REMINDER
Monday, July 23 at 7:00 p.m. at the Washington Mutual Bank on Los Osos Valley Road, Rob Miller and/or Paavo Ogren are supposed to be presenting information and answer questions on the proposed 218 sewer vote.
Tuesday, July 24, 2:00 p.m. in the board of Supervisor's chamber, downtown SLO, the BOS will be discussing the water severity situation in Los Osos. Since the Hideous Los Osos Sewer Wars are all about WATER (or lack of same) this will be a critical meeting.
Tuesday, July 24, 7:00 p.m. South Bay Community Center, Los Osos: TAC meeting on the Viable Project Alternatives (Chapter 7)
Actually, hope you'll plan to attend all meetings, since they're certainly linked. It's getting interesting in the assessment considerations as to what will happen to property owners of empty lots: if there's no water, they can't develop those lots. Will they get a 218 vote even though they get no present "benefit," and possibly may never get a benefit and never get to develop? Or do they get a vote and thereby get to influence a vote to get a sewer built, then with the sewer moritorium lifted, push for imported water (at additional $$) so they can develop? And are there alternative systems being looked at that get to the heart of recharge/stopping saltwater intrusion/purple pipe?
All of which goes to the heart of . . . water, water, nowhere, nor not a drop to drink.
Pages
Calhouns Can(n)ons
About the Can(n)ons
Calhoun's Can(n)ons was originally published in 1990 in the (now defunct) Morro Bay, CA, Sun Bulletin, and since 1992 has continued in the various resurrections of the Los Osos, CA. Bay News, Bay Breeze, Bay News, Bay News-Tolosa Press. A few years ago, the Can(n)on was added to the Central Coast NewsMission blogsite. Ann Calhoun lives in Los Osos. You can email her at Churadogs at gmail dot com
To be persuasive, we must be believable. To be believable, we must be credible. To be credible, we must be truthful.
Edward R. Murrow
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; the essential is invisible to the eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
The Little Prince
No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the misfortune is to do it solemnly.
Montaigne
Edward R. Murrow
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; the essential is invisible to the eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
The Little Prince
No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the misfortune is to do it solemnly.
Montaigne
Followers
Posts
Calhouns Can(n)ons
Search Calhoun's Can(n)ons
Adopt a Dog or Cat Today
Local Bloggers and Friends
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(186)
-
▼
July
(14)
- MISC Notices & Press Releases Fundraiser Supports ...
- Tell Me, Daddy, Was That Masked Man Robin Hood, Or...
- Yes, We Have No Water, So Go Right Ahead And Build...
- I Demurrer, You Demurrer, We All DemurrerYes, it’s...
- REMINDERMonday, July 23 at 7:00 p.m. at the Washin...
- Calhoun’s Cannons, The Bay News, Morro Bay, CA fo...
- It’s Not A.A.A.D.D., It’s Multi TaskingAh, yes, it...
- Is That Purple Pipe In Your Pocket, Or Are You Jus...
- Head's UpToday, on the Dave Congelton Show, KVEC, ...
- Put Down That Coffee Cup And Step AWAY From The Bl...
- PZLDF Meeting July 9In case you missed Pio Lombard...
- Calhoun’s Cannons The Bay News, Morro Bay, CA for ...
- So, what’s with the Tribune, anyway? Friday, Satur...
- Why, Yes, It's Another PoemOn another fine sunny s...
-
▼
July
(14)
Central Coast News Radio
Central Coast NewsLinks
CCNM Disclaimer: Calhoun's Can(n)on content copyright wholly owned by Ann Calhoun. Central Coast NewsMission site name and branding images, content and customization copyright © 2005 - 2009. Images courtesy page author, Ann Calhoun, and CCNM editor, Greg McClure; sponsors; and public domain. All writers are responsible for their articles. Permission granted to quote articles herein on a fair use basis, please credit the writer.
57 comments:
Since Ann is talking about water, To All:
Yesterday I happened to pick up a copy of "The Rock". While looking at it quickly, I only saw two advertizers: Ben DiFatta and Tank Nelson. The Ochs are to be commended for spending their money to produce and distribute this paper at their expense in their effort to promote freedom of speech and their wishes. It is their money.
While reading the paper more carefully, I noticed in an article by Dr. John Alexander he clamed to have "a small inexpensive gadget" to attach at the end of a septic tank that would clean "black water" to "beyond tertiary in a matter of minutes". He claimed that "All necessary items are available off shelf!"
This is something I would like to know about! Anybody know how it works, who has used it, and is there any documentation of his claim? Is there a web site to go to for schematics?
HELP!
Sorry, Crap. Can't help you with this particular issue.
I do want to suggest, however, that Paavo and Rob take the time to clarify procedures for actually casting a ballot this fall.
I'm concerned because it's been reported that Gail McPherson stated (on the Congalton show last week) that only those voting "no" on the 218 needed to return their ballots - that if a property owner wants to vote "yes" they don't have to do anything....
I've voted in a lot of elections, and that would certainly be a first. Last time I checked, a completed ballot has to be returned to the County Clerk for a vote to count either way.
I'm sure Ms. McPherson wouldn't want to mislead the property owners about this very important issue, so perhaps she could take this opportunity to correct/clarify her remarks over the public airwaves.
Crappy, take another look at:
http://www.edburtoncompany.com/wforest/WASTEWATERFORESTS.pdf
There is the device! the K6!
Of course Dr.A forgot to mention the redwood tree.
small potatoes
Imagine, if you had three of these devices and three redwwod trees using 40/gal or more a day you could achieve ZERO discharge and still use more water than the average home now!
Just working on a plan "B'
Most Honorable Crapkiller,
John Alexander can be reached by emailing tanknelson@earthlink.net or, if you draw no response, write directly to Dr. Alexander at PO Box 288, Cayucos, CA 93430.
Source
Crap sez:"This is something I would like to know about! Anybody know how it works, who has used it, and is there any documentation of his claim? Is there a web site to go to for schematics?"
and Mike sez:"Imagine, if you had three of these devices and three redwwod trees using 40/gal or more a day you could achieve ZERO discharge and still use more water than the average home now!
Just working on a plan "B'"
Fair warning: when dealing with RWQCB, you need to know that they're like Humptey Dumptey in Alice in Wonderland's Through The Looking Glass, i.e. When I use a word it means exactly what I say it shall mean, nothing more, nothing less.
"discharge." Good luck getting a definition that will not change every few months, good luck if you think the testing requirements and "permits" will not morph and change over the months, not to mention the price for discharge permits also, the number and costs for test requirements (weekly? by-monthly at $100 a pop?) , administrative fees, oversight requairements, monthly reports to be filed, etc. etc. Since the RWQCB staff defines language now to meet their whims and political agendas (forget "science," remember, this is the same staff who, in an official document, noted that "common knowledge says . . ." & etc.) And if you think whatever onsite system is fine, be prepared to take your case into a "real" court and/or a federal court. You can then compare the costs of doing all that against the cost of a community sewer, no matter how expensive. (A hint, the price for any onsite system, providing you can even get through the Board's ever-changing hoops, will ALWAYS remain more expensive than whatever community system is planned, not matter how expensive that is. Guaranteed!
