymous said...

It's also time to take a good look at what the decision of the CSD has meant! The ship is indeed in the hands of the government pilot and out of the hands of a band of pirates. Quit wringing your hands and crying boo hoo over the loss of your property. First of all, you haven't lost a damn thing yet. Do pay attention and pass the 218 measure unless you really want to have the State come down with a lot more force than the RWQCB. We let the CSD screw the legal process and now they have run hiding behind their self created bankruptcy! Throw the #@% in jail and let's get on with a sewer, ANY SEWER!!!

Anonymous said...

Hi Anon above,

Afraid of CDO's and/or CAO's?.............................

then support the County in building a sewer for Los Osos by approving the upcoming 218 vote. By doing so the RWQCB will not enforce theses actions.

Anonymous said...

8:10 AM, April 30, 2007

"Anonymous said...
It is now Monday Ann. We are waiting for your answer to shark inlet regarding TW. I'll bet you were hoping we'd forget. We didn't."

Now it's Tuesday and Ann, you haven't answered Shark or acknowledged the TW did follow the ever so important "process". Neither did you mention that LAFCo over billed TW and billed for their own normal operations (i.e. TV News releases) which caused TW to dispute LAFCo's billing. Wake up Ann, TW is NOT the enemy, but a large group of property owners who are looking out for the entire community!

Anonymous said...

In the press release from PZLDF there is a comment about the CSD joining the citizens on the appeal? Is Gail McPhearson speaking for the district? What do the directors think about that? I know they are sharing an atty but are they sharing PR too?

Anonymous said...

The community can support a clean process that delivers a acceptable project-That is what the County promised.

It is the community vote! Not the Water Board or Taxpayers watch Vote.

TW has been the sewer obstructionists since the recall. Their conspiring with the water board for their help with enforcement actions has a long public record, and is only to regain lost power.

THERE IS NO NEED FOR CAO except to assist Taxpayers watch for the TRI W project...or face saving at your cost.

The majority of the community supports a project. They voted to stop Tri W and move the project at great risk. THAT is what the County is doing.

Taxpayers Watch made promises to destroy the CSD & community, and with the water board they have worked hard to deliver on their promises.

It was TW who stopped the first Blakeslee compromise in Oct '05 because a successful project would have lost them face and power.

Fines and dissolution was THEIR game plan after the recall.
Taxpayers Watch has cost us taxpayers a bundle, including keeping the SRF loan and getting a project as proposed by the plan in '05.

Not that this was the best plan but THINK---If we were in construction NOW based on that SRF acceptable plan--(the New board Blakeslee compromise project plan)--- enforcement would just not ever have been happening!

It is exactly that kind of mindless, bitter, retaliation that drove members of TW to beg the water board to fine individuals, to fine the CSD out of existence, and dissolve the CSD instead of working for an acceptable project.

Apparently Taxpayers watch is still about dissolving, bankrupting, and destroying...lobbying the water board against the community, stacking the TAC in hopes of more costly options, and forcing an election.

They have been nothing but the true obstructionists over the last 2 years!

But that is in their ROOTS...they were they same bunch that stopped the County and duped the community with "CHEAPER...FASTER...BETTER" in 98

Taxpayers watch sees Enforcement as their trump card to force their way back into power. That is wrong……threatening the loss of every property in Los Osos to force a vote is illegal…and if the County does their job, this is all unnecessary.

Be very aware of this groups lies and so called "cooperation with the RWQCB"

Support the County for a plan that considers the whole community needs, and makes sense to you.

DO NOT accept a CAO, without filing an appeal, Especially do not take a settlement CAO-it is the same tool and allows the State to put a lien in any amount they choose on your home to pay for a project.

Citizens for Clean Water-PZLDF is not about the is ALL about NOT losing your home because of factional infighting, and power struggles by the old board against the new board ought t be moot as the County struggles for a good project against the Water Board..

Protect your homes, support a clean process so the County can do their job, and vote your conscience.


Shark Inlet said...

From The Trib Forum, a good laugh:

QUESTION: How many LOCSD Board members are needed to screw in a light bulb?


1. Chuck Cesena to say "I'm ready to roll up my sleeves to screw in the light bulb!"

2. Lisa Schicker to say: "It's late so I am too tired to make a decision about screwing in the light bulb!"

3. Julie Tacker to say: "I don't care what it costs to move the damn light bulb! As of screwing, I'm all for it!"

4. Steve Senet to say: "I think we need to run this issue by our committees and LOCAC before we make a decision!"

5. Joe Sparks to say (shaking his head): "You guys have spent all the CSD's money so we cannot afford to screw in a light bulb...let alone pay for the electricity to operate it!"

Ps - Don't harsh on Ann too much for not getting back to me ... she's likely been busy with real life things. If you don't recall, I was too busy to participate myself for a period of a month or three and no one raked me over the coals for that (I assume ... I actually don't know because I wasn't reading ... hmmm ... maybe I should check to see if Ron complained about my absence).

Anonymous said...

Ms. McPherson,

The County has failed to deliver on ANY of its promises. There is, never has and never will be a "clean process." In fact, the "process" is not only NOT clean, it's downright FILTHY. You know this better than anyone. So what are you talking about?

