Ding, Ding, Ding! This is an update of the previous (deleted) post with new information just in: See below, Tuesday listing
MONDAY:
A meeting of the Los Osos Wastewater Project Technical Advisory Committeewill be held on Monday, August 6, 2007 from 7:00pm - 9:30pm in the SouthBay Community Center at 2180 Palisades Avenue, Los Osos. The meetingagenda is attached. This information can also be viewed on the Projectwebsite at www.slocounty.ca.gov/PW/LOWWP.htmThis meeting is scheduled to be broadcasted, live, on Charter Cable channel20 in Los Osos.
TUESDAY DAY: UPDATE From: John Waddell: The easiest way to view the Board agenda is to go the County homepage athttp://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Home.htmSelect the Board of Supervisor agenda quicklink on the right side of thescreen, then click on the agenda link for the August 7, 2007. Scroll down to Item D-1.
UPDATE DING! DING! DING!
From: Noel King:
Ann, I read in your blog that you were not able to access the Board ofSupervisors agenda for August 7. That is unfortunate because this is an item that I believe many is Los Osos will be interested in.Part 2 of the staff report deals with the TRI-W Coastal Development Permit,which is expiring on August 11, 2007 unless an extension is requested. We are recommending to the Board that the extension not be requested, and that the permit be restarted, although much work would not need to be repeated(one of those playfield leveling things).Coming in as a corrigenda attachment to our staff report is a letter fromthe RWQCB which strongly opposes our recommendation. This is something that we thought many of your readers may be interested in following. (emphasis mine)
I noticed that we don't have the staff report posted on our project website yet (the people who do that are on vacation) and I an trying to get that corrected this morning. People can still access it by going through the Board of Supervisors County department website. Our project team is in meetings with the consultants all day, so I hope this all makes sense and you get the message in a timely manner. Thank you.Noel King
TUESDAY NITE: Press release from PZLDF
PUBLIC WELCOME !!!!!
Community meeting
for
-----The Los Osos project----
The 218 Assessment Vote
Q & A
Speaker: Paavo Ogren
Tuesday Aug. 7th 7:00 PM
Sea Pines Resort Conference Rm.
sponsored by
Citizens for Clean Water-PZLDF
For more information call: 534-1913 or PZLDF.org
To make donations to PZLDF: Coast Bank or PO 6095 L.O. 93412
Posts
44 comments:
My apologies wo whoever commented on this original posting. I deleted it all and posted the update with added informaton.
Hope you're -re-comment.
Hard to duplicate. I was just commenting on how I've long believed the obstructionists use fear, much like the Bush administration the past 6 years, to get the uninformed to support their obstruction. And how I couldn't believe McPherson's new tactic last night when she said many people are afraid of the 218 because it is a public vote and they're afraid if they vote no they'll be targeted by the RWQCB. She's got to be kidding. What a joke. She has to be, without a doubt, one of the most manipulative people I have ever had the misfortune of seeing. Just unbelievable.
The Thursday night CSD circus has become unwatchable. The nutjobs are circling the wagons, ready to wage war against the 218. Stay vigilant Los Osos home owner. It's time to stop the lunatics from running the asylum.
Well, looky what we have here...
"Part 2 of the staff report deals with the TRI-W Coastal Development Permit,which is expiring on August 11, 2007 unless an extension is requested. We are recommending to the Board that the extension not be requested, and that the permit be restarted..."
I had no idea about that expiration date.
My friends, that is that. THAT is why the RWQCB "strongly opposes" their recommendation. Briggs knows that I am right, which means he also knows that if that extension isn't granted, Tri-W will never get permitted again, because there will be no "bait and switchy" around THIS TIME to get it permitted.
Memo to the Pulitzer selection committee: Should I start shopping for a frame or clearing off mantle space?
... can't wait to read that staff report.
Ann:
Why were you trying to delete the first comment? Because you read it?
The 218 vote is a public vote, not a private ballot. The votes are by parcel number and can be accessed by public record request. I will make witnessed copies of my YES votes and send them return receipt mail.
I will use my YES votes to show INTENT in COMPLYING with the law. Since CDOs are INDIVIDUAL, I will use the PROOF of these votes to get my discharge permits mitigated. In addition my septic tanks were legally permitted by the county.
Those who vote No or do not vote will lose this defense. What will happen I do not know, but I have never seen a regulating board or court heap punishment on anyone attempting to comply with the law and prevented from doing so by the action of those who would obstruct the law. This is entirely different from the original McPherson defense that failed. There was no proof of an attempt to comply by an individual. The ballot will be proof, and must be considered.