Ann:
I have another use for Dr. Alexanders device, if it works, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the Los Osos sewer problem.
It has to do with aquaculture. Ammonia, then nitrite is highly destructive to the health of fish or crustaceans. However ammonia is easily converted to nitrite then nitrate with wet dry filters containing aerobic bacteria at a rapid rate. You have seen cascading water over lava rock in fish ponds.
This is a wet dry filter. Nitrate is less destructive, but hard and slow to remove. Usually in aquaculture nitrate is simply diluted with more water to keep it from reaching harmful levels.
In fresh water aquaculture applications, depending upon the cost and availability of plentiful water, this nitrate laden water is passed off into ponds laden with water plants that absorb the nitrate (fertilizer) and then reused. However it is extremely difficult to net fish or freshwater crustaceans in ponds filled with water plants without destroying the ecology, and eventually the fish or crustaceans populate these ponds, and worse, EAT the plants. Even if they do not populate these ponds, the plants need to be harvested due to overgrowth. This is labor intensive. Also more ponds require more land use and are unproductive.
Salt water aquaculture presents similar although far more difficult problems. Water is most always pumped from the ocean and returned to the ocean.
So if John Alexander has a simple cheap solution that can produce tertiary plus water in a few minutes with no or very little nitrate that can be used in aquaculture, I am very interested.
Let me suggest something that might be worth considering. I actually don't fully agree with what I am about to write, but heregoes ...
While certainly water supply (read "saltwater intrusion") is important, it might be cheaper to deal with that issue in the future.
Simply put, if trying to get a project that will "solve" the saltwater intrusion problem will delay the wastewater treatment aspect of the project for long enough, the total bill will be far higher than if we go with the wastewater issue right away and then grapple with the other issue later.
Building TriW (or the Ripley plant or whatever) right away and then later trying to figure out how to get the treated wastewater back into our aquifer to most effectively stem saltwater intrusion might be best. Sure we would have to figure out what to do with the treated water during that time frame, but I am sure that something could be figured out.
Just a thought to respond to Paavo's offhand comment of frustration on Tuesday...
To Mike Green:
The K6:
While this unit will remove a certain amount of nitrates in the effluent with the anaerobic bacteria using wood fibers (cellulose) as a carbon source, it sure as hell will not produce tertiary plus treated effluent in a few minutes. The key to the system is the redwood tree which absorbs and uses the nitrates as fertilizer (nutrient). The real beauty of this is that it supplies the tree upon demand. It could be manufactured or duplicated at home. You will note that there are no figures on Nitrate reduction.
Have you ever seen a working model of Dr. Alexander's system?
If you google "nitrate reduction" you will find many anaerobic nitrate filters for fish tanks, especially salt water tanks. Fish tanks use two types of filters, a wet/dry aerobic filter and an anaerobic filter to extend the time of the need for salt/fresh water replacement or dilution with newly made salt/fresh water.
Thanks for the reply.
To Mike Green:
An average home with four people uses 300 gallons a day of potable water. Now if you wish to sponge bath; leave dishes in the dishwasher until it is full; brush your teeth using a glass; do laundry once a week; let your landscaping dry up; never wash your deck, porch, deck furniture, your car, do without a HOME water softener (NOT pay large money to Culligan); adhere to the tenant "If it's yellow, let it mellow"; you can possibly get by with 20 gallons per day per person. That comes to 80 gallons a day.
Figure what you house would be worth if you had to live with 80 gallons a day for a family of four.
Most would have to beat their kids to make them comply. Then they would go to jail and cost the taxpayers $40 grand for each per year to take care of them. Everyone would be on welfare!
Inlet sez:"Simply put, if trying to get a project that will "solve" the saltwater intrusion problem will delay the wastewater treatment aspect of the project for long enough, the total bill will be far higher than if we go with the wastewater issue right away and then grapple with the other issue later."
So, wouldn't that make Pio's Purple Pipe Project the one that should be picked and put in IMMEDIATELY? Supposedly, it solves both problems in one fell swoop! Kaboom. And allows you to water your petunias to boot.
Pio's Purple Pipe Project is undesigned. There is no immediately, there is no better, cheaper, faster there is a process that has been in place that has involved the community via the TAC, input to the county via the website, multiple community meetings, the CSD Waste Water Committee has submitted comments and there have been hours of public comment.
The county has and will continue to provide our ability to review different projects and have had hours of discussions of: "what about......"
There has been no community wide process for reviewing Pio. Just by suggesting that we IMMEDIATELY put in that undesigned, unfunded project you are pushing the train off the track.
Who is going to build this Pio project? How is it going to be funded? We have a bankrupt CSD, we have AB2701 guiding the process, we have no general manager and the merry go round spins.
This community doesn't want to ride this train/merry go round/"what about" anymore and the delay has not only cost us money it has exacerbated a water quality and sustainability issue. It is obvious there are a few individuals out there who are privy to some ongoing discussions with Orenco and Dana Ripley and Pio and we are still under contract with Ripley - he obviously still owes us some work. But the only way the CSD can go under contract would be if the 218 failed.
Do you honestly believe that Pio's project will save the homeowners money? Ag exchange and/or urban in lieu will be necessary for our future. Where many communities are already on water reclamation projects via their wastewater projects, we are needing to cover more bases. This is far too serious an issue to be playing that there is another project just around the corner.
This community is 14,500+ and growing. We are not a small rural community. We do not have the luxury of "what-iffing" ourselves again. We have some serious issues and if we are unable to support assessing ourselves in the upcoming 218 then we are absolutely committing ourselves to state water. We need the county to support the long term potential of AG exchange. We need this relationship to be mutually beneficial so that the citizens of the community can have access to the services that only the county can provide.
I'm not just talking water here so I'll stop. It is obvious that I am concerned with the assumptions that companies that have never built or served a community with the challenges and constraints that we have are more capable to fund and build a project. I would like to see these companies work with the county but I suspect that since they have been speaking with members in our community to get ready to get back to work on October 1st, there is no motivation for them to recognize or follow the process as it stands.
Thank you for having a blog where these discussions are available for public consumption.
Maria
Thank You Maria Kelly!
As one more family who are sick and tired of the games being played by a few members of this community, we thank you for being a voice of reason! The "what-if" ads of HP were fine for that software manufacturer, but are only another delay tactic to continue to stall the construction of the much needed sewer.
We don't need to lead the world in testing some prototype system, we need a workable waste water treatment system. There are many more sewer/septic ideas than Los Osos or SLO County could ever evaluate and cost to the n-th degree demanded by the bankrupt CSD in trying their best to prevent any sewer ever being built. Let's let the County stay the course of the process laid out and then build the sewer design which will come out of that process. Hopefully the County has heard all that needed to be said and now we can move forward.