The RWQCB and TW are perfect foils for your tactics of distraction, but that's all it is, a diversion designed to deflect scrutiny away from your long history of serial failures, lies and distortions, which sum up your "contribution" to the community. Pretty much everyone in town knows this by now, and is quite aware you have simply moved your legendary traveling bookkeeping skills to a new shell.

You say "the County struggles for a good project against the Water Board," but people should know and do know that the County and Water Board are WORKING TOGETHER, arm in arm, in lockstep to put PZ homeowners in a vice they can't escape from, and your pathetically transparent attempt to disassociate the County from the RWQCB is a TOTAL FABRICATION not for swallowing since they are BOTH Children of the State and united AS ONE against Los Osos to build the most expensive sewer system no one can afford. But affordability was never quite your thing anyway, was it?

"Protect your homes, support a clean process so the County can do their job," you cheer on. But the County IS doing its job, screwing us, with your invaluable, stealthy assistance in the shadows, of course, ignoring us at every turn, hellbent on delivering the wicked promise of AB2701 -- gravity, Tri-W, in town or out.

"Vote your conscience." ????

What the hell would you know ABOUT CONSCIENCE? Yours is swept clean, as clean as the County's "process."

You sign your name/affiliation "PZLDF"...but there is NO PZLDF, just you, Alan "Mad Dog" Martyn, a cloud of smoke, a fundraising machine and legal debt. And, oh joy, more books for you to keep! Fact is, you don't represent anybody anymore. Just you. So run around in a frenzy and ACT IMPORTANT, it's OK. You're wired, delusional, and no one really wants to get in your way anyway. We understand.

And, oh, your County is doing absolutely everything to make sure the Prop 218 does NOT pass. Why should it? If you were on the up and up (LOL), you would simply say: "Vote NO on the 218 until they give us project and a price FIRST." But you can't and you won't do that, can you? Because you're a lineman for the County and a lobbyist for the State, steering the vote for Blakeslee, throwing the community to the wolves.

Why do you do it? So like your hero on the deck of the aircraft carrier you can stand at the podium, look into the camera, and turn to the community you have betrayed and pronounce with a big shit-eating grin: "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED."

Anonymous said...


10:08 AM, May 01, 2007

Apparently your comments were supposed to denigerate the TaxPayers Watch. If you were trying to spell out the great transgressions TW has done to the CSD and the community, you failed miserably.

I'm willing to bet you don't have a clue how many lawsuits have been filed by TW against the LOCSD. Please try to list them for this blog. Your words are just spittle with no meaning, just your anger with no thought as to what you are saying. Please try to put some coherent thought behind your emotion, until then you are just another uninformed wantabe obstructionist spouting lies you would like to believe!

Anonymous said...

To Shark Inlet, 11:59PM:

You said:

"From The Trib Forum, a good laugh:
QUESTION: How many LOCSD Board members are needed to screw in a light bulb?


1. Chuck Cesena to say "I'm ready to roll up my sleeves to screw in the light bulb!"

2. Lisa Schicker to say: "It's late so I am too tired to make a decision about screwing in the light bulb!"

3. Julie Tacker to say: "I don't care what it costs to move the damn light bulb! As of screwing, I'm all for it!"

4. Steve Senet to say: "I think we need to run this issue by our committees and LOCAC before we make a decision!"

5. Joe Sparks to say (shaking his head): "You guys have spent all the CSD's money so we cannot afford to screw in a light bulb...let alone pay for the electricity to operate it!"


Only JULIE. She is probably the best on the Board, who is REALLY experienced in SCREWING.

No one should fault you for any absence on here. However, since this is Ann's Column, she should get back to each and every person who asks her a question.

HEY ANN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Anonymous said...

Just wondering, did the 45 CDO recipients actually have to have their tanks pumped and inspected for leaks? If so, is there any data showing how many tanks actually are leaking.
Right from the beginning this was "suspected leaking septic tanks" which are polluting the ground water and Morro Bay. Here's their chance to prove it.
If ther're all leaking then we should sue whoever the manufacturer was.
There were approximately 1000 new tanks installed after this edict. Are they leaking as well?
Sincerely, M

Shark Inlet said...


Certainly this would be interesting data to look at.

One problem with a sample of 45 randomly chosen PZ homes is that the relatively small sample size would generate a rather large margin of error. If we were attempting to estimate the number of leaking tanks across the whole PZ I wouldn't be surprised to see a margin of error of +/- 500 tanks.

Also, the argument isn't just that the leaking tanks are problematic ... it is that even properly functioning tanks ... if there are too many per acre or if they are too close to groundwater (or bay water) ... will be causing pollution.

Anonymous said...

Hi Shark,
I sign my entire name when I post here so as NOT to be confused with "M".
This has happened several times and in this situation I would like it to be clear because I wouldn never propose to sue a manufacturer because the my septic tanks life cycle was up.
There are several assertions that "M" has made that now concern me that people think I made. Oh well...