Fear? Those who would vote NO or not vote on the 218 had better consider the consequences of their actions. This vote will be a public record. It is not a private ballot.
There are a lot more chains than dogs. Keep records.
It is entirely legal for the CCRWQCB to come up with weighted discharge permits based upon an attempt to comply with the water law.
If they go into discharge permit enforcement against the entire PZ, they may simply ask for proof of INTENT to comply. They have already mentioned $900 a month per INDIVIDUAL property for a discharge permit. It would seem to me that they would be inclined to let the $900 stand for NO or NON votes, and mitigate this to a far lesser figure for YES votes. There is no escaping the consequences of pollution.
Ron,
It is obvious that you should read the staff report before commenting.
In the report it is the County staff which is opposed to requesting an extension of the TriW CDP and their primary stated reason is to avoid the liability of destruction of ESHA should the County end up choosing something other than TriW. Heck, had the County chosen to request the CDP be renewed, it is you who would be screaming about all sorts of bias.
I had originally thought that you were are careful reader and were someone who was thoughtful when considering the Los Osos situation. You're now convincing me that you're more interested in tooting your own horn or in torpedoing TriW than in the facts or what is best for Los Osos.
Essentially, your 3rd paragraph: "My friends, that is that. THAT is why the RWQCB 'strongly opposes' their recommendation. Briggs knows that I am right, which means he also knows that if that extension isn't granted, Tri-W will never get permitted again, because there will be no 'bait and switchy' around THIS TIME to get it permitted." has no facts to back up your wild assertions.
Next time put some more time into understanding the facts before you offer your opinion ... your "take" will be much better.
Here's the link to the staff report (1.1. meg/pdf file)
And, just as I thought, it is so damn interesting, but first... Noel, my brutha, you have GOT to make it so those pdf files are copy and pastable. Scans suck. Scans are fine for things like Dubbink's application, but when it comes to things like your letter, please make that it so I can copy and paste it.
I know you're a fan of my reporting, and I've always appreciated that, so, you could really help me out and make it so we can all copy and paste out those pdfs. That's a HUGE part of my reporting.
I wanted to copy and paste a few things for this post, but I can't, and I'm not going to type it all out.
But there are some CHOICE takes in that report.
I've got some very, very bad news for Pandora Nash-Karner, Gordon Hensley, Stan Gustafson, Bob Semenson, Frank Freiler, Richard LeGros, and, I hate to say it, but I have to, Sylvia Smith: The staff of the county's public works department has been talking with the staff of the California Coastal Commission over the last "6 - 9" months.
That is extremely bad news for those people I just mentioned. Because the only other person that I've ever come across that is as clear on "bait and switchy" as I am, is the head guy at said Coastal Commission staff -- Steve Monowitz.
I know for a fact, after a series of phone calls and e-mails with Monowitz over the years, that he is crystal, and I mean f-ing CRYSTAL, clear on "bait and switchy." He knows (because of me, by the way [he certainly was never going to find out from the LOCSD or the Tribune]) that the single reason he signed off on the project way back in 2001, ended up being a "bait and switchy" lie just so a small group of people could CYA.
Monowitz knows that now, and I know he knows it.
And if county staff has been talking with Monowitz over the past 6-9 months, then that means COUNTY staff is now clear on "bait and switchy" and the fact that a bunch of ESHA was ripped up, with million in taxpayer money, for no reason whatsoever.
And if county staff is now clear on "bait and switchy," that is EXTREMELY bad news for Pandora Nash-Karner, Gordon Hensley, Stan Gustafson, Bob Semenson, Frank Freiler, Richard LeGros, and, I hate to say it, but I have to, Sylvia Smith. (See? I just copy and pasted that.)
Now that I think about it, that's probably not very good news for a bunch of other official types, people like Darrin Polhemus, Roger Briggs, and Les Bowker.
By the way, who resigned from the TAC? I'm gonna take a guess: Semenson?
This is a little confusing, It appears that the TAC is recommending that the County (BOS?) not request extension of the TriW permit due to concerns of the Coastal staff and to help create the appearance of a level playing field for the alternative projects.
That action appears to be strongly opposed by the RWQCB.
This will be very interesting to watch pan out, on one hand the County and the TAC need to get the 218 passed, and the County needs to insure that any negative impact from that permit is mitigated
On the other hand, It can only be assumed that the RWQCB by taking a position against re-permitting that project is afraid that it wont pass muster next time around, I wonder how the SRF funds owed to the State fit into this mix?
