Pages

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Hey, Where’s My Waiver?

The following email was sent by Los Osos resident Steve Paige to a local list-serve. It concerns, among other things, the CDOs from the RWQCB. Steve had proposed installing a urine separation system, submitted all the proper paperwork, and apparently was completely ignored. Here’s what he emailed me on 5/29: “I gave a formal proposal to the water board to exempt me and others who wanted to follow in my footsteps, from the CDO process via a Porter Cologne Waiver, Sec. 13269. They completely ignored my request even though I have a “facility” as they put it. Usually, only cities or service districts ask for a waiver, but by assuming I am a facility, I have the same rights as the big dogs. . . . By them ignoring my request they have discriminated against me under environmental justice law because of financial discrimination due to my “small dog’ financial status.”

To put this another way: The RWQCB issued a “discharge” permit to the CSD for the TRI-W wastewater plant. The discharge permit set the nitrate levels and allowed discharge into the PZ. So far as I know, Mr. Paige’s proposal also met the nitrate levels, just like the CSD’s project, yet apparently his request for a permit and waiver has been ignored. Interestingly, if you follow the language of the CDOs as they morphed from the earliest to the most recent, all language pertaining to nitrates, pollution, nuisance, groundwater, and waters of the state of California disappeared. The final CDO language simply uses the word (undefined) “discharge” and states that after 2011 ZERO DISCHARGE in the PZ will allowed.

Which leaves the weird question: Why the disconnect between pollution and nitrates and ground water and nuisance and waters of the state of California? And why would the RWQCB issue a “discharge permit” to the TRI-W facility, knowing it was going to “discharge” into the ZERO DISCHARGE PZ after the 2011 deadline? If the County's new wastewater system requires discharging treated wastewater into the PZ, how can the RWQCB allow that since they’ve morphed their language now and it’s no longer anything about X % of anything, it’s now ZERO discharge? And if they do give a waiver and permit to the County’s new "facility," why can’t Mr. Paige get one as well for his "facility?" This becomes even more puzzling since the RWQCB legally cannot tell anyone what kind of "facility" to build, they can only set discharge standards -- meet them as you please. So, what gives? Well, perhaps the Writ will give an answer?

Mr. Paige’s email, printed with permission:

I want to thank Gail and Shanna and friends for all their hard work at protecting the property rights of Los Osos homeowner's. Your thorough job of holding the State to it's stipulated obligations has many positive ramifications for homeowner's, but at the top of the list is preservation of property values. This suit improves property values in the prohibition zone...period. EVERYONE should be grateful. I definitely am. I read both documents. My check is in the mail for a donation to your cause.

I have been denied my own Environmental Justice civil rights by this board in my request for a PC 13269 Waiver for sequestering nitrogen by waste separation. It was approved by the Water Board and permitted by the County. My home was built after 83-13 and 83-12 and was allowed to be constructed with the full knowledge that there was nitrogen contamination in the water basin. The rationale was that then the State would have enough of a population base to justify the sewer project as outlined in Harvey Packard's recent letter.

But the true ramifications of that action are:

25% more nitrogen pollution in the prohibition zone.

400 acre feet a year excess overdraft of the water basin caused by the additional 1100 homes built harming water quality and availability to pre-existing homeowners.

Creating more pollution in defiance of the basin plan and orders so they could then have enough residents to clean it up by a method dictated by the State (not allowed in the Porter Cologne Act).

Allowing the home that I bought, that was built in 1987, thus creating the "attractive nuisance" of an illicit polluting home causing me "personal injury" which they did with foreknowledge and intent. I was duped. My home may be worthless in 2011.

I bought my home without foreknowledge of the Water Boards relationship to its creation. 1100 homes are illicit like mine. Had my home never been built, I would never have purchased it. My previous offer was on a house in San Luis Obispo. The State should be forced to purchase the 1100 homes and remove them, compensate homeowners, relocate homeowners to a legitimate similar coastal home, pay punitive damages, pay for the 25% correction in nitrogen pollution, and pay damages to pre-existing homeowners for salt water intrusion aggravation. My guess that it would cost the State approx. 2 Billion dollars in class action expenses to set things straight and they should. It's all about property rights.