I have never questioned the validity of the mandate in that common sense and density, just as you have stated Shark, is the only observation that I need to make to understand the problem. Additional date just solidifies the already good arguement.

I'm glad I stopped by, just so I could respond quickly.
Maria M. Kelly

Anonymous said...

Sorry about the grammer and spelling errors - I hate it when I publish instead of preview....
Maria M. Kelly

Mike Green said...

Maria and M.
Perfectly understandable for Sharkey. That said I think the data would be quite interesting. One has to wonder what might happen if the Water Board had to keep and investigate what would come of it. My bet is that they would rather eat worms, info on real data seems to be a little unappetizing to them, don't ya think.
Oh well, we have common sense and density. That trumps it, and it's good enough for me.
Oh bring us a piggie poke-um!

Anonymous said...

As one of the 45, I have not heard of anyone with a "leaking tank" The most common repair seems to be a deteriorating baffle wall (between the two sides of the tank). If not fixed, this could compromise your leach field.

Most people have never made repairs on their baffle walls, because a certain LO pumper has neglected to tell homeowners when there was a problem. He doesn't repair baffle walls, but he does replace leach fields. He waits for the leach field to fail, and he makes a profit on the replacement. Pays for his new trucks.

So watch out for preditors when you have your tank inspected.

Anonymous said...

M. Confusion reigns. Leaking Septic Tanks have never been attributed as the cause of Nitrate pollution.

Mike Green said...

Dear " Tank inspected"

I would, as many others, be greatly interested in any experience you might want to share.

Any response is appreciated.

Gypsie Pumpers?

Anonymous said...


This is about your friend Gail. I agree with another blogger above.

Just think. We were well on our way with Dana Ripley and step when along comes Gail with her AB2701. She lied about the purpose of the bill. It was said it was for septic management.

Some on this blog say we didn't have a project, but we did, until Gail stepped in to make sure the project would be Tri-W. The only way Tri-W could come back was with the legislation.

I thought YOU were smarter.

Anonymous said...

Are you saying McPherson is the spokesperson for Tri-W?

She must have some heavy duty political power to influence the State Legistlature to vote 100 to 0 in favor of taking the incompetent CSD out of the sewer decision making process.

Oh well, we'll all just have to live with the WWTF at Tri-W. Ain't that just peachy!

Anonymous said...

New septic orders may loom for Los Osos

‘Clean up and abate’ mandate on agenda as water board meets

By Sona Patel

The Regional Water Board could crack down on Los Osos residents next week in a move that would require almost every property owner in most of town to stop using their homes’ and businesses’ septic tanks by January 2011.

If a sewer were built before then, property owners would be required to hook up within 60 days of its availability.

Notices were mailed to the nearly 4,400 property owners in Los Osos and Baywood Park last month, warning them that they are breaking the law because their homes’ septic systems are discharging pollutants.

The properties affected are in the so-called prohibition zone that makes up most of the town. The Regional Water Quality Control Board has forbidden almost all building there since 1988 because of groundwater and bay pollution blamed on septic systems.

Water board officials want the coastal town of about 14,000 to build a sewer in hopes it would stem the nitrate contamination.

Water board staff said they will recommend “cleanup and abatement orders” next week to individual property owners.

Last year the board targeted 45 randomly selected property owners for cease-and-desist orders. Those orders, which under state law require public hearings before they are issued, outline terms similar to the newly proposed cleanup orders.

State law, however, allows the water board to issue the new orders without holding individual hearings, according to Harvey Packard, a division chief and enforcement coordinator with the agency.

Under staff’s recommendation, property owners would have the opportunity to submit written comment against the enforcement but would not be entitled to a public hearing.

“It is impractical to hold board hearings for all 4,300 properties in the prohibition zone,” Packard said.

Arguments made during the hearings held for the 45 property owners allowed the water board to “review and approve staff’s enforcement policy.”

“We feel that the issues raised have already been thoroughly reviewed and discussed by the board in a public setting,”he said.


The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board will discuss its proposed enforcement against Los Osos property owners at 10 a.m. on May 10 and 11 at 895 Aerovista Place, Suite 101, in San Luis Obispo.

Have a nice day Los Osos!

Anonymous said...

I'll take my CAO like a man and continue to support the professional and thorough process the county is putting forth. I'll also continue to do all I can to stop the misinformation and outright lies of the lowly obstructionists who are costing us homeowners in the PZ a fortune each and every day. Unite against these nutjobs Los Osos and support the county and you'll never have to hear about the RWCCB again.

Shark Inlet said...

When listening to NPR the other day, I heard an interesting quote that would probably be worth remembering when we think about our community and the problems we face.

From the NPR website:
Thomas Mann of Brookings said the result depends on basic respect and civility.
"You have to be able to accept the legitimacy of the motives of those with whom you disagree, and you have to be willing to engage seriously in their arguments," Mann said...

I think this would be a key to any discussions of Los Osos matters. Far too many people seem to simplistically say that the other side is just evil or that they don't care. I suspect they do care and that they are just concerned with different issues or that they've thought through the issues differently.