It does seem such awaste of time and money for this CSD to continue deluding themselves that they need to ready with a Plan B, they never ever had a Plan A and then they flushed all the District funding down the septic tank.
Thank you again Maria for your efforts to overcome the misconceptions and out-right lies thrown at the County and the TAC. We, the majority of Los Osos property owners, are 100% with you!!!
I agree with many of the important points that Ms. Kelly makes. There will always be salespeople who want to profit by marketing something "cheaper, faster, better" to the gullible people in our town. That's pretty much the benefit of having a stable, professional, experienced government that is in it for the long haul making these decisions.
If any of these companies are really legitimate, they can prove themselves by providing comprehensive and specific information in the CEQA review phase of the County's project. If they are afraid to do so, that says a lot.
Maria,
For the sake of transparency, please list here your qualifications and/or credentials for evaluating a wastewater project for Los Osos.
Additionally, please list here any advisors or experts you turn to for advice on this subject.
It should be noted for the community that you have made a remarkable transformation from someone who wanted absolutely nothing to do with the sewer to someone who "acts" like an expert -- to someone who speaks way beyond her personal knowledge on topics that have nothing to do with your scope of work on the TAC Committee.
How do you account for this sudden wisdom and new authority?
Do you intend to run for the CSD in '08?
I look forward to your briefest, most concise response.
KEH
Maria,
How nice that you have 100% support from all the pro Tri-W and county supporters.
It sure tells us a lot!
TCG:
You say, "That's pretty much the benefit of having a stable, professional, experienced government that is in it for the long haul making these decisions..."
Please tell us TCG, exactly who is experienced or professional from the county who is working on our wastewater project?
Noel King picked citizens rather than experts to be on TAC.
The county has some kids.
Carollo only does gravity and has no real ability to look at step fairly.
The county created the problem by permitting, building, some 25% of the PZ creating the so-called pollution. They never collected money from any of those developers for infrastructure!
And now they want us to pay 100% for a monster sewer to HOPEFULLY clear up nitrate problems.
You, 4Crapkiller, Maria, etc. are out of your minds!...or just corrupt to the gills...
The county broke it and should now fix it and pony up all the money that they owe on the project. They collected tax dollars from these 1100 homes too!
TCG:
You say, "That's pretty much the benefit of having a stable, professional, experienced government that is in it for the long haul making these decisions..."
Please tell us TCG, exactly who is experienced or professional from the county who is working on our wastewater project?
Noel King picked citizens rather than experts to be on TAC.
The county has some kids.
Carollo only does gravity and has no real ability to look at step fairly.
The county created the problem by permitting, building, some 25% of the PZ creating the so-called pollution. They never collected money from any of those developers for infrastructure!
And now they want us to pay 100% for a monster sewer to HOPEFULLY clear up nitrate problems.
You, 4Crapkiller, Maria, etc. are out of your minds!...or just corrupt to the gills...
The county broke it and should now fix it and pony up all the money that they owe on the project. They collected tax dollars from these 1100 homes too!
Conspiracy Boy said... actually demanded Maria Kelly provide her credentials, well quite frankly, that smacks of arrogance from one already shown to be ignorant of the issues faced by the CSD's past and present and by the County.
So, mister self appointed keeper of the conspiracy theories, just what credential might you have? Before demanding anything of anyone else, you might try to show that you know something more than that someone connected your computer to the internet for you.
Mike,
You're a village idiot, to be sure. Not being able to read a simple blog is a definite indicator.
I asked for (NOT Conspiracy Boy) -- and NOT demanded -- Maria's credentials. To say I'm arrogant for asking for qualifications smacks of an attempt to obstruct transparency, which has consistently been part of the County's campaign.
You are nothing but a cheap-seat obstructionist, lobbyist and echo.
I wonder if Maria agrees with Mike that qualifications mean nothing -- that it's your bias that's important here.
KEH
My aren't you sweet... just what credentials do you have that you could share that would show you have the qualifications to understand what Maria's background and objectives are?
Just what makes you any kind of a judge of the character of the lady serving on a thankless committee in the process of developing a sewer? Is it possible you either don't want any sewer, want the most expensive sewer somewhere out of town or now want 10 to 20 cluster collectors spread around town? What do you gain by your very own brand of obstructionism? I'm backing the County 100%, what about you?
I would think that Maria's best credential is the use of common sense, and that she is civil.
NOT like keepemhonest, who sure as hell is not honest. Or conspiricy boy, who finds a conspiricy hiding behind every government official.
I look at obstructionists as those who do not want a sewer, any sewer, and wish only to delay the inevitable. They have been with us for thirty years.
The county will decide, and the obstructionists will do anything to stop a sewer. They certainly do not give a hoot about the property owners who will be picking up the bill.
conspiracy boy, you said, "How nice that you have 100% support from all the pro Tri-W and county supporters." (about Maria)
I assume by this statement that you mean people who want a sewer ACTUALLY BUILT.
So what is your problem with that?
I might also add, that Tri-W supporters, like the Taxpayers' Watch group, want a sewer built, even if their favorite choice is not chosen.
Ann said:
"So, wouldn't that make Pio's Purple Pipe Project the one that should be picked and put in IMMEDIATELY? Supposedly, it solves both problems in one fell swoop! Kaboom. And allows you to water your petunias to boot."
So how exactly does that jive with Measure B which had your sympathies at one point? Little sewer plants all over town? You really can't have it both ways you know.
And you can't say it is the cost being the driver, as Pio's "idea of a possiby possible project" costs up in the Step/Steg/Tri-W range. Makes me think you are just trying to confuse the issue for the voters who have not been following the nit-picky details of this whole debacle.
Maria sez:"There has been no community wide process for reviewing Pio. Just by suggesting that we IMMEDIATELY put in that undesigned, unfunded project you are pushing the train off the track."
Woa, woa, go back and read Inlet's comment to which I was commenting. I'm not pushing anything anywhere. Inlet mused (idle musing, wool gathering, speculation, asking "what if," even stating that he wasn't quite sure he believed what he was about to suggest & etc) and I simply asked an "idle musing" question as well. Now, suddenly, that's morphed off into pushing things off the track?
Woa, and you wonder how quickly things get so crazy around here? Here's example 101. O.K. everybody, TAKE A DEEP BREATH.
Maria then sez:"Thank you for having a blog where these discussions are available for public consumption.
Maria
8:41 AM, July 22, 2007"
Uh, you're welcome, but doesn't that seem a bit contradictory? How can you have "public discussions" on the one hand but if you mention something not in the Playbook, you'll be accused of pushing things off tracks? Or accused of some "agenda," or taking "sides" or being a liar or having "bias," or, or, or . . . Does the word "ridiculous" come into play somewhere along here?