It is not the Water board's business to create pollution so it can control the method of cleaning it up. I see that actitivity as having no legal basis that can be explained away in water law. All the smoke and mirrors of CDO's and CAO's and the State loan cancellation represent a State Board in confusion, illegitimacy, and legal disarray. The ultimate liability for all the problems here rests with them and the historic pollution burden of the 1100 illicit homes. It would be smart for the WB to cooperate with everybody and stand down before the 1100 'elephants' fall out of the legal closet for 1100 "personal injuries".

Steve Paige

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

Steve, you ARE a small dog.

Clearly you do not like living in a country with restrictions, however you revel in the freedom to make noise. Why don't you and Gail and Al and your CSD friends head off to another part of the world where you don't have to be such a small dog.

Most of the rest of this community are fed up with the obstructions and delays your activities have created for the entire community!

Churadogs said...

Anonymous sez;"Clearly you do not like living in a country with restrictions, however you revel in the freedom to make noise. Why don't you and Gail and Al and your CSD friends head off to another part of the world where you don't have to be such a small dog."

Interesting, even this early in the morning, you've missed some of the key points and interesting questions Steve's letter raises. Hmmmm, well, typical of "anonnymice." Maybe there's some other posters with something more interesting and on point to add?

Rick said...

Yes, yes, yes. The "why don't you get out of the country if you don't like it" attack point. Tried. Tested... but still untrue, and stupid.

The reason for Mr. Paige's problem is simple: the RWQCB is utterly incompetent and unaware of its legal obligations. Unless you apply the bludgeoning brute force of the courts to them, they are too scared to do anything.

Quit pretending they should be reasonable. Quit bringing knives to gunfights. You know they aren't reasonable, you know they are incompetent. Sick 'em.

Why do I get the feeling that Mr. Anonymous, who seems to find revulsion at the idea that the state government should act according to the law, is the same kind of disgruntled proletarian who thinks "Ernie should be able to do whatever he wants with his land" in San Luis--damn the laws and everyone else who has to drive in traffic there--that the Oceano dunes should continue to be allowed to be a humming hive of Central Valley detritus, because "humans are more important than animals" and...

OMG! The rest of the county has problems too! Call the news! It's not just us crazy Los Osos folk.

Hypocrites.

Anonymous said...

It would appear the early poster understands the laws. It also appears that Mr Paige has tried flauting them and would create his own set of rules. It does look like another example of attempting to obstruct a sewer.

4crapkiller said...

I noticed Steve Paige's name on the McPherson groups website. Is not he a member of their board? Of course he supports their activities.

Steve Paige makes good points. The points deserve to be litigated concurently while the sewer is being built. If the arguements fail, at least we will have a sewer and usable homes.

In the meantime he has shown "good faith" in reducing his individual polution. He will have to hire an attorney and go to court to get his waver and discharge permit. Probably he will not be able to get it after spending a ton of money. Maybe he will, but at what cost? He will still probably have to hook up to a sewer.

The law is the law, however it is interpreted by judges, and they are not exempt from their own bias. They change the intent of the law to their own intent and to the wind of politics.

The political wind is strongly against the obstructionist poluters of Los Osos. Judges look at the consequences of their rulings, and the effect on the "greater good".

In my opinion, despite the arguements from Sullivan and Paige's group which read as VALID in most of the arguements, these arguements will not prevail in court. Should they prevail, polution would continue and could not be stopped whether caused by individuals, corporations, or municipalities.

That is why I do not support the efforts of this group with a substantial donation despite their ability to nit pick the law. The group is pissing into the wind of political thought, and the universal demand for clean water and lack of polution.

As Mike Green says "Get er built!"
I say "get er built anywhere as quick as possible". No judge looks upon speeders, drunks, rapists, or poluters favorably.

Anonymous said...

4Crapkiller,

I've got a question for you then, why don't you call the county and Regional Board polluters since THEY ALLOWED over 1,100 homes to be built after 83-13 violating septic discharge??? They are the polluters, not the homeowners who never got any disclosure about the septic discharge. They were permitted!! 25% more homes in L.O. after 83-13!! Give me a break about polluters!

