Pages

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

1. Some Thoughts After Attending Tuesday Night's TAC Meeting Wherein They Conducted Their Meeting As Per The Agenda, And Got Yelled At Because Some Folks Didn't Understand That They Had To Put Down The Specific Agenda Item # And So Were Put Into Public Comment Pile #2 When They Thought They Were In Public Comment Pile #1 So One Of Them Started Swearing And Yelling And Stomped Out Only To Return To Speak Without Incident When The TAC Got To Public Comment Pile #2 And When The Meeting Looked Like It Was Going To Run OverTime, The TAC members Were Polled And Asked If They Were Willing To Stay Late To Hear The Remaining Speakers And They Voted To Do Just That.

Sigh. A wag once noted that real life is just one long High School. When it comes to certain people attending CSD meetings (and other various public meetings) I would conclude that High School is too advanced. Try kindergarten.

2. CSD AGENDA ITEM #B for the Los Osos CSD Meeting on Thursday, May 17th, 2007 at the South Bay Community Center, meeting to start at 7:30 P.M.

[Action item] B. Consideration of Public Censure -- The Board Will Hear Testimony and Consider Adopting Resolution 2007 - 10, A Resolution of the Los Osos Community Services District. Publicly Censuring Resident Al Barrow for His Disruptive Behavior at Public Meetings and on Public Property.

ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution.

68 comments:

Anonymous said...

The CSD has my family's vote to censure Mr.Barrow! He should not be allowed inside a CSD or County meeting ever again, this has gone on far too long! We no longer care whether he has a good idea or not!

Mike Green said...

Yes, what an emBarrowsment!

Anonymous said...

Mr. Barrow's behavior is unacceptable especially at such a critical time. The CSD and the community have been patient with him long enough. He wastes our time and energy that could be put to much better use.

Mike Green said...

After witnessing another Circe de sewer last night, I wish we could modify the comment process a bit. With today's digital recording capabilities what do you think of having general public comments before the agenda items are discussed? That way, the board can bring back the peoples comments that really have pertinent content or questions, each member could "mark" that part of the recording that they feel is worth it.
It might help get the nervous tanglebrains settled down because their egos would be already fed.
As for me, I think I'm going to stick with written comments directly to the board.

Anonymous said...

Like your Circe de Sewer, great description!

The carnaval atmosphere surrounding these meeting is going to one day bring about some form of restriction, including the possibility of the elimination of public comments. Many of our community, on both sides of the issues, have ceased to attend any meetings in Los Osos due to the very real potential for violence. What started as concern for the direction the past CSD was headed has turned into a nasty confrontation with no winners as this has turned from a concern into WWIII.

Anonymous said...

I hope they keep letting Barrow come to the meetings... that way I can claim everyone that wants to move the sewer is crazy.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone tell me if Linde Owen is a homeowner in the PZ.

Anonymous said...

I don't know but wouldn't it be in county property records?

Anonymous said...

It has come to my attention that El Tiberon and Mike Green miss me and my comments. So I will comment.

I recently attended a TAC meeting and sat next to Ann Calhoun. I spoke publicly that it seemed to me that the TAC was doing a good job. I also asked Pavo to clarify the part of the Blakeslee Bill concerning the site of the sewer.

He told me that the county had the right to put the sewer anyplace they wanted under the juristiction of the county and that the bill gave them the right to put it within the jurisdiction of the LOCSD.

We shall see.

I have all my property up for sale, and am looking forward to being in Panama and catching and releasing big fish as soon as possible. There is no need for me to comment on this blog. It seems that sharky and mike green reflect my views, and are quite capable of reflecting reason and concern.

Jon Arcuni

Anonymous said...

If anyone is interested in learning more about the Petaluma WWP, now under construction, just google it. I think this is the kind of project the original solutions group wanted but couldn't do on the small parcel of land that is "TRIW." I believe that if this kind of a project is an option for Los Osos it will be overwhelmingly supported just as it was in 1998.

Anonymous said...