Conspiracy Boy sez:"The county broke it and should now fix it and pony up all the money that they owe on the project. They collected tax dollars from these 1100 homes too!"
It's been my experience that governments (and regulators) often break things (and people) but they NEVER apologize nor fix what they broke. The costs are simply shoved off onto the taxpayers, the people who created the mess are promoted to another job somewhere else, usually at a better pay grade, and the broken citizens are told, "no need to dwell on the past, it's time to move forward." Then they get the full bill.
Ann wrote:
"... the people who created the mess are promoted to another job somewhere else, usually at a better pay grade, and the broken citizens are told, "no need to dwell on the past, it's time to move forward." Then they get the full bill."
In one of Patrick Klemz's New Times cover stories on Los Osos, (the one with the hilarious "Where's Roger" illustration by Glen Starkey), I found this to be very interesting:
"Many of the water board names scattered across recall-era correspondences have shifted positions, resigned, or otherwise left the scene. Regional wastewater analyst Gearhart Hubner: retired. State financial planner Darrin Polhemus: promoted out of the department. Regional CDO drafter and agency counselor Lori Okun: reassigned due to a conflict of interest. State board member Richard Katz: reassigned by the governor. State executive officer Celeste Cantu: resigned. State board member Gerry Secundy: returned to the private sector after the rest of the board reversed his controversial decision to stay fines against an avionics corporation early in 2006."
The one I found to be especially interesting is that Darrin Polhemus was "promoted to another job somewhere else, usually at a better pay grade."
Polhemus was the one that green-lighted the SRF loan to pay for the millions of dollars of decorative items found in the Tri-W project, despite the fact that the SRF Policy clearly and brilliantly states, "Ineligible (for SRF funding): decorative items." That was a huge, HUGE f-up, and it was green-lighted by Polhemus, and, now, we learn from Klemz that Polhemus was "promoted to another job somewhere else," "at a better pay grade."
"no need to dwell on the past, it's time to move forward."
Guess so.
Maria wrote:
"The county has and will continue to provide our ability to review different projects and have had hours of discussions of: "what about......" "
Unfortunately, those "what about" discussions don't include the one project everyone wants to know "about."
From the Rough Screening Report:
"The previous project at the Tri-W site will be carried through fine screening process..."
and from the draft Fine Screening Report:
"... the previous LOCSD project at the Tri-W site will continue to be carried through the fine screening process..."
The strange thing about the "carried through"-ness, is that it wouldn't even take "hours of discussions" by the TAC to reveal that Tri-W should NOT be "carried through" the entire screening process. All the TAC has to do is become clear on ONE question: Why did Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, call the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004?
That's it. One question. Fifteen minutes of discussion, and that would be that.
Maria, why won't the TAC answer that extremely important, highly relevant, bottom-line question? That sure would be swell if you guys did, because it would save everyone a lot of money, time and headaches.
To date, I've asked Paavo Ogren that question, Bruce Gibson that question, and Maria Kelley that question, and not one of them has answered it.
Perhaps Paavo's hoping to be "promoted to another job somewhere else, usually at a better pay grade."
4crapkiller said...
"I would think that Maria's best credential is the use of common sense, and that she is civil."
Yes, Maria's qualifications for objectively evaulating a sewer system for Los Osos are certainly quite impressive, aren't they?
It would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic for the community.
We all will pay dearly for the blantant biases of a proxy clone for recalled Richard and Gordon.
Stupid!!!! Stupid!!! Stupid!!!
Ron,
Perhaps you forget that TriW is not only about a "bait-n-switchy" promise of a park (it is interesting that Potter's comment was on the removal of *some* portions of the park even though it was to remain in the project ... Potter was smoking crack) but it is a location, a WWTF design and a collection system as well.
If the County determines, with the input of the TAC, that aspects of the TriW location, WWTF design and collection system are good, they'll choose those aspects. If they don't want to include a park (and they've said as much), they can still prefer other aspects of TriW.
I would think that you could figure this out. Heck, if you can read through staff reports of the CCC to find minute details that would appear to support your contention that the park drove the site selection, I would think you could read comments in the newspaper from Paavo and Noel when they say that the park will have nothing to do with the discussion of the technical merits of various sites and systems.
On the questions of Maria's qualifications ...
She's thoughtful, careful and she cares about Los Osos and getting a solution that, to the greatest extent possible within County, State and Federal regulations will meet the desires we all have.
Oh yeah ... she also got a hell of a lot more votes for LOCSD than you did.
I would think that the reason Maria and Rob Shipe were chosen was really clear. Some folks were selected because of technical expertise in one area or another and those who put the TAC together also wanted to give a nod to those in Los Osos who had run for office and were well supported yet didn't win. Shipe and Kelley are clearly two folks who fit the bill nicely.
I would certainly rather the two of them than two appointed by the LOCSD. It is clear that they are supported by our town.
With perhaps a few vocal exceptions who post here ...
Of course, as usual, after my last post above, I got to thinkin'...
I wrote:
"Polhemus was the one that green-lighted the SRF loan to pay for the millions of dollars of decorative items found in the Tri-W project, despite the fact that the SRF Policy clearly and brilliantly states, "Ineligible (for SRF funding): decorative items." That was a huge, HUGE f-up..."
I can't overemphasize what a GIGANTIC (bold, italicized and capitalized) f-up that was by Polhemus.
Here's why:
If he had simply followed the SRF Policy, and made the decision NOT to fund the millions of dollars worth of decorative items found in the Tri-W project, (get ready for lots of passive tense here) then Tri-W could not have been built, and the project would have been instantly eviscerated in 2004 because it would have been in violation of its development permit (much like it is today) because there would have been no money around to meet Special Condition of Approval #17, Nash-Karner's multi-million park, and the "viable project alternatives" session that's happening today, would have happened three years ago.
Not only was the decision to fund the amenities a colossal mistake, it was also a slap to the face of every California taxpayer, especially those in communities that badly needed SRF funds at the time to help fund amphitheater-less wastewater projects, but couldn't scratch up a penny of SRF funds.
You know, a couple years back, I spoke with Polhemus over the phone regarding this very subject, and he was highly confused on why their was a multi-million dollar park in the Tri-W sewer plant project to begin with.
He told me that his office made the decision to fund the decorative items because he thought they were mandated by the Coastal Commission as "mitigation," but all he had to do was pick up a phone, like I did, and call Steve Monowitz at the Coastal Commission and asked him, "Did the Coastal Commission mandate as "mitigation" the millions of dollars of decorative items found in the Tri-W project?"
If Polhemus had made that phone call, like I did, Monowitz would have told him, like he told me, "It galls me when they (Save the Dream / 2005 LOCSD) say we added the amenities."
Ann wrote:
"the broken citizens are told, "no need to dwell on the past, it's time to move forward." Then they get the full bill."