You say that no judge looks upon speeders, drunks, rapists or polluters favorably, well then, I'd ask you how the county would spend $190 million dollars to pipe in polluted water, knowing it was harmful. Doesn't seem to me that anyone gives a hoot about pollution really. It's about money my dear! You know it and I know it.

Anonymous said...

What's harmful with piped in State Water? Are you that crazy?

Shark Inlet said...

It seems to me that there are essentially three problems here for Steve.

First, no one is entitled to a waiver. They need to be justified.

Second, the justification process may not be as simple and as cheap as Steve lets on. That only large organizations, such as cities and prisons and the like tend to apply for these waivers is bound to make the application process oriented towards such large scale projects and the process won't necessarily match up so well to such a small scale issue as Steve has. Even so it might be the case that he has yet to jump through the proper hoops. If Steve had a GM (like Bruce Buel) and a legal team (like Jon Seitz), it is quite likely that he could get a waiver if he is entitled to by law, but the burden of proof is on him and he needs to take seriously the application process. [Steve, if you've actually filled out all the required documents and provided all the necessary documentation and if you've hired an advocate to work with the RWQCB, I apologize for this comments ... it was based in part on the fact that you didn't describe your application process in great detail.]

Third, as some others have already stated, the Los Osos situation is politically complex and the fact that they've already determined (for right or wrong) that onsite doesn't cut it would make Steve's application more difficult to approve.

Presumably he would need to come up with a convincing argument that onsite is sufficient ... not just for him but for all those who might prefer onsite options who've already been told that onsite is not allowed. Along these lines, the process of monitoring the discharge and verifying that it is good enough each and every month is probably the sticking point.

If there are requirements not just for nitrates but for other pollutants as well, the levels of these would need to be monitored (which involves expensive testing) and reported. Perhaps if Steve were to work with the LOCSD and RWQCB staff to get the regular sampling of discharge from such systems verified (perhaps even as a collective), it would only involve tens of dollars per month per household for the monitoring and testing. If there are enough onsite systems, that is. If there are only two or three it could easily be hundreds of dollars per month per household.

Anonymous said...

to 3:59,

The water is full of mercury and polluted from mines. Are you crazy? The Department of Justice came here for this and Atty. Sullivan represented one of the polluters. There were many others. $190 million for polluted water!

Anonymous said...

anon 5:12 PM, May 30, 2007 - can you please point me to the documents that support what you say?

Anonymous said...

You always want the documents. Oh, please. It's all well known facts by everyone except you.

Anonymous said...

what law school did Paige go to??

Anonymous said...

To the Poster so concerned about the State Water, if all the facts are so well know and accurate, they should immediately contract for the legal services of Shauna Sullivan and sue the EPA!

Anonymous said...

Did anyone stay up and watch Dr.Phil last night? It showed "Marica Brady" aka Maureen Mccormick, and her dealings with her abusive, brain washing brother. Point is, one of the abusers strategies is to do this "wait and see, I know and I'll prove it and you are a liar and that's all I have to say...". The other technique is to isolate the abused and prey on the isolated.
Do you people see where I'm going here?
Two things: One we obviously need Dr.Phil to come do an intervention in our community and two, we are being savagely abused by the folks who want to delay a solution to our pollution indefinitely so that they don't have to pay a DIME!
That is the only affordable project we'll ever get is the "no project" un viable alternative.
Help us Dr.Phil! Can you save Los Osos?

4crapkiller said...

To anon 1:34 PM

Of course the county is at fault. If they had not issued the permits there would be far less polution. They received money for the permits and property taxes. The whole county benefited from their actions. For only the property owners in the PZ to pay is an injustice.

How do you know that the traces of
mercury in the RAW water imported from Naciamento will not be removed through water treatment? Many communities have problems with arsenic and mercury and remove the traces from RAW water at their water plants to make the water conform to quality standards.

I am sure someone will ask me if the nitrates in our upper aquifer could be removed at a water treatment plant or at the well heads so the water from our upper aquifer could be fully utilized and we would not need state water. The answer is a resounding yes. However the law will not allow us to do so until a wastewater treatment plant is built. It is against the law to "crap in your own well".