Interesting,
To All:
If the board of supervisors lets the TRI-W Coastal Development Permit expire, and bucks the CCRWQCB wishes that it be extended, it will be acting in "Bad Faith and without "Due diligence" as to the intent of the Blakeslee bill. Fines have been accruing at the rate of $10,000 a day for pollution against a project that the county is working on. They should avoid a legal battle with the water board and not listen to the BOS staff.
I cannot believe that the staff would be so stupid as to recommend the lapse of this permit, or that the BOS would not listen to the regulating body.
The permit exists. "Bait and switchy" is unfounded opinion based upon the comments of a coastal commission board member. The board issued the permit. Are they willing to admit they were stupid and duped? I think not. I think we are being duped by this "bait and switchy" argument.
Ron: Go buy a solid gold frame for your prize, put it on your mantle, look at it and meditate constantly, while hoping for it to be filled.
In the meantime, I hereby award you the "Los Osos Sophistry Award" for false reasoning and spin. Put that in your frame.
To Mike Green:
Interesting? Your speculation has value. As far as assuming that the Coastal permit will not pass muster again and that is why the CCRWQCB wants the permit extended is highly speculative.
They want a sewer, they want to stop the pollution, and they realize that our water supply is in peril. They want a solution as quick as possible.
And then there is the threat of $900 a month for discharge permits.
Crappy, Then explain why the strong opposition, especially if re-permitting is the way the County wants to go? If it passed last time,why not later?
It sure looks like the CCRWQB not only wants A sewer, they are hell bent on getting THAT sewer.
Why?
Why torpedo the County process and the careful considerations of the TAC?
I need some "splainin" from the Water board.
Go ta thinkin'...
I wrote:
"Now that I think about it, that's probably not very good news for a bunch of other official types, people like Darrin Polhemus, Roger Briggs, and Les Bowker."
Now that I think about it... more, there are a hell of a lot of official types, other than past CSD directors, that are going to have to do some type of under-oath-'splainin'... top o' the list? My main man, Bruce Buel.
You know who else is going to have to testify, and this is interesting, Paavo Ogren, for his role as the interim GM at the District in 1999, when they were chasing the Community Plan at the same time they had a stack of evidence that showed that plan was never going to work.
He's going to have to answer questions like these:
"Were you, Mr. Ogren, familiar with a document called the Questa Study when you were GM in 1999?"
Yep.
Were you familiar with the Coastal Commission staff study that showed "pursuit of the Solution Group alternative could lead to significant delays to implementing a wastewater solution in Los Osos?"
Yep.
"Then why did you pursue the Solution Group alternative as GM of the LOCSD in 1999?"
Excellent question. Can't wait to hear the answer.
Jon Seitz (sp?) will have a lot of questions to answer, as will Roger Briggs. That's I'm smelling massive conflict of interest with the staff of the RWQCB's "strong opposition" to thw county staff's recommendation. Of course he's going to oppose it. VERY strongly. If he ends up having to answer this question under oath:
"Why, Mr. Briggs, did you allow the LOCSD to chase a project for two years, 1999 - 2000, when you had a gigantic stack of evidence on your desk that showed said project was never going to work?"
If he has to answer that question, all under-oath-like, he could lose his job.
I highly recommend that, if the BOS agrees with their brilliant staff on Tuesday -- and oh, should they ever -- the county District Attorney's office immediately launch an investigation into what happened.
If the Tri-W project is so great that it got $30 million thrown at it, then why is county staff recommending that its permit not be extended after speaking with Coastal Commission staff over the past "6-9 months."
The D.A. now needs to become crystal clear on "bait and switchy."
Mike Green wrote:
"Interesting."
Damn straight.
Tuesday's going to be awesome. That public comment period will be amazing.
WHY in the world would someone who doesn't live in our community have such an intense interest in stirring up as much dissention as you do Ron? Don't you have a life or is our sewer what keeps you breathing?
So, extending the permit could save millions on a potential project that still is in the mix. Hmmmm. And by not extending the permit, you're no doubt jacking up the price of said potential project still in the mix, which appeases the outspoken faction in the community who care much more about stopping Tri-W than they care what we homeowners in the PZ ultimately will have to pay. (Which makes sense, since many, many of them are not, well, homeowners in the PZ). Or in Santa Margerita Ron's case, much more about winning a peyote-induced dream Pulitzer Prize or showing up his object of obsession Pandora than what we homeowners in the PZ will have to pay.