The hypocrisy of Ann's comment is astounding. Where was she (and the current LOCSD Board members) when Al routinely behaved like this with the pre-recall board? When Cynthia Mulligan, Keith Swanson and Tom Salmon behaved in the same way?

Now that the lunatic fringe's ire is directed at the current board and the County, suddenly it's unacceptable behavior, worthy of public censure?

Now I need a shower....

Mike Green said...

I don't recall ever reading Ann complimenting Al on his behavior, in fact I do recall her lambasting him the time he mau-maued the poor receptionist at Sam's office!
The previous post is certainly a case of attacking the messenger (unless YOU approve of Al's rants).

Anonymous said...

Dear anon 1:15 - the Petaluma plant that has 31 violations? Is this an upgrade because the ponding isn't working out too well?
http://ciwqs.waterboards.ca.gov/ciwqs/readOnly/ciwqsReportEnforcement.jsp?reportID=5&place=2&facility=PETALUMA+WPCP&sortOrder=VIOLATION_TYPE&sortDir=&pageCur=1&pageSize=25
cut and paste link.
Just curious.

Anonymous said...

To 1:51PM,

The Petaluma project started out as a conventional/traditional plan, but it was the homeowners and residents who fought and won. There were petitions, etc. and a lot of community input.

Paavo has seen the designer's book on Petaluma and he knows it's all out there and available to us. The designer, Patricia Johanson, has been to Los Osos and committed to work here.

Johanson met with Rob Miller, Judy Vick, Julie Tacker, and most importantly, Gail, but there was no interest on this board's part and apparently none from the county either.

Petaluma's plant was mentioned a few times last night at the TAC meeting. I would hope the county would consider an award-winning project for Los Osos. Or is it too late in the game already?

Anonymous said...

To 3:33,

The Petaluma project's engineers are our engineers now, Carollo. Maybe we can ask them about it? They should know!

Anonymous said...

Please note that Petaluma buys all their water and is a recycling project. How does this fit into Los Osos?
We need to harvest, use, reuse/put back and harvest again. We need a complete project and their project just purchases, stores, pumps to users. They use their groundwater as back up water only.

Is this the direction Los Osos wants to go? We only buy our water from a state water project? I'm not clear on this direction as it is comparing apples to oranges. This appears to be yet another opportunity for Los Osos to be confused by wanting the greener grass from the other side of the aeration pond.

Anonymous said...

Most importantly Gail? Gail must be writing for herself and Lisa Shicker now.....or maybe Lisa is now writing for Gail!

Anonymous said...

"I don't recall ever reading Ann complimenting Al on his behavior, in fact I do recall her lambasting him the time he mau-maued the poor receptionist at Sam's office!"

I'm not attacking the messenger, only the hypocrisy of the message. So she lambasted Al for harrassing Sam's aide? When did she EVER lambast him (or others) for doing the same thing to the pre-recall board?

Is she saying it's okay to abuse LOCSD board members, but not County or State officials?

Give me a break.

Shark Inlet said...

Mike (and anonymous),

I don't remember Ann complaining about Al harassing Sam's aide. Instead I remember her essentially suggesting that it was all political theater ... presumably she thinks the aide should have recognized the theater aspect of Al's bluster.

Anonymous said...

When Al goes off, it scares the hell out of me. There are so many fragile elderly folks that could be seriously injured if his anger takes him a step further. Even some of the big boys are fearful of his retribution.

LOCK YOUR DOORS AND STAY AWAY FROM YOUR WINDOWS may have some truth in it when it comes to Al.

Mike Green said...