I love bacon and corned beef. Last night I ate corned beef and cabbage. This morning corned beef and eggs. I consumed far more nitrate in each sitting than drinking ten gallons of 40 ppm (40ml/l) nitrate laden water at each sitting. Well, it is gone from me, I peed it away into the Atascadero sewer system. Very yellow pee compared to normal. I always look. Everyone should look at their pee and stool on a regular basis.

Everytime you eat salami you are getting a gigantic dose of nitrate. Delicious. Feed the bacteria.

And now someone will ask me why the European standards for nitrate in potable water are 30 ppm (30ml/l) and they find these standards acceptable and Americans want 10ppm (10 ml/l) or less as their standard. Political will is the answer. Talk to the "big brother" environmentalists who in conjunction with the sewer plant industry formulated the standards. "Blue babies" sold the concept. I haven't seen one yet. I am sure they have existed.

Is this whole thing rediculous? Yes. What can be done? Change the law and fat chance.

One other thing while I rant: How many dogs, cats, and horses pee outside? What is the effect of their pee on our nitrate problem? How many exist? When someone says that the problem will not go away for 40 years, it maybe that the animals will continue it. Take away my four legged children with fur? Now you will see a REAL battle. (My renters in Los Osos are NOT allowed dogs or cats)

My pet peeve: Why do people buy bottled water to drink at $1.00 a pint = $8.00 a gallon and bitch about gasoline at $4.00 a gallon?

Food for thought:
A home Reverse Osmosis setup from Costco costs $160.00 and produces 12 gallons of water a day just a pure as the bottled water. Good for at least two years without filter change.

More food for thought:
How many homes in the high nitrate concentration areas of the PZ use water softeners using sodium chloride (table salt)? Sodium chloride kills bacteria, and a septic tank needs bacteria to function properly. I soften my water, but use potassium chloride out of respect to the Atascadero sewer system. My house plants LOVE my water from the tap. I do NOT give them Reverse Osmosis water. I DRINK Reverse Osmosis water.

Another point. You can bathe, wash your teeth, clean your clothes, and wash your dishes in 100ppm (100ml/l nitrate water) as long as it is sterile (no bacteria or virus). You will be fine. However, if you drink it, you will be at risk. Nitrates have been found as contributing to cancer. It is not wise to have a heavy diet of salami, corned beef, or bacon.

And now someone else will ask: "Why are you not fighting this whole sewer thing since you find it rediculous? Especially since you are going to pay a ton?"

My answer: I am an old lady that realizes that no matter how right I feel about my opinions and my concept of justice and law, it is impossible to fight overwhelming and long lasting political will right or wrong in an individuals concept. This political will becomes the basis of our civilization. I have learned that nowhere on this earth does the concept of "fair" for the individual exist. "Fair" is political will and subject to dispute by individuals subjected to it.

The county, state, and federal government look at us as poluters. The people who vote for our elected representatives look at us as poluters. We are poluters. We cannot prevail against overwhelming political will against polution, even though we are victims of bad government and law for "ALL" that does not take into consideration the needs of a miniscule part of the general population. We screwed ourselves through obstruction.

While we are a nation of laws, we are controlled by lawyers who write the law, and then adjudicate the law. Lawyers then become judges. They self perpetuate their profession. Most by far of our representatives are lawyers. Our presidents are elected mostly from a selection of lawyers. Lawyers always win finantially. It would be nice if simple common sense prevailed. However, despite this, we have the finest form of government in the world, and were the first to codefy our form of government. I would not take a gun off the wall except to defend my right to vote, the law, and this form of government, regardless of my criticism. I am sorry that people with money, education, and power have always dominated civilization, however, without them there would be no civilization. These are the people who create "political will". Of course they do it for their own benefit. We get stability, they get the money. We also in this country have received a high standard of living. Does your mud hut have dirt floors? Have to walk everywhere? No rice?

Enough! Please excuse me from this "Ted Peterson rant". Sort of feeling like I am being Ann Calhoun or Crawdaddy.

Anonymous said...

An entry that is off the topic but important...several homes were robbed this past weekend. Homes in nice neighborhoods. My neighbors have been talking to the sheriff's office. They say the drug problem has led to increased burglaries in our area. Locking your doors and windows is not a joke. And, a police officer commented that "this is not the idyllic little backbay community" that it used to be." In any case, just a heads up. Thieves have been walking into our unlocked, friendly, open doors. Frankly, it pisses me off. I'm sorry but I just can't say anything positive right now.