The outcry over this will come from the very, very predictable people in Los Osos. And I'm a tad pissed off the county, which is doing EVERYTHING one could possibly do to stay transparent and unbiased yet still gets villified by the obstructionists at EVERY BOS, CSD, and TAC meeting, would be willing to further bend over backwards for these rogues. KEEP THIS FREAKIN' PROCESS MOVING AND BUILD THE DAMNED SEWER!!!!!!!!
Just how much money would it cost to re-permit TriW?
Considering that almost all the work has already been done, my guess is cost is not the issue here, nor time.
Then what is it?
Also, re-permitting would allow the County to amend the project, perhaps making it even cheaper in the long run. (sorry, bye bye park and wave wall and tot lot)
What does the Water Board fear?
The loss of amenities? Or the loss of the permit itself?
Maybe the County isn't the only government entity that has been talking with the Coastal Commission.
Interesting.
A,51
As I read the report its pretty evident that the county is not bending over for "some rogues"
It's a response to the Coastal Commission.
And the only "outcry" so far has been from you and Crappy.
Interesting.
It's a LOT of time to permit or even re-permit a project of this magnitude. If some project out by the cemetery is selected for instance, even with an accelerated permit process time schedule, the permit time alone would be more than 12 months. Concurrent with design? Ha! That's a real pipe dream!
How about land aquisition? Just how much time did it take to aquire Tri-W, create design and obtain all the various permits? How much delay will occur when the out of the PZ'ers drop their little lawsuit into the mix?
If we don't get rolling on the Tri-W site, I'm willing to bet it will take 4 to 5 years before another pipe is put in the ground!
To Mike Green:
What? Strong opposition to extending the permit by staff or strong opposition by the CCRWQCB against letting it expire?
Of course the CCRWQCB wants TRI-W! They are not stupid! It is the only legally permitted, designed, land purchased, etc. option we have that will stop pollution and help with water recycling. We have already spent 23 million dollars on it and we are paying for it on our taxes.
All the alternatives are "pie in the sky" at this point. No permits, no land, no plans, no blueprints, NOTHING, but GREAT speculation. How the alternatives will fare under court challenges from "Out of Town Property Owners" is also unclear.
Well it comes to this: $900 a month for a discharge permit in 2011 or leave if the county process does not proceed because a 218 vote fails, or vote YES on the assessment and let the county get whatever done quickly.
Have you ever considered that we may not be able to get any sewer built outside the district boundary, despite what Paavo says?
I have. And this is a strong possibility.
How many years of inflation will we have to endure to settle lawsuits from out of town non district residents? How many years of paying discharge permits for nothing?
How long are you willing for your home not to be able to be sold except at a fire sale price?
I will accept ANY sewer project, and at this point I am afraid that those who cannot afford it will have to consider their own pocket books. They listened to Ron, Ann, Joey, McPherson, Barrow, Owen, The greedy lawyers, etc. and made their choice in the recall. Even worse, the property owners will have to bail the district out of debt. This will come from either the property owners who can't afford the sewer selling their property at a higher price than their assessment for property taxes (grow out) or a straight assessment (imposed).
TRI-W is still a bird in the hand. The water board knows this. They do not want "pie in the sky".
I do not want 2 $900 a month discharge permits.
Mike,
It would appear that you put too much faith into what Ron's take (without even having first read the Staff Report, I should add).
The County Staff (and Jon Waddell) in particular, is arguing that it would be cleaner to just drop the earlier TriW permit. This is not "strong opposition". I've earlier given one reason for dropping the LOCSD CDP ... the County wants to drop the park which is part of the LOCSD CDP. Other stated reasons in the staff report are that the County doesn't want to take on the LOCSD liability for bulldozing ESHA at TriW if they end up choosing some other site.
Perhaps to clear things up, please remember that the staff report Ann and Ron are referring to is a SLO County staff report to the SLO County board of supervisors, not a RWQCB staff report or a CCC staff report or a TAC report.
The cost of re-permitting TriW is far lower than the cost of sticking with the earlier LOCSD CDP. First off, the possible liability is a huge issue (maybe a million). Second, as some have told us, the park was scheduled to cost some $3-5M. The cost of re-applying for a new CDP will be far less. The only loss would seem to be time lost while the CCC considers the new request. (On the other hand, even if they have a new request, I am sort of convinced, Ron will come up with yet another way of trying to torpedo TriW even if the community as a whole prefers that site because of lower costs ... but we've got to ignore Ron and focus on what is best for us, not on his whimsical wishes for our town.)
ps - Ron ... while your Oliver-Stone-ish mind may think otherwise because you naturally see everything as tied to some grand conspiracy, Don Asquith quit the TAC for heath and family related issues.