If you want to infer Hypocrisy then I suggest you read the following logical fallacy;

An excerpt from the logical fallacy handbook:

* SILENCE IMPLIES CONSENT
Consent to what? Just what is it I consent to when I do NOT vote? To the
policies of Bush? To the policies of Clinton? To the policies of Marrou? To
the policies of all those whose principled disagreement with the electoral
system precludes their participation in it?
The process of implication contains a causal relationship. For one thing
to imply another thing, there must be a causal sequence between the two
things. People who make the assertion "silence implies consent" never
propose any chain of logical connection between the silence and the consent.
Precisely how does consent arise from silence? How can dead men be said to
consent to anything?
If my silence does imply consent, then how far does that implication
reach? If I am silent about one side of an argument, and also silent about
the other, and contradictory, side of the argument, then what implication
can be drawn concerning my consent to either side? Am I considered to
consent to all things about which I am silent? Even those about which I am
completely ignorant? To the fact that someone in Calcutta beats his wife? If
I must express disapproval of all things to which I do NOT consent, for fear
of reproach resulting from my silence about any of them, there would not be
sufficient hours in the day for such a plethora of expressions as would be
required for me to preserve my honesty and impartiality. "

Just because Ann didn't bemoan Al to your satisfaction before dose not prove that she approved it.

I will leave it at that. I can see your opinion though. perhaps we can agree to disagree.

Mike Green said...

Jon, Godspeed my friend.
Keep my number, I will come visit as soon as I can!!

Mike Green

Anonymous said...

It's pretty simple: There were no witnesses at the Blakeslee office incident -- he said, she said.

There were no witnesses at the CSD with Ann -- he said, she said.

We can't rely on the Tribune with their blown up story about the Blakeslee office encounter.

Now it seems everyone wants to shut Al up. Hmmmm.

Mike Green said...

I for one do NOT want to shut Al up! When he calms down and acts respectfully he is an articulate knowledgeable speaker. What I would appreciate from him is a measure of decorum and respect for all the other people in the room!
Disruptive behavior dose nobody any good, regardless of their position!

Anonymous said...

Oh man I'm laughing so hard. Anon 6:24 I see where you're going. Oh man. You're right maybe. The conspiracy goes right up to Big Al. They're trying to silence him. I guess he better start checking his soup.

Only in Los Osos. Bwaahahahahaha

Anonymous said...

I find it very hard to believe that there was "no interest" on this board's part in pursueing a project like the Petaluma project. My impressiopn has been that they like ponds and such. Even Chuck mentioned at TAC last night that Carollo are the Petaluma engineers and we should ask them about it. Now Gail, there's piece of work. For the life of me I can't figure out what the heck she wants. And she's working so hard on it! I know Lisa likes the Arcata project and I think Steve and Joe would go with anything that seems reasonable. Julie wants whatever Jeff wants.

The PZ said...

Al Barrow fully deserves public censure for his repeated behaviors.
But will he finally Get It??
He didn't Get It after he walked face first into the Triv's front page after scaring Blakeslee's poor widdle intern with his antics.
He didn't get it when he has been 86'ed from nearly every establishment in town.
He collects restraining orders,over the years, like playing cards.
The Sherrif is Aware of him...
But he never GETS it.
He thinks his actions are legit--always has a rationale.
It is part of his disorder. He needs help.
However, this community has been ill suited and ill served in its role as his proxy therapy.
The behavior based marketeers could never had such a propaganda tool as his obsessive, paranoid, brow beating antics have provided them:
The Face of the Anti Sewer Crazy

Anonymous said...

Will we all be weeping for poor Al when he makes the final bend and goes postal in one of the meetings. The guy appears to be a certifiable nut case who should be undergoing some State paid diagnostic and extended vacation time in Atascadero. I don't care if he is some genius sewer guru, he doesn't belong in a public meeting where he could throw another senseless fit of rage.

One day, and no one can predict when, he could go off and hurt or kill someone! He's just crazy enough to take on every one of the BOD or BOS! Do you want to be in the room when that happens?

Mike Green said...

Hey, you know the thought just came over me:
What if we hired Ron to write an in depth expose'
On Al?
Maybe he would disappear from the meetings just like Pandora?
Come on Ron! Wink Wink!

Anonymous said...