Furthermore the last part of Mann's quote would be of key import. If we are willing to engage each other and discuss each other's perceptions of the problem and of the solution we can make progress. The extent to which we are unwilling to work with others we disagree with is the extent we are causing the problem to continue. For this reason I am deeply frustrated with Lisa. She's told us in the past that she wants to work with the community and with the RWQCB but her actions have suggested strongly that she's not interested at all in working with folks like me who want the cheapest reasonable solution.

Churadogs said...

Anon sez:"
"Anonymous said...
It is now Monday Ann. We are waiting for your answer to shark inlet regarding TW. I'll bet you were hoping we'd forget. We didn't."

Now it's Tuesday and Ann, you haven't answered Shark or acknowledged the TW did follow the ever so important "process"."

You need to get over yourself. Was out of town from Sat to Wed, and and now am trying to play catch up. The problem with Inlet's quotes, is he often believes that commenting on something, even humorously or sarcastically, means I agree or disagree with whatever's taking place. He's also really bad at comprehension. I've called him on that before. Reads totally wrong things into what I've I written, then gallops off on a hobby horse of his own meaning. Here's what I believe: TPW was jerked around by LAFCO. I sent a letter to LAFCO at the time asking that they vote this dissolution up or down AS IS, not try to use it as blackmail or as a threat to link dissolution or non-dissolution with requiring the sewer element be removed & etc. That winkling cost TPW a pretty penny that shouldn't have gone on "their clock" . Had LAFCO done that, TPW would have had a much smaller bill. I also was critical of TPW because instead of using the various polical tools available to them, out of the box they went for dissolution -- I wrote a column on that, at the time, struck how "Medean" it was and how "anti-democratic" it was -- Did you lose a vote, fine, take the football and close down the game and make everyone go home, etc. Not particularly good.

I was and also remain troubled by setting up procedures that citizens are free to use while, at the same time, hammering them severely with costs they incur while utilitzing those procedures. I am also troubled that -- conversely -- citizens can cost taxpayers a bundle utilizing those same procedures for hidden agendas and "medean" reasons that have little to do with actual facts. I don't know how to reconcile that. It may simply be the penalty we pay for trying to run a "democracy."

All in all, it will remain to be seen whether the Dissolution "distraction" plays out as justified or simply makes something that made the whole situation worse. As for what TPW owes, I believe I wrote here in the past that everyone who signed the dissolution petition needs now to step up to the plate and cough up a few bucks to pay the piper. Knowing this community, let me bet that almost no one will. I'm hoping TPW and their supporters will prove me wrong, but I won't hold my breath.

Anonymous said...

To Anon 7:55:

The county has hardly been professional. The county has been lying and not any homeowners. You have it all backwards. And why are they keeping a lid on the fine screening? What's the secret? Why not share with the community???

The RWQCB (and the county) has lied over and over, bullied, terrorized, praticed in electioneering, and now Blackmail.

You don't know what professional means.

The lies are from you. Not only do you not care about people, you don't care about the environment.

Anonymous said...

To 5:52 Anon,

Gail had the help of Sam Blakeslee. Gail had the help of the State Water Board. Gail had the help of the county. Gail had the help of the Sierra Club. Gail had the help of Coastkeepers (Gordon Hensley)... even Steve Senet sat on their side of the table. ALL ATTENDED TO SUPPORT THE LEGISLATION. ALL ATTENDED TO SUPPORT THE BIG LIE AND SCAM.

Just remember how the legislation was written (5,000 septics were polluting and septics were polluting the bay -- exlusively) ... it was based on lies to begin with. It was sold on lies from respected agencies (who all lied) AND REMEMBER WHY THE LEGISATION CAME ABOUT!


How stupid can one be?

Ron said...

Shark wrote:

"Also, the argument isn't just that the leaking tanks are problematic ... it is that even properly functioning tanks ... if there are too many per acre or if they are too close to groundwater (or bay water) ... will be causing pollution."

I don't believe I'm about to say this, but that's exactly right. Sorrel Marks at the RWQCB used to tell me that all the time... before she started hanging up on me after Three Blocks was published. According to Marks, one septic tank per acre, and LO is in gross violation of that. Of course, a good rebuttal I've seen lately is, "Well, then why the hell did the powers that be allow LO to have waaaay more than 1-per acre?"

Good question.

Anon wrote:

"We were well on our way with Dana Ripley and step..."

That's beginning to look more and more like the case. AB2701 is shaping up to be nothing more than a waste of a year and two million MORE dollars of county taxpayer money... all because Tri-W, for whatever reason, is STILL on the table. An Anon left this: "... the misinformation and outright lies of the lowly obstructionists who are costing us homeowners in the PZ a fortune each and every day." Right now, that quote applies much more to the Tri-W supporter(s) [I added the "s" just in case there is more than one], than anyone else.

If the Tri-W supporter(s) would just finally get the hell out of the way, this mess would REALLY wrap up MUCH faster, MUCH better, and MUCH cheaper. Oh well.

Same Anon:

"Some on this blog say we didn't have a project, but we did...

That is correct, as the prestigious NWRI well tell you.

Ann wrote:

" Was out of town from Sat to Wed...."