Anonymous said...

That's interesting. I have noticed my neighborhood going downhill these last few years. Welcome to freakin' dogpatch-by-the-sea. There is a DUMPSTER right out on the street by my home! Right next to the mosquito breeding puddle!

Churadogs said...

Anonymous sez:"And, a police officer commented that "this is not the idyllic little backbay community" that it used to be." In any case, just a heads up. Thieves have been walking into our unlocked, friendly, open doors. Frankly, it pisses me off. I'm sorry but I just can't say anything positive right now."

I am so sorry to hear it. Unfortunately, we've got a failed drug "war," a failed drug policy, next to zero treatment centers, and a whole lot of extremely sick addicts who need money for their fix. Lock your doors is right.

In reading Crap's "rant," I was reminded of a quote from Voiltaire: "So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men."

Did anyone but me notice that the Tribune, which constantly gets the story wrong and thereby contributes to this ongoing mess, is now often using the word "assert" when speaking of the RWQCB's assertion that nitrates are coming from septic tanks & etc. What's interesting is that before the ACL & CDO hearings, that claim was stated as fact. Now, it's claimed or asserted or in the opinion of .. . Can we suspect that this word change is the result of hearing sworn testimony over and over again from RWQCB staff that they have no imperical evidence of any pollution from Mr. Jones or Mr. Smith &or Ms. Brown & etc? Suddenly "fact" isn't "fact" and so must remain an assertion, or, as it was put in a RWQCB official document, "common knowledge tells us . . ." (Common knowledge once told us that witches floated and the moon was made of green cheese) Which, alas, is why in many ways we've ended up in this mess. Long ago if the county or RWQCB had put taggants in various toilets they'd have a "fact," not an assertion. They did find de-nitrification going on in the vados zone, depending on the depth, which surprised them no end since "common knowledge" up to that point had it that no denitrification took place at all. (Matt Thompson, RWQCB staff members, asserted this false "common knowledge" during one of the hearings, apparently unaware of the county's tests) Adding that together, if the county had amended the basin plan and the RWQCB re-did the PZ and focused on nitrate loading and water reuse, & etc. they could have had a more flexible and a more sensible leg to stand on, vis a vis encorcement and/or options. What we ended up with is the worst of all possible worlds: the nit-pickyness of the LAW and the nit-pickyness of Science trying to arm wrestle with both common sense, common knowledge and politics. Tough match. Often wastes a lot of time and money.

Inlet sez:"Presumably he would need to come up with a convincing argument that onsite is sufficient ... not just for him but for all those who might prefer onsite options who've already been told that onsite is not allowed. Along these lines, the process of monitoring the discharge and verifying that it is good enough each and every month is probably the sticking point."

Inlet, if you go through and read the various official CDO paperwork, from the original one issued to the last one, you'll see the RWQCB has carefully, over the months, removed ALL references to "pollution," "nitrates" "groundwater" "nuissance" "waters of the state of California," etc. in other words all the LEGAL definitions that would make one a lawbreaker. All gone. Goal posts moved. All that remains is the word "discharge." (It's undefined. Shauna tried to get Matt Thompson to define it and he kept going circular.) This is very interesting because if you do not define what it is you're discharging, there WILL BE NO "alternative" systems allowed so even though the policy/law states that the RWQCB cannot dictate systems, only set discharge standards, in reality you've selected for only one type of system -- full collection. It's a pure Hobson's Choice game and has been for years. and has little or nothing to do with control or managing "pollution."

Once again, keep changing the story and you'll keep ending up with wrong questions, wrong answers, wrong "solutions."

Anonymous said...

Brilliant Ann,

Your comment above now establishes the 'fact' that there is no pollution going on in the PZ!

4crapkiller said...

Ann, in a previous post on your last thread, I stated: "However, I see regulation everywhere, and no "murderous Darwinian economics" lately. Perhaps "unfettered market forces" were in the past, but lately it seems they are chained."

It was unique that you would use the conceptual phrase "murderous Darwinian economics" which I lightly brushed off as far as "economics". But it got me into some serious thinking.