To 7:44,

When Patricia Johanson came to Los Osos (she was invited by a citizen) she met with John, Julie, Gail, Rob Miller, Judy Vick, Ann Calhoun but both John and Julie were rude to her. Lisa refused to show up stating that no body gave her Patricia's book first (a big wow) But Judy and Rob Miller were very impressed. Judy because she is an artist herself who
followed Patricia's roomate, aritist Georgia O'Keefe, and Rob was impressed by all Patricia's contacts and who she knew.

Patricia wanted to work as a consultant and wanted to bring in Professor Gearheart, who did Arcata, (they're friends) who she claimed "thinks out-of-the-box" but the current CSD board simply wasn't interested. Gail never called Patricia. Judy Vick kept to touch.

Paavo has her book, knows her work, but I haven't heard that he's shown any interest at all in the kind of project those two extremely talented people could do for a system in Los Osos.

Any person who is interested should google Patricia Johanson to see her work. It's some excellent stuff.

P.S. Al Barrow gave her a tour of all the land & properties, and Patricia actually thought Al was the most helpful and knowlegable of all the people she met in L.O. How that for ya? Ha.

Anonymous said...

You all might want to compare the rainfall in both Petaluma and Arcata. If ponds work, dilution can play a big part in that. Hmmmm. What was our rainfall this year so far?

Anonymous said...

How come Mrs.Tacker is picking on poor Al Barrow?

She certainly encouraged his outbursts against the past Board Members. Maybe she and several other ought to be censured as well? Julie's outrageous public behavior has also been an embarassment to the community for several years. Kieth Swanson has been pretty outrageous as well and maybe Lisa's Jeckel and Hyde act could be considered an embarassment.

I like watch Barrow explode, gives a certain character to the Circus of the Sewer.

Churadogs said...

Inlet Sez:"Shark Inlet said...
Mike (and anonymous),

I don't remember Ann complaining about Al harassing Sam's aide. Instead I remember her essentially suggesting that it was all political theater ... presumably she thinks the aide should have recognized the theater aspect of Al's bluster.

5:28 PM, May 16, 2007 "

I suggest you go back and re-read the original Blakeslee Mau-Mau posting posting. Mother Calhoun spanked. Once again, I have to conclude you have comprehension problems. Or maybe my style of writng is confusing to you? or something keeps going wrong with your precis of what I've written. It's disheartening.

A shout out to Jon Arcuni. Panama here you come! Hooray! Get settled then all of us can come visit and go fishing! I'll even get some way cool tropical socks!

Anonymous said...

The problem is that Ann has been pegged as an "anti-sewer obstructionist." Therefore it follows that she somehow condones Al's behavior. People in Los Osos make way too many assumptions about other people based on their political leanings. I think it's sad. Not to mention the fact that Al has been pushing for a wastewater project for Los Osos for years!!!

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

You called Al's behavior political theater ... just bad theater with Al's choice of audience a poor one.

Your calling it theater as opposed to threatening behavior suggests that you feel his behavior was simply a poor choice and not a real threat.

Perhaps you ought to re-read what what you wrote on the matter.

I don't want to argue Al with you. I don't so much care at all. I was just trying to remind Mike of what you wrote. If you disagree with me about what you meant, fine. I do think that the casual reader would view your earlier postings (see the link above) as less a criticism of his threatening actions as of his poor choice of audience.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link Mr.Shark

It appears Mr.Barrow was only "protesting" a missing ice tray and NOT really "threatening" anyone. Surely those who have been suject to Mr.Barrow's "political protests" simply missed the theatrical value?

"Having seen many of Mr. Barrow’s angry, ramped up “criticisms” and “political protests” at numerous CSD meetings, Mother Calhoun stands behind her previous posting: “Mau-Mauing an assemblyman’s 19 year-old scheduler about legislation or policy is BAD theatre and makes about as much sense as Mau-Mauing the young lady behind the Gottschalks cosmetics counter because the refrigerator you ordered a month ago arrived with an ice tray missing.”"