I'm so glad you're back. These days, you're my favorite "newspaper" in the county.

"He's (Shark Inlet) also really bad at comprehension. I've called him on that before. Reads totally wrong things into what I've I written, then gallops off on a hobby horse of his own meaning."

Yes, they do that all the time, with me AND you... almost like it's on purpose.

"... everyone who signed the dissolution petition needs now to step up to the plate and cough up a few bucks to pay the piper. Knowing this community, let me bet that almost no one will."

That's funny. Ann, it is so good to have you back.

Shark Inlet said...


The question remains ... based on the quotes I presented ... how could you reasonably expect that people would think that you feel TW was jerked around by LAFCO? How could you expect reasonable people to believe that you felt that it was okay for them to "stick the County" with the bill?

Is it really that I have a reading comprehension problem or that you have a problem communicating your beliefs clearly?

Perhaps you were using humor and sarcasm in this case but to suggest that you told us that your statements were supportive of TW and their move to reduce their bill is simply silly. We're not that dumb.

Anonymous said...

Soooooo...Gail wants TRIW? Then why did she spearhead the recall? Please explain what I'm missing here.

Anonymous said...

What you're missing is the insane gene possessed by many of the conspiracists who blog here, that's what you're missing.

Shark Inlet said...

To tackle another issue Ann raises ... she claims that TW didn't use the "various political tools available" but pushed for dissolution instead.

I would want to point out that the dissolution request was a legal and legitimate political move. Criticizing them for their dissolution request because it isn't democratic is the same as criticizing Steve Sawyer and the Recall candidates for their recall attempt. Both are the same thing ... trying to use the rules within the system to influence the outcome.

Ann also writes "everyone who signed the dissolution petition needs now to step up to the plate and cough up a few bucks to pay the piper." This makes me wonder whether she argued that the people who signed a recall petition should be the ones to pay for the additional costs associated with the recall.

[quick scan]

Nope. She didn't. No surprise.

Anonymous said...

Lets flush out the CAO option the Water Board is going to go for:
This CAO would become, in fact, a filed lien on your property which must be disclosed to lenders/buyers.
The problem is that this 'lien'has no hard cost attached to it(yet).
How do you refi/buy with that unknown dollar amount hanging over your head? How do you disclose to your lender/buyer? Will Real Estate activity come to a sudden halt?
If this is not the ultimate outcome of a CAO, I would like to hear a legl opinion here.

Anonymous said...

A CAO also allows the RWQCB to come on to your property, make repairs, and charge you for it. Is there any language in the LO CAO to prevent this?

A CDO gives you the protection of the courts. A CAO is for a hazard that demands an immediate one time clean-up. The RWQCB is not allowing individual "fixes". What does this CAO offer that is better than a CDO? Can the RWQCB give out indvidual CLEANUP and Abatement Orders for a problem that can't be cleaned up by the individual? Will they have to offer alternatives if a sewer doesn't materialize (like they do for a CDO)?

Anonymous said...

How could anyone mistake me for Maria M. Kelly?
She signs all of her posts as Maria M. Kelly.
I sign mine as M.
I won't take offense, Maria, at trying to distance yourself from me.
I am kind of wondering though how Shark Inlet could possibly mistake me for you.
Sincerely, M

Anonymous said...

What a bunch of whinners!

Just build the Treatment Plant on the property the District already owns and be done with all the turmoil.

Anonymous said...

Whinners - is that pronounced winners or winers?

Sounds to me like you're whining.
Or maybe you are simply emoting.

Summing people up with a single adjective doesn't help to clarify much (especially if you misspell the adjective and confuse the issue). It's the ubiquitous tactic used by talk show hosts to rile people up to get attention and, therefore, ratings. Not much of a technique for logical argument, rhetoric, and persuasion.

Anonymous said...

Sort of like the MTS arguments!

Shark Inlet said...


Sorry 'bout that. I hadn't ever really noticed that you and she are distinct posters ... I had just figured that she sometimes signed her posts with her initial rather than her full name. I do the same myself sometimes.

Ann might very well say that I made the mistake because I have a reading comprehension problem.

Myself, I think that when a person writes something like hey, that group is full of crap ... no wonder they stink soooooooo much they are intending to be critical more than witty.

Maybe I should take a page from Ann's playbook ...

M, I was trying to be witty and sarcastic when I responded to your comment but addressed Maria ... you clearly have a reading comprehension problem and it isn't my fault that you didn't get the joke. I've called you before on this and I won't actually address the issues you've raised because I figure that I can just duck the questions you asked by by this diversion. Bwa-hahaha.

Anonymous said...

Good morning "M",
No offense taken and I hope that you don't take offense that I stated my opinion. I'm sure that under different circumstances we could have a fine conversation in regards to all the topics pertinant to Los Osos.

Differing opinions and perspectives are vital to a healthy community. The second part of that is how they are conveyed and discussed. Civility is critical and even though I may want to clarify the differences in perspective I feel no need to distance myself from the discussion. If we don't talk, we can't find out where we agree. Granted, I get frustrated and sometimes when I'm at home I fret and fume but when I sit and really think about it, I'm able to refocus on seeking common ground.