I was WRONG! If this concept is applied to the legal profession and our justice system, YOU are totally correct. My total "rant" is based upon this, and is proof of the validity of your concept relating to our sewer problems. AHH, had you only penned "murderous Darwinian Law and Justice".

You replied to my "rant" with:
"In reading Crap's "rant," I was reminded of a quote from Voiltaire: "So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.""

Yes, this quote has great value, and is certainly true. It has been proven throughout history. This old gal watches the actions of government closely. I live by this quote. I am a political animal.
However, that said, my frustration lies with "The tyrany of democracy". This tyrany is perpetuated by the legal profession for their own personal benefit. Law and confrontation is a religion for them.

It is easy to fight a tyrant. The enemy is known. But in our case "I have seen the enemy, and the enemy is us". (Pogo)

How does one fight the "tyrany of democracy"? I guess the only way would be to NEVER vote for a lawyer, for any office, regardless of political leaning. Vote for people with common sense who understand right, wrong, practicality, and consequences of action. Let them direct their staff lawyers and staff.

Mike Green said...

Too bad the Water Gods couldn't take a hint from the AEther Gods, and let us install pollution devices on our rigs and have them certified once every two years.
It worked too! a remarkable achievement for a government bureaucracy!
Unfortunately, The Water Gods, as Ann said,
Make their "requirements of sufficient homage" up according to their pleasure!
They are not asleep, they are still plotting to punish us!
Pray to the county gods! beseech them to deliver us at any costs !

I do believe in Water Gods! I do I do I do!

Anonymous said...

Another reason to be proactive when talking about water:
http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?id=13737673&ps=1012&cat=&cps=0&lang=en

Anonymous said...

Comprising over 70% of the Earth�s surface, water is undoubtedly the most precious natural resource that exists on our planet. Without the seemingly invaluable compound comprised of hydrogen and oxygen, life on Earth would be non-existent: it is essential for everything on our planet to grow and prosper. Although we as humans recognize this fact, we disregard it by polluting our rivers, lakes, and oceans. Subsequently, we are slowly but surely harming our planet to the point where organisms
are dying at a very alarming rate. In addition to innocent organisms dying off, our drinking water has become greatly affected as is our ability to use water for recreational purposes. In order to combat water pollution, we must understand the problems and become part of the solution.

http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/society/waterpollution.htm

Anonymous said...

Although some kinds of water pollution can occur through natural processes, it is mostly a result of human activities. We use water daily in our homes and industries, about 150 gallons per day per person in the United States. The water we use is taken from lakes and rivers, and from underground (groundwater); and after we have used it-- and contaminated it-- most of it returns to these locations.


http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/5161/water1.htm

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with this picture?

The Los Osos CSD is bankrupt.

Yet, the Los Osos CSD continues to sue governmental agencies. HOW does the LOCSD plan to pay for all these lawsuits? And, why can't the LOCSD realize that all their petty bucking against the State of California is stupid?

How naive can you get?

First of all, the BOD of the LOCSD should realize that the only people that will benefit from all the lawsuits are the attorneys.

Second, the Office of the Attorney General of the State of California needs to investigate the BOD of the LOCSD for giving public funds to hiring Shaunna Sullivan to defend the homeowners in the PZ. After all, several of the BOD members LIVE within the PZ.

And finally, doesn't anyone on this website see that all the sabre-rattling and expensive attorneys in the world will not help Los Osos residents avoid paying for a waste water project?

Delay HAS already driven up the costs, from the original 2001 estimate, to an astronomical sum.

Delay will only further drive up the costs.

Stupidity, no matter if it is cloaked in naivete', is still stupidity. The two women on this Board have proven again and again that they have learned nothing from being on this Board, except how to wield power. I can hardly wait until they are in the orange jump suits, along with the three original Lisa Board guys. They need to feel the true results of their selfish, vindictive, power-hungry actions.

Anonymous said...

I second that, 8:50pm!

Anonymous said...

"Long ago if the county or RWQCB had put taggants in various toilets they'd have a "fact," not an assertion."

no, they would have more data, not not more facts. They might be able to make more assertions as well.

More confusion. Nice.

Anonymous said...

It really doesn't matter how carefully the County does its work on the project alternatives. The obstructionists will find fault no matter how clean and clear the process is. They do not want a sewer. Period. You are NOT going to change the minds of TRUE BELIEVERS.