This topic -- the SWRCB financing millions of dollars of decorative items in the Tri-W project despite the fact that the SRF policy states, "Ineligible for funding: decorative items" -- is one of the points in the class action lawsuit I recommend for Los Osos, so you don't get stuck with "the full bill."
Boy, you absolutely have them on that one, Los Osos. They f'd-up, and that f-up allowed the "bait and switchy" Tri-W disaster to move forward, ultimately costing state taxpayers, oh, I'm going to guess somewhere in the aggregate neighborhood of $100 million, and Los Osos property owners a bundle due to three-years-and-counting worth of unnecessary delays.
- - -
So, Anonymous commentor, 11:11 AM, July 23, 2007, your answer to "Why did Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, call the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004?" is, "Potter was smoking crack."
Great. Thanks for that quality input. Now if we could just get answers from Ogren, Gibson, Kelley and a bunch of other TAC-types on that same question, then we'd be on to something.
Ron,
Just how much percentage-wise for the park etc. are you moaning about? 10%, 5% - what? The most expensive part was the collection system and the next most expensive part was the building (with its "hidden-ness" and smell mitigations)?
I will repeat myself as you have some comprehension difficulties, and I really want you to answer this question. How much percentage-wise are you moaning about?
Shark Inlet said...
"On the questions of Maria's qualifications ...
"She's thoughtful, careful and she cares about Los Osos and getting a solution that, to the greatest extent possible within County, State and Federal regulations will meet the desires we all have."
Your description of Maria fits 90% of the people who live in Los Osos. -- and have lived here a heck of a lot longer than Maria and know a hell of a lot more about what is best for Los Osos (except you of course).
"...and those who put the TAC together also wanted to give a nod to those in Los Osos who had run for office and were well supported yet didn't win. Shipe and Kelley are clearly two folks who fit the bill nicely. I would certainly rather the two of them than two appointed by the LOCSD. It is clear that they are supported by our town."
More real intelligent reasons for Maria and Shipe from Shark. Those who put TAC together are miserable excuses for public officials. Your last comment is most truthful: they're on your side.
"Oh yeah ... she also got a hell of a lot more votes for LOCSD than you did."
You're right about that. I got 0 votes, so Duggan, Ochs, Barrow, Edwards, Shipe, Tornatsky, Senet, Cesena and Kelly got more votes than I did. Each of these people gave up something valuable when they ran -- their integrity.
Is that your ace in the hole? Maria and Shipe were also-rans in the election and that qualifies them to sit on TAC when one's expertise is as a janitor and the other as a carpetbagger?
Sharky, the problem with your side of the argument is that bias causes loss of objectivity, at which point you are useless as a commentator and just talking to yourself to hear the sound of your fingers on the keyboard.
Have you tried ping-pong against a wall?
KEH
keepmhonest, you said: "You're right about that. I got 0 votes, so Duggan, Ochs, Barrow, Edwards, Shipe, Tornatsky, Senet, Cesena and Kelly got more votes than I did. Each of these people gave up something valuable when they ran -- their integrity."
How are people suppose to get ELECTED to public office? Should they be appointed? Would that "save" their integrity?
How do you suppose people are selected for a jury panel? Does their job qualify or not quality them for being fair?
Who would you select to sit on the TAC? Or did you apply and were not selected? But maybe you are too young - your emotional outbursts peg you to be around 14 or 15. Maybe you are too immature to hold down a job as well. Your personal attacks on Maria and Rob certainly peg you to be jealous of them.
If you don't like the govenmental processes here in America, why don't you move (if you aren't too young to make decisions like that)?
Based on the number of votes that Kelly and Schipe received, there are many people in this town who trust their judgement on matters exactly like what the TAC is currently working on. I am fine with their selection.
We should not have to be scientists/engineers to understand generally what the project costs, pros and cons amount to. Honesty and intergrity are more important traits in the TAC members.
In fact, if the TAC analysis is written at more than a 12th grade level, it will be too complicated for our purposes.
SharkInlet,
You say, "I would think that the reason Maria and Rob Shipe were chosen was really clear. Some folks were selected because of technical expertise in one area or another and those who put the TAC together also wanted to give a nod to those in Los Osos who had run for office and were well supported yet didn't win. Shipe and Kelley are clearly two folks who fit the bill nicely."
First of all, when the county talked about accepting applications for the TAC, they said they wanted people with expertise. Many people didn't apply because of that.
I personally feel that it's really stupid to have people with no experience (let alone with bias) looking at pros and cons. What do they know? There were many experts, top experts, that would have been happy to help Los Osos....but no, they wanted Maria and Rob -- regular citizens doing what experts should be doing!
You are apparently stupid enough to support Tri-W, so you are stupid enough to support a woman who knows nothing, and a janitor to help select a project. We're in B-I-G trouble.
Maria went way out of bounds supporting and talking about the 218. That's not what the TAC's job is. It's probably illegal to boot.
No wonder you like Maria. She's shown she is as phoney as you are!
AND TO TCG:
Now you are starting to sound like a real idiot!
TAC stands for Technical Advisory Committee. Rob and Maria were endorsed by the Tribune. And we all know many voters that don't know about the candidates, just select who the paper endorses. Period. And I hardly think Maria is honest. Just looks to me that the county is interferring with our politics (again) since Maria and Rob will surely run for CSD based on their boost by the TAC!
SEWERTOONS MOANS:
"How are people suppose to get ELECTED to public office? Should they be appointed? Would that "save" their integrity?"
WHY IS IT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, THAT CANDIDATES HERE RUN FOR OFFICE AND AS SOON AS THEY WIN THEY TURN THEIR BACKS ON THE PLATFORM THEY RAN ON? THEY WOULD SAVE THEIR INTEGRITY BY BEING THE SAME PERSON WITH THE SAME VALUES WINNING AS RUNNING. THEY WOULD SAVE THEIR INTEGRITY BY NOT BE BOUGHT OFF AT SUCH A LOW PRICE SO SOON. WAIT A FEW MONTHS BEFORE SELLING OUT. MOST OF THE CANDIDATES WE'VE BEEN SUBJECTED TO LATELY HAVE BEEN FAR BELOW STANDARD, I MEAN DOWNRIGHT SUBTERRANEAN.
"How do you suppose people are selected for a jury panel? Does their job qualify or not quality them for being fair?"
I BELIEVE THE NAME OF THE COMMITTEE IS TECHNICAL ADVISORY, NOT TENDERFOOT ACADEMY. EXPERTISE WAS REQUIRED, BUT NOT DESIRED. THE COUNTY WANTED AND GOT A CLEAR PATH THROUGH IGNORANCE. THE COMMITTEE IS THE FOX NEWS VERSION OF "FAIR AND BALANCED" -- UNFAIR AND UNBALANCED ENOUGH TO TILT THE TOWN AND SINK IT IN 3 INCHES OF WATER.