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the link Mr.Shark

It appears Mr.Barrow was only "protesting" a missing ice tray and NOT really "threatening" anyone. Surely those who have been suject to Mr.Barrow's "political protests" simply missed the theatrical value?

"Having seen many of Mr. Barrow’s angry, ramped up “criticisms” and “political protests” at numerous CSD meetings, Mother Calhoun stands behind her previous posting: “Mau-Mauing an assemblyman’s 19 year-old scheduler about legislation or policy is BAD theatre and makes about as much sense as Mau-Mauing the young lady behind the Gottschalks cosmetics counter because the refrigerator you ordered a month ago arrived with an ice tray missing.”"

Anonymous said...

Let's hope that the subject of Mr. Barrow's censure wasn't the reason to do this extra meeting and spend $500 on Directors, $xx (I don't know how much it costs to rent SBCC, lawyer's time - what was it $260/hr?, and staff time, cost unknown.

That part of business could have been tacked onto the next regular meeting at no cost. This has been going on for years, why would there be a rush to do this now?

Anonymous said...

I think a large part of it is because of Mr. Barrows behavior towards the TAC and the County on Tuesday night at the town hall meeting. It was so disrespectful to visitors from the county who are trying to help us! We are finally getting a bit of consencus and cooperation going and he is bursting the bubble. If people think we are crazy it's because often Barrow is before these boards and groups cursing, yelling, and so on. Maybe the CSd is finally doing some PR work.

Anonymous said...

My guess is that the loonies are really going to come out of the bin tonight. It will be interesting to see how the board handles it.

Anonymous said...

If Al's message is so valuable, he had better get someone else to deliver it. No one is going to hear or respect anything he has to say when his behavior is so repulsive.

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't get within a country mile of the meeting tonight. Al does present as angry, out of control, and a true danger should something set him off.

Funny thing is, that this has been Al's behavior since the beginning of time. Julie and Lisa were in his corner when he made a mockery of the supposed decorum that should be observed in a public meeting. Sort of reminds me of parents of an unruly child, who smile indulgently as their child breaks things in someone's home; but when the child carries that same unruly bahavior into the parents' home, the parents don't like it.

Al, Linde, Peggy, Keith, Joey and a host of others should have been removed from the meetings years ago. Their behavior has always been unconscionable.

Now, when Al's temper tantrums do not suit them, those same people who had rooted for him, want him censured.

Is he of no further use to them?

Duh duh DUH, the plot thickens.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous 3:35PM:

If the CSD really wanted to do some PR work, they would all resign.

Anonymous said...

To 3:30:

I guess Gail's board will spend that much for a special CSD meeting to kick Al off the wastewater committee. It's worth it to her to shut him up about Orenco or any other sustainable and affordable project. None of us want that...! and it was ONLY Al who brought all the experts and alternative projects to town. No, don't want any of that!

Gail doesn't like that Al's asking why the numbers on Tri-W and step from TAC are fudged (again?)

No, can't have Al around to ask the hard questions, can we? And we certainly can't have him around to hold anyone's feet to the fire. No, that's not good either.

But for Ms. Tacker to trump this all up on Al. She who dated LeGros, she who sold out the town that Al was trying to save (for her "new" boyfriend.)

Ms. Tacker sits on a board in total conflict of interest.

Oh, and yes, we are ALL in favor of censorship -- this is Los Osos in SLO county!!!!

Anonymous said...

It's still "MRS." Tacker

Anonymous said...

Good God, we know about Edwards and Bleskey, she dated LeGros also?

Anonymous said...

Yes, and all the while being MRS. Tacker. Poor Tom.

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous 3:30 PM:

The cost of a meeting at the Community Center, with AGP recording it, attorney and consultant costs, overtime for non-exempt staff runs about $4,000-$5,000.

Anonymous said...

Please break down the $4,000-$5,000. I find that hard to believe. But maybe I'm naive?

Tacker dated Le Gros? No way! That is LE - GROSS!