What needs to be done is marginalize them and muffle their screams of protest. Psycholgists out there (and I don't mean a certain protester who is infected with the "me,me,me" disease) - listen up! Help us out here - what can we do? We have to get a sewer this time!

Churadogs said...

Anonymous sez:"Brilliant Ann,

Your comment above now establishes the 'fact' that there is no pollution going on in the PZ!"

Pluueeeze tell me you wrote that as some kind of joke? My comment establishes no such thing. Let me say again, if you define the wrong problem, you will keep coming up with wrong solutions.

Crap sez:"However, that said, my frustration lies with "The tyrany of democracy". This tyrany is perpetuated by the legal profession for their own personal benefit. Law and confrontation is a religion for them."

Oddly, I find that the tyrany of democracy can only be contained by . . . LAW. The constitutioin is a set of "laws," rules we all agree to abide by. It prevents the tyrany of democracy, i.e. the tyrany of the majority. For example, I have no doubt that the majority of Americans today would vote FOR having prayers (traditionally and historically they used to be all christian prayers) back in our schools. Who and what prevents that tyrany of the majority over the rights of a minority of non-christian, non-religious kids? Why, it's Lawyers and the Law. GAAAAGGGHHHHH!

Anony sez:"Although we as humans recognize this fact, we disregard it by polluting our rivers, lakes, and oceans. Subsequently, we are slowly but surely harming our planet to the point where organisms
are dying at a very alarming rate. In addition to innocent organisms dying off, our drinking water has become greatly affected as is our ability to use water for recreational purposes. In order to combat water pollution, we must understand the problems and become part of the solution."

Amen, brother or sister, amen. With global weather change, WATER will be the next "black gold." Indeed, it's already starting. That is one reason I hope whatever systems end up on the County's table, have a very, very strong water reuse components and/or capability. Otherwise, it'll all be for naught.

anonymous sez:"What needs to be done is marginalize them and muffle their screams of protest. Psycholgists out there (and I don't mean a certain protester who is infected with the "me,me,me" disease) - listen up! Help us out here - what can we do? We have to get a sewer this time!"

Ah, I see, another lover of democracy checks in -- SILENCE PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH YME, SHUT THEM UP, SHUT THEM OUT, SHUT THEM DOWN. Yep, The American Way.

Meantime, everyone, get a grip. The Process is plodding along. The Process will give homeowners a vote. People in the community will campaign. Lies will be told. Truth's will be told. Balloons will appear. Posters will appear. People holding signs will show up. People speaking at podiums during their Sacred Three/Two Minutes will appear. Tons of Ink will be spilled. Then on the appointed day, homeowners will vote however they want. Or, if history is any guide, 40% of the homeowners won't bother to return their ballots, so 60% of the homeowners will vote. The Process will then go on to Phase II. Followed by more yelling & so on. It's the System at work. Chugga-chugga.

4crapkiller said...

Yes Ann, the constitution is law. It was mostly formulated by non-lawyers. However it is constantly under attack by lawyers who wish to change the original intent and their judge buddies who wish to go along with them.

Anonymous said...

Ann,

You said, "Meantime, everyone, get a grip. The Process is plodding along. The Process will give homeowners a vote."

PLEASE ANN, GET IT RIGHT. OUR VOTE WAS TAKEN AWAY. IT'S NOW A SURVEY OF EVERYONE (INCLUDING PEOPLE WHO WON'T HAVE TO PAY -- RENTERS, PEOPLE OUT OF TOWN, PEOPLE IN CABRILLO ESTATES, PEOPLE WITH ONE ACRE, ETC.) SO IT'S NOT JUST HOMEOWNERS AND IT'S NOT A 'VOTE' AS ORIGINALLY PROMISED!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Yes, we will get a 218 vote Ann.

A open-ended 218 with three projects and three prices. We'll get to vote, but will not know what we're voting for! Do you endorse that???

I don't recall ever getting a 218 on the Tri-W, only an assessment (218) for bonds for the purchase of land and design of project in 2001. That was our Constitutional right which was ignored by the recalled CSD board.

Anonymous said...

"Constitutional right"

What a dope.