Thanks to Shark, as always, I enjoy your posts, enjoy your perspectives and appreciate your engagement.
Maria M. Kelly

Anonymous said...

The County did a Press Release today on the subject of the upcoming Regional Board Hearing, see below.
John Waddell
Los Osos Wastewater Project Engineer
County of San Luis Obispo

REVISION TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAY 8, 2007, AGENDA ITEM FOR THE WEEKLY STATUS UPDATE FOR THE LOS OSOS WASTEWATER PROJECT, May 3, 2007 --The weekly status update for the Los Osos Wastewater Project to the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors on May 8, 2007 will include an item to request approval for a letter to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board requesting that future enforcement proceedings in the Los Osos Prohibition Zone, be held in abeyance.


May 3, 2007

Mr. Jeffrey Young, Chair
Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
895 Aerovista Place #101
San Luis Obispo CA 93401

RE: Agenda Item #6, for May 10, 2007
Other Future Enforcement Proceedings in the Los Osos Prohibition Zone

Dear Mr. Young:

Your staff’s report for the above referenced item offers several alternatives for future enforcement actions against residents of the Los Osos Prohibition Zone.
The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors strongly recommends that the Regional Water Board adopt the “No Action” alternative for the time being for the reasons noted below.

We agree with the assertion noted in the staff report that some believe “further individual enforcement is counterproductive to the County’s process.” As you know, the Regional Water Board’s previous enforcement actions against 45 randomly-selected individuals has produced a vocal and angry response from some in the community and has resulted in at least one ad hoc group organizing to oppose those actions on legal grounds.

While the County does not dispute the Regional Water Board’s authority to pursue these individual enforcement actions, we believe that further such actions would hinder the County’s extensive efforts to develop wastewater treatment alternatives in the following ways:

1) The enforcement actions distract the community at a time when full attention should be given to careful consideration of a large volume of technical, financial, and environmental information that we are preparing ahead of the Proposition 218 vote this fall. County staff and elected officials have stated publicly on numerous occasions that the community’s energy should be spent on pursuing a successful project, which would render moot the possible penalties outlined in previous actions.

2) Previous Regional Water Board actions have been alleged by some to constitute “electioneering” in an effort to favorably influence the Prop 218 vote outcome. Please note that the County does not see evidence of legally-defined electioneering in previous Cease and Desist Orders, the associated Settlement Agreements, or the recently-issued Notices of Violation. We are concerned, however, about the perception of Regional Water Board electioneering becoming an ever-increasing distraction and impairing the Prop 218 vote, if active enforcement actions or hearings are underway this fall.

3) Further individual enforcement actions increase the likelihood of litigation against the County and the Regional Water Board. We speculate that further individual actions would encourage many recipients to seek legal relief, again distracting attention from the County’s process. As noted above, we understand that the Regional Water Board has legal enforcement responsibilities under existing law, however, any new litigation would risk further delay of a project already long overdue. The cost increases and environmental damage resulting from further delay would be seriously detrimental.

In summary, we recommend that the Regional Water Board hold further enforcement actions in abeyance while the County process under AB 2701 is underway. We believe the Regional Water Board has shown clear intention to pursue enforcement if the property owners in Los Osos reject the County efforts by defeating the Proposition 218 assessments. Enforcement actions undertaken now would be premature and counterproductive, since the County process is reaching a critical stage.

Some have also suggested that the Regional Water Board must proceed now with enforcement against the balance of the Prohibition Zone in order to retain the right to do so later. If this is accurate, the County and the community should receive a clear summary of the relevant legal issues that necessitate further enforcement action at this time.

Let us emphasize that the County greatly appreciates the support that the Regional Water Board and your staff have given in our efforts to pursue both State and Federal grant funding for a community wastewater project. Your staff provided a letter of support to the Proposition 50 (Integrated Regional Water Management) grant efforts with the State Water Board and we appreciate their comments on the need for grants when the cost of complying with regulatory mandates exceeds affordability criteria established by regulatory agencies. Your staff also exceeded expectations in our meetings with Congresswoman Lois Capps and Congressman Peter Visclosky (Indiana), when they toured Los Osos on April 12th and took first-hand water quality samples from freshwater seeps that exist on the edge of the bay. We will continue to work cooperatively with your agency to seek extension of the State Revolving Fund payback schedule beyond 20 years and to secure other funding essential to a successful project in Los Osos.

We believe that deferring enforcement actions will allow your Board, your staff, the County and the community to concentrate on the myriad issues needing resolution in the near future. The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors has the highest level of respect for your Board and your responsibilities. We hope you recognize that our support of Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee, and the efforts he led for approval of AB 2701, indicate the County’s commitment to help resolve the wastewater dilemma in Los Osos.

We believe that the County efforts, initiated voluntarily under the authority of AB 2701, provide the best opportunity for resolving the wastewater problem. After numerous meetings in the community, the creation of a project Technical Advisory Committee, and weekly updates by staff to our Board, we are increasingly hopeful that the community and property owners recognize that this final opportunity for a local agency solution will prevail and that State enforcement and/or implementation actions can be prevented.