"Your personal attacks on Maria and Rob certainly peg you to be jealous of them."
I'VE HEARD THIS 'JEALOUSY DEFENSE' BEFORE. IT REMINDS ME OF THE 'TWINKIE DEFENSE.' BOTH COVER UP WRONGDOING BY SUBSTITUTING A HERRING FOR A REAL RESPONE BECAUSE THERE IS NO RESPONSE FORTHCOMING. WE HAVE COME TO ACCEPT LESS OF OUR POLITICIANS. WE HAVE COME TO ACCEPT STUPIDITY AS A LOST SHADE OF COMMON SENSE AND THE CONSPIRACY OF MEDIOCRITY AS MANDATORY FOR THE WORLD TO TURN. WHY WOULD ANYONE BE JEALOUS OF BEING PAAVO'S ORGAN GRINDER'S MONKEY, OF BEING A FLUNKY FOR THE COUNTY, USURPING AND ABUSING POWER TO FEED AN UNQUENCHABLE EGO? I AM TIRED OF THE LOS OSOS CSD BEING A SAFE HAVEN FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED A PSYCHIATRIST MORE THAN WE NEED THEM AS THIEVES OF THE PUBLIC TRUST. WE HAVE CERTAINLY RISEN TO OUR HIGHEST LEVEL OF INCOMPETENCE, ACCEPTING SUBSTANDARD LEADERS WHO ARE VOID OF CHARACTER, WEAK OF MIND, AND SO EASILY CONTROLLED BY OTHERS (INCLUDE THE CURRENT BOARD IF YOU WISH.)
LOS OSOS DESERVES SO MUCH BETTER, BUT WE CONTINUE TO GET DAMAGED GOODS.
(DON'T WORRY, I'M NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE. I'M NOT EVEN WALKING FOR OFFICE. I'VE ONLY GOT ONE GOOD LEG. BUT THANKS ANYWAY.)
Well, conspiriacy boy, which witch will you try and burn next? Can we have a big bonfire and bring in the BOS and county employees and tie them to stakes?
Hard to do with no wood, no stakes, and no pitch. Unfortunately, your hot air rises!
And by the way, are you the EXPERT that was passed over? Sort of sounds like you have a very high regard of yourself. Your posts, to me, seem "worthless".
Show us the "beef".
Conspiricy boy:
By the way, why do you not really start on Ann and Ron? Along with Al Gore (had to do it), these are the people who have you bent over and have supplied the vaseline.
As soon as we get a sewer plant in, we can start treating upper aquifer water at the well head and remove nitrates with a resin system. This will produce more usable water. The whole key is to recycle as much quality water as we can through any system.
State water, through long pipes, will be terribly expensive, plus it will have to go through a water treatment plant.
This is not easy business.
It's hard to give any credibility to a person who calls people with a different opinion than his an "idiot." In fact, it's impossible.
TCG said...
"It's hard to give any credibility to a person who calls people with a different opinion than his an "idiot." In fact, it's impossible."
It has nothing to do with "a different opinion." For example, can you call a "traitor" to one's community an "idiot"? I think so. Is it OK to call someone intentionally spreading propaganda and misinformation an "idiot" for doing so? Sorry you have such low standards.
I just call it like I see it. Obviously you don't agree. That's OK. It doesn't make you an "idiot" just because you don't agree with me!!!
Conspiracy Boy and Keepmhonest ...
From the tone of your recent comments here that you are more interested in getting your way at all costs than in working with others in your community to achieve the goal of a wastewater treatment plant even not ever aspect of the design is your choice.
Let me further add that getting a wastewater treatment plant online quickly will limit the damage we do to our own drinking water resources and will limit our own costs.
It sounds as if you are more like kids on a soccer team who, when a call doesn't go your way, spend the rest of the time whining about how unfair the ref is and argue that the rest of the team should pass the ball to you because you know the only way to score.
Essentially you're telling the rest of us ... including people who would appear to have more information and knowledge than you do ... that we are wrong and that you are right.
This would actually be fine (other than your tone is more off-putting than would be ideal) if you would simply offer up the reasons behind your statements. If you would explain, for example, why we know that Orenco is so knowedgeable of all aspects of Los Osos that they aren't overlooking something really important in their promise of saving us money. Perhaps if you would also explain what they propose to do with the treated wastewater and how their proposed idea will stem saltwater intrusion it would be nice.
Nope, the two of you seem to be more bluster than fact ... more anger than reason.
Now ... to the question at hand ... if you both seem to be so darn upset with Rob and Maria (and presumably the others on the committee), would you please tell us who from Los Osos you would approve of for this committee? Perhaps you could give us a list of the TAC members you approve of and for those you don't approve of please tell us who applied who you think would have been a better choice.
Until you can give us names of folks you feel would be better qualified it would seem that all your bluster over Maria and Rob is simply causing additional division in our town.
Please work with the rest of us to find a solution and stop the ill will.
keepmhonest and Conspiracy Boy, just remember that the candidates you pick will have to be able to work with other people and see other's points of view. People who do not have open minds are of no use to Los Osos.
'toons wrote:
"I will repeat myself as you have some comprehension difficulties, and I really want you to answer this question. How much percentage-wise are you moaning about? "
Uhg, yet another person that will never grasp the wonderful meaning of the LOCSD's "bait and switchy" move. I feel sorry for those folks because it's such an awesome concept to be clear on.
'toons, for the umpteenth millionth time (And I'm the one with the "comprehension difficulties?"), the cost of the park element in the Tri-W project is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the entire park cost ten bucks. What DOES matter is that the park was the only reason, according to Coastal Commission and CSD documents, that the Tri-W site was selected for the second project at Tri-W. (The Solution Group's Oswald ponding system, the one that got the LOCSD formed in the first place in 1998 -- was the first project slated for that location.) And since Nash-Karner's park element dictated the mid-town location for the second project, then that means all the cash it takes to make a mid-town sewer plant "urban compatible" is on the park, and in this case, according to state officials, that's some $20 million. (See what I mean, *pg-13, about repetition? I must have written this in some form or another here and on my blog well over one hundred times, and here I'm doing it again. And why? Because the TAC refuses to discuss it. I remember when the idea of a TAC was first proposed, and at first I thought, "What a waste of time. Everything's been studied to death. The only reason there's a controversy at all is because Pandora really, really, REALLY likes parks." But then I reasoned that once the TAC started reviewing what led to the Tri-W siting that I would officially be proven right. However, what I wasn't expecting was for the TAC to "carry through" the fatally flawed Tri-W project all the way through the entire screening process. Without Tri-W scrutiny, then that means my initial reaction to the TAC was dead on accurate. What a waste of time.)
'toon's, I can tell from your post that you're not even close to answering this question:
Why did Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, call the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004?
Everyone in Los Osos owes it to themselves to know the answer to that question, and the answer to that question is flat-out awesome. It's the Holy Grail of the entire sewer controversy. Get clear on it, and you'll find it fascinating. I guarantee it.