Churadogs said...

Crap Sez:"Yes Ann, the constitution is law. It was mostly formulated by non-lawyers. However it is constantly under attack by lawyers who wish to change the original intent and their judge buddies who wish to go along with them."

The constitution is under constant attack by all sorts of "special interests," conservative and liberal, and very often the constitution is defended by an outfit I'm sure you profess to despise -- the ACLU -- an irony I don't think is lost on you.

Anon sez:"You said, "Meantime, everyone, get a grip. The Process is plodding along. The Process will give homeowners a vote."

PLEASE ANN, GET IT RIGHT. OUR VOTE WAS TAKEN AWAY. IT'S NOW A SURVEY OF EVERYONE "

No, I got it right. Homeowners in the PZ will get an assessment vote on the maximum $$ to be assessed for an unspecified, undescribed, "wastewater treatment something or other somewhere or other." That's the law. The advisory vote will only be for type and style & placement etc. and
at this point will be allowed for everyone in the general boundries of L.O., sort of. That "advisory" will be "advisory," since the BOS will be making the actual decision. They can abide by the advisory or "bait & switch" and pick some different project.

Anon sez:"I don't recall ever getting a 218 on the Tri-W, only an assessment (218) for bonds for the purchase of land and design of project in 2001."

That was a problem, clearly. If I understand correctly, that assessment vote was for land and design. The other HUGE costs that came along later as final costs were all considered non-assessable "service fees," and so it was claimed they didn't require another 218 vote. That claim resulted in a law suit being filed before the election, but that's never been settled so I don't know how a court would rule -- i.e. whether the huge additional sums requested by the old CSD from the SWB constituted a loan big enough to qualify as needing a 218 vote? Or whether the small land and building assessment loan was open ended enough to cover whatever elephant wandered in on its tail so as to never need another re-assessment assessment vote. That's still up in the air, so far as I know.

Anonymous said...

to the idiot at 11:10.

the 218 is our Constitutional right to vote..stupid!! The recalled board denied our right to vote...stupid!!

Anonymous said...

Ann,

The CSD needed a 218 vote for the project. The bond money assessment was just that, and for that amount of money, something like $24 million, I'm not sure but around that amount. The recalled CSD was trying to get away with "service fees" but you can't have service fees if there's no sewer. They tried to avoid a 218. The state insisted on a 218 to proceed with the loan (the second installment) and that's when the Blakeslee compromise came into play. The state wanted to have a 218 right away and wanted us to strike down Measure B and only then would they continue with the SRF loan. That's according to the State Water Board during the compromise.

The bond assessment was only for that $20 some million, period. That was the cap on that particular vote.

Anonymous said...

to 4:13, please post the section of the Constitution regarding wastewater fees and exceptions

Anonymous said...

of course the state insisted on a 218 vote, the new board stated their intention not to complete the project the loan was given for, so the state wanted security.

Anonymous said...

To above,

The state had to have secured funding and it did not have it, they were busted and you know it, the recalled board avoided our 218 vote and that law is the Calfornia Constitution. Talk about delay, if they would have followed the LAW we wouldn't have had to file for bankruptcy.

Anonymous said...

no they didn't have to have secured funding. filing for bankruptcy has nothing to do with secured funding - it has to do with being broke

Anonymous said...

To: 11:14 PM, June 02, 2007

Well, I guess if the recalled board was spending the SRF money, the CSD had no money except for the SRF money so the CSD had been "broke" for a long time and we were bound to file for bankruptcy. The county never distributed the proper amount of money to the CSD, the money went to other communities in the county. Right? It's now obvious that the county is only keeping the CSD running on a small amount of money, just enough to keep it alive so they don't have to pick up any costs of Los Osos. The board should have been dissolved, we would have been better off.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:43 PM, June 02, 2007 said... "if they would have followed the LAW we wouldn't have had to file for bankruptcy"

What a bunch of spin! The Recall CSD had every opportunity to propose a system, but they didn't, because there never was a waste water treatment plan. This CSD spent all the money they could to fight against any sewer and they did it deliberately in order to bankrupt the District! That was their "Plan", create a financial hole that would prevent any sewer, any where! Lisa, Julie, Chuck, Steve and John belong in jail!!!