Of course the board wants Al out of the way now. Why do people find this such a surprise? They supported AB 2701, they support Gail, etc. Al has no place in the current agenda.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"You called Al's behavior political theater ... just bad theater with Al's choice of audience a poor one.

Your calling it theater as opposed to threatening behavior suggests that you feel his behavior was simply a poor choice and not a real threat."

If you had bothered to attend last night's meeting, you would have heard from the CSD's attorney and office staff that the sheriff determined that --at this point -- there was no real threat of bodily harm that would justify a restraining order. The Blakeslee matter was investigated by the Sheriff and again, nobody was arrested for a "real" threat. There is a line that can be crossed and to date legally Al hasn't crossed it, at least not to the satisfaction of the authorities.

so I stand by what I wrote: What you're looking at is political theatre, a bully boy tactic designed to get what you want. Political theatre can be used in an office, it can be used at the podium during a public meeting. Heck, Al once pulled his Mau-Mau routine on me while standing on the sidewalk. The tactic rarely if ever works and almost always blows back on the bully boy. But on two occasions now, the authorities have not viewed this a s "real" threat. If they had, they would have hauled Al's behind to jail.

And, as seen last night, this CSD (unlike the previous one) will not run the risk of committing perjury by swearing out a restraining order claiming fear of direct, iminent bodily harm & etc., an order which is then (heh-heh) later pulled once it's usefulness was over.Talk about a political piece of theatre!)

anonymous sez:"My guess is that the loonies are really going to come out of the bin tonight. It will be interesting to see how the board handles it.

3:55 PM, May 17, 2007"

Once again, here's a huge problem. Citizen spends time posting comments but can't be bothered to attend a meeting. Too bad. I think you would have been surprised. I was.

anon sez:"The problem is that Ann has been pegged as an "anti-sewer obstructionist." Therefore it follows that she somehow condones Al's behavior. People in Los Osos make way too many assumptions about other people based on their political leanings. I think it's sad. Not to mention the fact that Al has been pushing for a wastewater project for Los Osos for years!!!"

That in a nutshell is the topic of my next column. Our (often false) definitions keep us blinded and stumbling down the wrong roads.

Anonymous said...

Hi all,

Just to clarify......

According to Julie, I did date her once or twice back in 1990-1991.....but I do not remember doing so. I'll have to take her word on it.

Regards, Richard LeGros

Anonymous said...

Is that a yes or a no? Or an I conveniently can't remember?

4Crapkiller said...

I cannot trust anyone's opinions about the danger of Al Barrow until he is evaluated by a shrink.

Ann opines without seeking comment: "the whole thing hit the front pages and made Al and, by association, all of Sewerville look like certifiable nut jobs"

4Crapkiller opines: "ALL OF SEWERVILLE"? Speak for yourself Ann! The "nut jobs" have made themselves clearly evident to everyone and share YOUR viewpoint.

However, your quiet behavior separates you from the nut jobs.

You are a fruit: Honeydew

Anonymous said...

4crapkiller,

The only "nut jobs" are the ones who think a plant at Tri-W (and with a park too) was a good idea. Any six year old would know better.

You are the "nut job" and fortunately you have your very own newspaper, The Triv, to portray anyone who doesn't want Tri-W as nut jobs. Did anyone notice when the congressman was here the sub-headline read that they were walking in the "sludge" not mud, but "sludge" -- oh you gotta love the Triv!! Always there to make us look bad to the rest of the entire county!

You called the man who Paavo went to see recently (that held up the fine screening, who writes the books on sewers) a nut job. So, I have come to the conclusion it's you -- you're nuts, and working for the county to monitor this blog to sell the "process" and you and I know the "process" is a big pipe sewer that we don't need.

Now why don't you share with us why the advisory vote (which now the county says is illegal) has turned into a "project survey" allowing everyone to vote, especially the people who live out of town. We know how they will vote, because we know they don't want a sewer there! Another clever move by the county (guess it pays to have so many attorneys) so when all the people outside the PZ vote for Tri-W, the BOS will say, "see this is what Los Osos wanted" -- another clever trick for Tri-W!!! Go county, go!!!