We would be glad to provide a presentation to the Regional Water Board in the near future on current County efforts. Please don’t hesitate to contact Project Director Paavo Ogren (781-5252) or County Supervisor Bruce Gibson to arrange that presentation or if you need further information.


Jerry Lenthall
Chairman, Board of Supervisors

Bruce Gibson
Supervisor, District Two

Anonymous said...

Wow! I appreciate the County doing this. It makes a lot of sense. I just hope that the RWQCB listens to them.

Anonymous said...

This is great! These two have really stepped up to the plate for us. Please everyone support the County efforts! Let's all be nice so we can get the RWQCB to "stand down" as they are supposed to do. Look we've got some influential people on our side we should take advantage of the situation. This news just makes my day. Thank you for the posting and I hope it shows up in the TT ASAP! This is the kind of news that will help bring us together. Tell everyone you know about this press release.

Anonymous said...

Let's also hope the community is listening! Great response Bruce and Jerry!!!!!!!!!!

Mike Green said...

Bruce and Jerry, Thank you! This is a great thing.

Anonymous said...

This is spectacular, truly. People see that we really do need help from agencies, not strong arm bullying. Right on, you guys. And my deepest thanks to both of you. I'm thinking my vote for Bruce was a good choice :)

Anonymous said...

Bruce and Jerry, if you are listening, is someone going to be at the hearing or whatever it is at the RWQCB next Thursday? We could use your support there as well. Please come and speak if you can. Thank you in advance.

Anonymous said...

Finally...a sewer lovefest!

Anonymous said...

Ladies and Gentlemen,

After John Waddell, our Los Osos Wastewater Project Engineer, posted the above proposed letter that, if approved at the May 8 Board of Supervisors meeting, would be sent to the Regional Board, several comments have been posted expressing appreciation to Board Chairman Lenthall and District 2 Supervison Gibson, specifically. I wanted to clarify for the readers that each of the five members of the Board of Supervisors supported the preperation of this letter. Supervisors Lenthall and Gibson were the two who were designated as signers for the Board. Supervisor Gibson did have a strong hand in getting the Board to consider taking this action. We expect the approval of this letter to be granted by all five Board members at the Los Osos standing 2:00 agenda item on May 8.

Noel King
Public Works Director
County of San Luis Obispo

Mike Green said...

Thank you Noel!!! And Thanks to ALL the Co. BOS.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Just signed on and have been reading the posts. I am speechless! This is wonderful news and I thank the entire BOS, Mr. Wadell, Mr. King, Mr. Ogren...whoever is responsible... for their support. We have been waiting for this for a long time. Thanks again. We want a project and we want to take of our environment. I am so happy right now!

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr. King

I hope you will consider that some of us can't come to the BOS on Tuesday (I teach at Cuesta during that time) but this letter has my wholehearted support. The approval of this letter would mean so much to our community.

Very sincerely,

A concerned PZ property owner for 16 long years...among many

Anonymous said...

Thank you SLO County BOS for your efforts. And a big THANK YOU to Bruce Gibson who apparently has been listening to the situation and the community.

Anonymous said...

To 11:09 on May 3rd:

You asked about Gail and the recall. Gail was initally against the recall, but Steve Sawyer insisted and fought with Gail (he was going to do it anyway) and at that point Gail agreed to "take it over" then she picked the candidates (who, by the way, were all state employees, and could be seen as a conflict of interest in the state's demands for Tri-W).

Gail picked the people she could control. Gail's been in charge ever since and nothing positive has been accomplished by her for the people.

Yes, Mrs. Queen of Shit has done a real good job to bring the town down. Notice she never mentions that we were well on our way with Ripley when she brought us the legislation. Again, the legislation was the ONLY way that the Tri-W group could recoup their project. Gail admitted it was Gordon Hensley that brought her in to help.

Gail said people in Los Osos fell off the turnip truck, and I believe she's right about that judging by the way that people still believe she's on their side. She never mentions step only on site. Yes, Gail ruined the one chance we had for an affordable project (so nice she doesn't have to pay for the system that she's bringing us).

Anonymous said...

I have to thank the county for (finally) stepping up to the plate to defend SLO taxpayers.

Afterall, the county permitted the septic tanks and allowed building (creating the density problem) and never implimented the required septic management plan since 1983. The county should take responsibility for the RWQCB's actions now (or at least appear to defend taxpayers.)

It wasn't the homeowners who did anything to deserve the kind of abuse and suffering in hell by the RWQCB's actions and abuse of power. Homeowners did absolutely nothing wrong or illegal and the realtors never disclosed anything about illegal discharges which could be considered fraud since they knew and didn't disclose.

Why would the RWQCB punish if it wasn't outright blackmailing homeowners for their 218 vote??? Their punishing and terrorizing doesn't clean the water!

Thank you BOS for finally getting on board. It will help the county gain some credibility (since people have been asking Bruce and Paavo for help ever since AB 2701 became law.)

P.S. Noel, if you're reading this, have you changed your mind about the Tri-W as you promised?