KEH wrote:
"Sharky, the problem with your side of the argument is that bias causes loss of objectivity, at which point you are useless as a commentator and just talking to yourself to hear the sound of your fingers on the keyboard."
To tell you the truth, a long time ago, I started scrolling through about 90% of what that Anonymous commentor pops out. It's just so fluffy, there's no substance or attribution, it's not funny, and it stinks of behavior based marketing. Sorry Anon, that might just be me (although I'm sure I'm not alone on that.)
'toons:
"If you don't like the govenmental processes here in America, why don't you move"
Or battle your ass off to change it.
4CK:
"By the way, why do you not really start on Ann and Ron? Along with Al Gore (had to do it), these are the people who have you bent over and have supplied the vaseline."
I have no idea what that means (thank God), but I don't like the sound of it. I'm pretty sure that Ann, and I'm 100% positive that I, never once voted to do dittily squat as a LOCSD director.
Sewertoons says:
"People who do not have open minds are of no use to Los Osos."
You've just ruled out Maria Kelly!
Got to thinking again...
I wrote:
"And since Nash-Karner's park element dictated the mid-town location for the second project, then that means all the cash it takes to make a mid-town sewer plant "urban compatible" is on the park, and in this case, according to state officials, that's some $20 million."
That's just the financial impact of "bait and switchy." The much more interesting and impactful aspects, in my opinion, are the legal aspects and all the forced regulatory crap that was needed to jam a sewer plant into the middle of a beautiful central coast town.
Stuff like overriding the entire environmental review process with a simple 4-page document, or violating the Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance by building on ESHA when there were clearly other environmentally preferable, viable locations for a sewer plant.
THAT kind of stuff is the real fall out of "bait and switchy." That's the serious, fatal flaw stuff.
The $30 million dollar park ($20 million for "urban compatibility" + $5 million for amenities + $5 million for O & M over the next 10-or-so years = $30 million) is peanuts compared to the cost of forcing the second project in at Tri--W... a cost that increases by the day.
Ron,
I glad that you've finally admitted that you don't really bother reading what I write before you respond. That explains a lot. It certainly explains why you never seem to answer the questions I and others pose to you.
Might I suggest you simply drop out of the discussion if you don't actually want to engage in a conversation.
ron, stop being a dork. Pay attention to NOW.
There are mid-town sewer plants in Montecito and Beverly Hills. I'm sure those locations are at least as beautiful as Los Osos. You seem to forget that there is a need to get the water back into the lower aquifer to stem saltwater intrusion. If you put the plant out of town, it costs a whole lot more to bring that cleaned water back into town to do that. I'm guessing it might be more than the scaled down park that the County suggests for Tri-W.
You probably like step, too. The O & M on that is more expensive than gravity. And that is in real life, not the low-ball sales pitches from step companies.
Conspiracy Boy said...
Sewertoons says:
"People who do not have open minds are of no use to Los Osos."
You've just ruled out Maria Kelly!
CB,
I guess you have not been attending or watching TAC or CSD meetings. That is the only possible way that you could make that statement.
What I don't get is your singlular pursuit of Maria. You have made this issue so personal. How about the other TAC members? Or are you just obsessed with your object of jealousy?
Sewertoons:
I can see through Maria. I resent her trying to seem fair when she is biased and works for Gordon Hensley and Richard LeGros. Obviously, because they couldn't sit on the TAC they put her there, and obviously, she's has been and will continue to run for the CSD. (Did she respond with her qualifications?)
Anyone else on the TAC? Well, they are ALL BIASED except for perhaps Karen. I don't know about Rob, I only know he's not very bright.
I have been watching the TAC and that's exactly why I can see that Maria is biased along with her "conflict of interest" boy, Dan Berman!
Exactly how stupid do you think we all are in Los Osos? Let me answer that for you! Obviously, you think we are REAL stupid!
P.S. Has anyone seen Maria meeting at Pandora's house recently?
Conspiracy Boy ...
Considering you've not named for us those who did apply for a position on the TAC who would be preferable to you for all the positions but Karen's ... it would seem that we can't determine whether your argument that the TAC is biased has any merit or not.
If you can't name a group of folks who could fill the majority of the seats, it would seem that not enough people you consider to be "unbiased" applied for the job. It would hardly be the fault of the County or others if folks with your point of view don't even apply for the position, would it?
If you just demonstrate that you are in the majority or that there was a clear bias you'll have carried the argument. If not, it would seem that it is you who is out of step (pun intended) with the community and not the TAC members.
Again, the majority of what you write here seems to be more a complaint about everyone else and everything that you can't control. Again, work with the community, not against it.
Dear CB~ If I was at Pandora's house she could prosecute for trespassing! I have been at a green house on the north side of the street twice in the past couple of weeks. Yesterday it was to pick up some thank you letters that needed to be mailed and the person home couldn't do it because there wasn't a car available. I'm sorry if you came out and noticed my car there because the kids were playing with the radio and kept blaring it. Please know that I pointed out the rudeness of that behavior.
If you aren't careful, you are going to make yourself absolutely ill with suspicion. In the future, I'll be sure to post when I'll be down on Mitchell so you can have a camera ready.
It concerns me that I am even responding but this is so ridiculous that it was too fun to pass up.
If and when I even have the opportunity to actually meet Pandora, I'll let you know right here first!
My qualifications are listed at the county website and as of today, July 24th, 2007, I have no intention of running for the CSD. I had my chance and it would be far too presumptuous of me to assume that I would be prepared for 2008. With busy children and more commitments now than a year ago, there is no way I could even begin to consider running a campaign today. I hope you find this a satisfactory response.
In response to GH and RL, I wish I had a job that I was getting paid for! With the state of affairs, it is getting more and more pressing that I do find long term employment. I have one child with 5 years left of school and there isn't a fund yet for him to work out of. My hope is scholarships and loans from grandparents.
By clouding the issues regarding my integrity or honesty, you run the gamble of alienating the position you hold. In a town this size, character assassination typically doesn't play out well and really shouldn't be the first line of defense. Tackling the issues and having a response to my assertions of needed services in this community and my opinions on State Water and a 218 would be far more beneficial to the sustainability of your arguments.
Since I am not a county employee but a volunteer, and I'm not sitting in a meeting at this time, it is perfectly o.k. for me as a voting property owner to have an opinion on a 218. I can tell you without a doubt that if a STEP system came out of the county process as the most viable solution for Los Osos I would vote yes. The same holds true for a gravity system. This is what I tell people when I speak with them. I have concerns, I spend hours upon hours discussing and pondering the impact this entire situation has had on this community and I am hopeful for a positive outcome for the community. If this lacks integrity in your eyes, it's o.k. with me. It's just like I tell my children, I was not put on God's green earth to make you happy - there is a collective we and no one person is the most important person here.