Anonymous said...

Ah, another sip from the cup of paranoia. Same 'ol stuff from you Anon 2:09. You by far are the most creative and entertaining writer on this blog. Keep spinning your tales of deceit, fear, and conspiracy. They are priceless.

Anonymous said...

I'd like to know why I can't post a comment on Ann's latest story, above this one? Has she turned the comments section?

Anonymous said...

2:30,

Well, there you go again, you never address any of the questions -- just like to call names and label....toss out any facts or info and say "paranoia" to dismiss it all. Good goin'...

Why is it now illegal to call it an "advisory vote?" Why is it called an advisory "survey" and why change the rules now?

Anonymous said...

'ABOUT AL'

What hasn't been metioned at all, is that Al doesn't yell, he just can't hear!

When a person can't hear, that creates a lot of mis-communication and confusion.

I think the CSD should have taken that into consideration. They are using a couple of his disabilities against him.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

There are at least sorts of "threats" we're talking about here and it is good to keep them separate.

First ... what does Al mean when he says stuff? Presumably if he means to threaten and isn't just mau-mauing (it is interesting to note that the definition essentially says that mau-mauing is to intimidate, harass and terrorize ... I read Wolfe's book also and his use of the term is far more mild) this is a serious situation.

Second ... how does the recipient of the mau-mauing view the situation? Do they view it as political theater as you do or are they really afraid?

Third ... do these threats meet some legal definition of threats or harassment that is actionable?

Al may mean to threaten and the recipient may feel threatened but it might still not meet some legal criteria necessary for involuntary hospitalization or a restraining order. On the other hand, Al may actually doing some sort of political theater and no one is in any danger at all.

The problem is this ... until someone crosses the line we cannot really know whether they intended to do actual harm to others or not. To assume that one's threats are empty because they've not crossed the line in the past is naive, perhaps.

Again, I don't know Al well enough to know whether it's just political theater or not but I do know that I have a lot of sympathy for those who would want to speak out in Los Osos but are worried about Al and others they perceive to be dangerous bullies.


On another matter ... Ann ... why do you assume that I am an able bodied person with a schedule which would allow me to attend every CSD meeting and every TAC meeting and every RWQCB meeting? Yes, public participation is important, but why do you ask others to participate in every meeting as much as you do? Is our opinion somehow less valuable because we don't voice it when and where you want us to? It would seem that it is only able-bodied people who are retired have the luxury of attending all these damn meetings. I think, Ann, that you underestimate the power of online communication. Estimates suggest that there are tens to hundreds of readers for each individual who comments in any forum.


Lastly a note to our most recent poster ... my father-in-law is pretty deaf and he doesn't swear at people in inappropriate situations. Al's disability isn't the issue ... the issue is whether he intends to harass.

Anonymous said...

To 3:45

I saw in meetings (most recently in a TAC meeting) when Al didn't hear correctly regarding the subject of the State's Resolution on sustainabity. The TAC committee and Al were talking about two different things because Al didn't hear correctly. I don't know exactly what it was but it was very clear by watching there was mis-communication because of his hearing problem. I've heard Al had another medical condition, some kind of an explosive/anger thing....who knows ...but for the Tribune to do such a large write-up (and not interview Al for his side) and the CSD to waste time and money when they could have talked to him ... well ....maybe one day I'll come to a CSD meeting and talk of all the violence that I've witnessed (and you think Al is bad!)

Anonymous said...

Paranoid Anon 3:22:
You'll find out these answers concerning the survey when the next brochure comes out from the county very soon. How do I know? Because I write the county with questions all the time, and they are extremely forthcoming, informative, and gracious in their replies. Which is more than I can say about your present CSD, who have answered a total of zero (0) of my e mails to them. How often do you contact the county with questions?

Now I've answered your question. Now how about you providing proof that the "fix is in" as you always say, and that the county is definitely picking Tri-W, and any of the other outrageous claims you do a disservice of disseminating all the time.