And, WILL THE BOS really get on board and look objectively for a cost-effective, sustainable, environmentally superior project?
(with the elections coming up, Jerry...?)

Anonymous said...

To Anon 7:44PM 5/4/07

You must be an insider to the Los Osos fiasco if your info is true.

I do not think what you state has any truth to it. You simply do not make an iota of sense. If anyone picked the candidates, it was Fouche. He was well involved opposing the sewer, long before Gail ever arrived. Schicker was already on the board and must have asked Fouche to help.

Hensley asked her to help and brought her in? Please document where Hensley ever knew Gail before she came.

It is obvious why Gail became involved: sewer manager wannabe.

The big question is who knew her before and who promissed her a job if the recall succeeded. If they knew her well, they would have known about her past problems with the law.

Mike Green said...

Anon.(Jerry...?) above, a letter I got from Bruce:
"I can't fathom why anyone would think that the County won't seriously consider the advisory survey.

The final project approval (assuming the current efforts are successful) will rest with the Board of Supervisors. As with any BoS action, we actively solicit input from the public. The advisory survey will provide a detailed assessment of community opinion that will be of great importance to our decision.

Thanks for your interest and support.
Bruce "

What other option do we realistically have?
This support from the county is huge,
All of Los Osos's problems can be explained by political ineptitude, if the 218 vote is to pass, it has to win the election, election is a word that should make everyone nervous,
No more "cheaper better faster" ever!

4crapkiller said...

To Anon 8:19 PM

" And, WILL THE BOS really get on board and look objectively for a cost-effective, sustainable, environmentally superior project?
(with the elections coming up, Jerry...?)"

I feel that the BOS will do the best they can do. But if you think this project is going to cost less than what the old Tri-W project did, before the opposition, you are living in la-la land.

However, with the right amount of fed and state grants, there is a possibility somewhere between slim and none.

Anonymous said...

I guess slim and none is better than nothing. But who really knows at this point? Perhaps a miracle will happen. Let the County do their work. They are doing a good job. Better than any of the CSD boards, I'm sorry to say, considering I voted in all of the elections.

Anonymous said...

And getting the Water Board to back off would be really helpful because we wouldn't have to feel so upset all the time.

Mike Green said...

Crappy, if that chance is a fair and open one, then everyone wins, even if it is TriW
With the right political action and clear objectives, between clear and none is a wide road.
Besides, what the old project (pre recall TriW) would have cost is no longer relevant in its entirety.
Like it or not, the paradigm has shifted.

Mike Green said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mike Green said...

"slim and none" sorry.

Anonymous said...

Mike, your take is clear, concise, simple, and right on. I think the county is providing the fair and open process so far, and I have no reason to believe it won't continue. But agendas in this community drive everything concerning the sewer. I think the hardest part bar none for the county is not proceeding with this incredibly complicated process fairly and openly, it's swimming against the tide of misinformation and obstruction by the various agendas, for whatever their reasons. And if you consider where we've been, and where we have to go, and all the help we're getting along the way, it's pretty sickening it's still not enough for some. I'm tired of all these people with an agenda. On all sides. Let the county do it's job.

Mike Green said...

Welcome to Cargo Cult!

Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight...

The Water Board has been barbecuing CDO draftees for a year... Los Osos has been begging the County to step in all that time... Los Osos is part of San Luis Obispo County, but the County stands down in silence as AB2701 is thrust upon us in the middle of the night...

NOW the County decides to write a letter to the RWQCB to stand down? Why now? Because they are working together to screw us, they know the 218 is in deep jeopardy, and they need to rub a little PR on the spot, hoping it'll get it out the stain.

The County has NOT provided a fair and open process. Those, like McPherson, who complain about "the tide of misinformation and obstruction by the various agendas" are the worst of hypocrites, for they have put their agendas before the community's well-being, and now we must suffer their self-righteousness with the huge monthly sewer bill her AB2701 will drop on PZ homeowners.

She has the nerve to carp. "I'm tired of all these people with an agenda."

Gail, if it wasn't for your agenda, your failures, your lies, we wouldn't have the CDOs and CAOs you're pretending to defend us against.

The Water Board should give you a big raise for doing their work for them, the Medal of Freedom, an acre of land, and plenty of slaves to till the soil. You've earned it the old-fashioned way -- lying through your teeth out of all three sides of your mouth.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:28, you've got to get a grip. I'm not Gail, I'm not even a woman, just a regular citizen who is tired of the sewer games and the sewer lunatics like, well, you seem to be. Maybe you should get together with Santa Margerita Ron Crawford and you both can get at the root of your women problems. I'm not fan of Gail McPerson's either, believe me. The woman is slippery to say the least. But you've got to get a grip.

Anonymous said...

From what I see, the blogger at 10:28 has much more of a grip on the situation than you ever could!

Anonymous said...

A grip as in he thinks that I, Anon 9:14, am Gail McPherson? A 48 year old man who sees McPherson as a carpetbagger of the worst kind; Lisa Schicker's mouth-piece;and who will never forget McPherson's "you lost, now get over it" quote? He thinks I'm her? Bwahahahahaha