You are still a neighbor and a member of this community and just based on that, I will continue to work towards a resolution and try to be as respectful as possible. Please know though, if I don't respond it is due to the fact that I find your personal attacks to be unworthy of a response. I believe that what we put out to the collective we has a profound impact on the group. If it's negative it keeps the energy negative. If there is heart behind the concerns, people will listen and hear.
I'm committed to keep trying.
Ron wrote: "So, Anonymous commentor, 11:11 AM, July 23, 2007, your answer to 'Why did Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, call the LOCSD 'bait and switchy' in 2004?' is, 'Potter was smoking crack.'"
Um ... yes. Drug use would explain why he derailed a project over minutiae. Heck, the LOCSD had removed some aspect of the park that people were complaining about so then Potter complains that these park components were removed ... silliness.
After CCLO and others ... including you ... complained about the cost of including parklike stuff at the TriW site, that stuff was scaled back but not completely eliminated. The CCC staff even approved of those changes.
Ron, essentially you're trying to make great hay over a past and dead issue. Please please please please pay attention this time because otherwise you remarks will continue to be irrelevant. The CDP with the LOCSD includes a park and the County can move forward with exactly that approved plan. If the County thinks the TriW site is best for technical reasons but changes the park portion of their plan (and they say they intend to) they'll have to provide the CCC a justification for the site choice. If that justification is sound, the CCC will give a CDP amendment or an entirely new CDP (depending on what is asked for).
One whole thing bothers me about the CCC hearings back in 2004 ... the actions of the CCLO. After complaining about the park for a long time, they formally asked for the CDP to be revoked because the project at the time didn't have enough park stuff. Essentially this was either an intentional delay tactic (hoping perhaps that with enough delay, TriW could be stopped) or it was a high-stakes gamble for our community. The CCC essentially required an additional few million dollars worth of park-like stuff put back into the project because of the CCLO request and the delay associated this whole matter cost a minimum of another $4M.
What bothers me more than the additional $1000 (or more) I will have to pay because of this CCLO action is the blatant two-sidedness of their actions. Complain about the park and then complain about the lack of park. Weasel lawyers have never had better friends.
Hey,
I was unable to make the SLO Supervisors meeting yesterday but got to hear some of it on the radio.
When I tuned in, Lenthall was explaining the the behavior of "Mr. Jones" wasn't appropriate for civil discourse and wouldn't be tolerated. What happened?
Inlet sez:"Hey,
I was unable to make the SLO Supervisors meeting yesterday but got to hear some of it on the radio.
When I tuned in, Lenthall was explaining the the behavior of "Mr. Jones" wasn't appropriate for civil discourse and wouldn't be tolerated. What happened?
7:35 AM, July 25, 2007"
Sigh. Mr. Jones was engaging in his usual high-flown melodramatic rhetoric --i.e. SHAME ON YOU Mr. SO and So for . . . .!! (fill in the blanks, & etc. Sorta like the wonderful bombastic cartoon character, Senator Klaghorn?) It was stuff Mr. Jones has done before at the CSD meetings, reading from a prepared typescript, full of dramatic flourishes of umbrage! and I was curious to wonder if he had engaged in the same hyperbole when Katcho was BOS chairman? If so, Katcho so honors free speech that I'm sure he would have overlooked some of the higher notes of "outrage" Mr. Jones was playing, but Lenthall is no Katcho. His approach is more like, F--- your "sacred" three minutes! He's a former cop. Get in his face and upset his sensibilities and he'll get right back in your face and upset your sensibilities.
There was also some back and forth a little later from another member of the aundience pointing out that apparently one of the staff members being critized by Mr. Jones had made some slighty snarkey comment somewhere along the line about some Los Ososian folk, or something.
It was all very High School. Same old, same old. I didn't even bother commenting on it at my last posting. Sigh.This is getting sooooooo old.
Ann wrote:
"He's (Lenthall) a former cop. Get in his face and upset his sensibilities and he'll get right back in your face and upset your sensibilities."
Hey, Jones better be careful. Every time Lenthall's name comes up, I think of that great mid-80s Telegram Tribune photo of him -- all 7-feet of him in his SLOPD uniform -- calmly holding a fire hose and blasting it at a bunch of kids that were attending a rock concert at the SLO Vets Hall. A classic, classic image.
Wouldn't that be something? Whenever a public speaker upsets his "sensibilities," instead of going to to gavel, he just breaks out his fire hose and blasts the speaker down the isle.
"Next speaker!"
Maria wrote:
"... the kids were playing with the radio and kept blaring it. Please know that I pointed out the rudeness of that behavior."
THANK YOU!!!
In a society where the norm is moving towards complimenting children on anything they do, no matter how bad -- "Nice job, Junior, you sure did a good job turning up that volume knob. You're special." -- I can't thank you enough for pointing out "the rudeness of that behavior."
Anonymous commentor wrote:
"Um ... yes. Drug use would explain why he derailed a project over minutiae."
Potter didn't derail anything, and then I scrolled through the rest of your post. Could someone do me a favor and go back and read Anon's post and let me know how many times s/he uses the phrase, "According to... ."
Perhaps someone ought to look over all the posts that do include the phrase "according to ..." and see how accurate those statements are. My take ... based on reasons I've explained earlier ... is that a full 0.5 of the 2 "according to ..." statements earlier in this comment section are accurate.
I also remain amused that the guy who makes such an issue over others backing up their statements doesn't actually bother to respond when directly questioned about his own.
Amused .... but sad as well.
Maria,
"I will continue to work towards a resolution and try to be as respectful as possible."
It's simple. I don't believe you. You take all and no positions, talk out of both sides of your mouth, and vote for whatever Richard and Gordon tell you to do. You are basically a carrier pigeon, always going home to your biases.
I watched you on the TAC on TV last night. I was shocked how much you giggle and joke with your "Environmental Committee" pallyboy Dan Berman. During public comment you were giggling, not listening. Very disrespectful, very unprofessional. I guess listening is not your thing, but talking is...and writing miles of gibberish...to cover up...the flight of the carrier pigeon.
It is not me dividing the community by questioning your integrity. It is your lack of integrity that is dividing the community. I don't apologize for my opinion or observations. Why should I? Am I so wrong? Many in the community feel exactly the same way (a few here don't, so?). All you do is look the other way and call that commitment. Commitment to what? To division pure and simple.
Maria, please don't answer this. It's beneath you and besides I have heard every excuse in the book from you and excuses are all they are, all you are or will ever be.
Thank you for not listening and not learning anything you don't already know.
P.S. Thanks for saying you're not running for the CSD. Of course I don't believe you, but thanks anyway for the moment.
Well, it is not beneath me to answer you, keepmhonest. Can you fixate on nothing else? Say something on here that is not a personal attack would you, if you must write at all? We've hear all this, enough already.
FYI, one person doesn't have that much power to "divide the community" except in your mind.
Post a Comment