Anonymous said...

I can't believe it. I actually agree with Shark Inlet.....at least his 3:45 post.

The is no excuse for Al's anti-social behavior. It is not acceptable in our society. Al needs some consequences for this behavior if we ever expect him to stop. He has pushed the line over and over, and has walked away laughing. How far will he push it next time?

Anonymous said...

4:35,

The big fix is in? It might very well be. All indications so far show that. It probably won't be the Tri-W now. It will be basically the same thing out of town. That's what I would bet on at this point. If the county can get away with it.

It was an adviory "vote" since January and now all the sudden it's a survey. That's because a vote would hold the BOS to what was voted on, a survey will not!

I'm glad county employees are so nice and informative, they get paid a lot of money by us for what they do. Doesn't Gail Wilcox make more than a US Senator? And don't our L.O. property taxes go for 20% county administration? (That's why I recently heard)

Mike Green said...

Anon asked ( quite politely, kudos! )
"I'd like to know why I can't post a comment on Ann's latest story, above this one? Has she turned the comments section?"
No, probably not. I'm sure what happened considering the time between the meeting and the post, that she simply edited the blog rather than writing a completely new "edition" which only leaves the original comment attachment below.

I know, because I can do it too on this blog site.

I hope this helps.

Anonymous said...

The county employees make that much???

And off our property taxes???

Good grief!

And if the sewer breaks down the county isn't liable, we pay all repairs? Anything that goes wrong from odors, broken pipes, spills, etc. we pay for? Do we have to pay to repave our roads to? Doesn't the county get 20% of our property tax money for roads? Why do we have to pay?

If it turns out that the 218 was done wrong, Wallace isn't liable? Is the county liable? I don't think so.

I guess there are many questions that must be answered before my friends and I can vote.

Churadogs said...

Inlet Sez:"Al may mean to threaten and the recipient may feel threatened but it might still not meet some legal criteria necessary for involuntary hospitalization or a restraining order. On the other hand, Al may actually doing some sort of political theater and no one is in any danger at all.

The problem is this ... until someone crosses the line we cannot really know whether they intended to do actual harm to others or not. To assume that one's threats are empty because they've not crossed the line in the past is naive, perhaps."

You have put your finger on the problem -- there's "law," with it's defined (sort of) terms, then there's often "reality" and perception and reactions and different styles and the bumptuous "marketplace," that has to tolerate a variety of free speech theatre, up to the end of one's nose and the end of someone else's fist. But, in this day and age of armed citizens, you never do know at what point that "legal" line will be crossed. That's the, uh, "interesting" dynamic of a free society, the "danger" in "freedom." It's always been a problem.

Anonymous said...

Churadogs says: "But, in this day and age of armed citizens, you never do know at what point that "legal" line will be crossed."

You are absolutely correct, Ann. And that is exactly why the citizens of Los Osos stay away from public meetings in droves.

I had to laugh at some of the comments at Thursday's meeting. Particularly amusing was Chuck Cessena's acknowledgement of the challenges faced by the previous boards with regard to controlling the climate of the CSD meetings.

As he was one of the MANY people who criticized the use of the gavel, and the presence of law enforcement in the room, it's ironic that he appears to have finally realized that's what it takes to maintain order in Los Osos.

The "kinder, gentler" route just doesn't fly in the loony bin by the sea. I haven't attended a meeting since the Sheriff was sent packing by the post-recall board, and won't return until he comes back. The sight of Al Barrow sporting his "personality" problem and a trench coat during a public meeting causes me to be afraid, and I'm no wallflower. Nor am I comfortable around Keith Swanson when he's having one of his little tizzy fits either.

Mock us all you want, but Al, in particular, causes a great number of citizens serious concern, which is why we don't attend meetings anymore.

Call me a coward if you want, but I hope your literal wakeup call this morning allows you to understand a little better where may of us are coming from.

Anonymous said...

Thank you from another who quit going because of Barrow, Swanson and Racano.