Shark, PLEASE don't take me wrong! I think Ron should be taken for exactly what he is, a noisy neighbor who has been trying to interfer with our sewer problem. He is all bark and no bite! We are the ones who will have to pay for the delays and misdirections caused by our own community members. Personally, I don't care which site is eventually chosen, but the practical side says to get on with Tri-W as the least costly and time consuming. We have a lot of delays in cost and time to overcome because of the obstructionists who do not care what this is costing our families!
Whoa, easy on the celebration, Ron?. Didn't you ever see "Alien"?
Hilarious to watch the Big 3 dipso Dreamers run around with their heads cut off as their rotten Tri-W nest burns. Proves the point just how stupid they are, these "local experts," who never saw it comin'?! Let's give the village idiots a big round of applause!
Warning, though, in Noel "The Swing of" King's note on the front of this thread. Tri-W ain't off the table at all:
"We are recommending to the Board that the extension not be requested, and that the permit be restarted, although much work would not need to be repeated (one of those playfield leveling things)."
It sounds like he's getting a new permit rolling for the same Tri-W project outside of the town. That's nothing to be grateful for, certainly nothing to celebrate. That's the Same Gravity Disaster -- the same unaffordable sludge monster -- moved up the road and out of sight.
But not out of mind. The results will be exactly the same -- thousands of residents forced out of town, forced to basically walk away from their homes, or sell them for peanuts to vulture realtors.
So who wins here, anyway?
Just you, Ron, because you don't live "here." But you're still wrong...yet AGAIN. You can't kill Tri-W. At least you haven't yet. But keep trying.
KMH
Sharkey, good analogy, better than mine for sure.
Seems like a good move by the county to me, I wonder why the Water Board is so opposed?
If their desire is to have TriW built, then lowering the costs with a stripped down plant should be an attractive choice in the survey, don't you think?
I am puzzled.
Mike Green,
As I've said before, the state water board wants Tri-W to get their $6.5 million back. If it's a different project they're going to have problems collecting the money. It's that simple.
SharkInlet, Crapkiller, and Sewertoons:
You guys have put down Orenco and Ripley and haven't mentioned today at all that they have General Electric financing -- not small potatoes!
CB, Lets see,
A stripped down TriW with a new permit
And stick it to the State for the 6.8 million.
Sounds better all the time! Go County!
Oops 6.5 million,
Mike Green,
I would bet that the county will make sure that the state gets their money back. Thank both CSD's for spending it (on what again?!)...
CB, thats why I'm puzzled.
What is the water board concerned about?
El Tiberon:
Do you think that when one considers inflation and the increased costs thereof, the inclusion of a park at TRI-W would be counter productive?
Also, when I read the Blakeslee Law closely, it seems that the county has been protected from liability by the law in its efforts to build WITHIN the district. Am I missing something or assuming something.
You seem to be far better prepared on the environmental and permitting processes than I am. What do you say and what does Richard Legros have to say? Do I have to do my own research? This old lady is getting very tired of this whole situation.
Maybe it is the heat. It was 106 in the shade here in Atascadero today.
Los Osos residents do not realize how good they have it as the meter turns. If this heat keeps up, I will expect an electrical bill of $400 this month. Water and sewer runs $120 a month, and sure to rise due to the heat.
Otherwise:
Now we have Lois Capps working hard to get us 35 mil to lessen the costs to 5000 property owners in Los Osos. Bless her! Probably the only thing that she has been able to do for the residents in her congressional district outside of making sure that Morro Bay is dredged for boat traffic. She started her efforts at the behest of the recalled board majority. Shirley Bianchi helped. Two good democrats! For our situation! I was once a Democrat!
When one looks at the impending loss of life due to bridge failure, in light of the bridge failure in Minneapolis, and the IMMEDIATE necessity of handling this problem NOW, it would only be wise for the feds to allocate funds for bridge repair NOW. What will happen to the bill that she supports? There are limited resources. If the bill passes, I expect a veto.
Do we raise taxes immediately and destroy our economy, stop the war on terrorism by leaving the middle east and let the Jews fend for themselves, and enjoy 12 dollar a gallon plus for gasoline? Or do we install a flat tax (sales tax/consumption based tax) to harvest taxes from the underground economy? There are consequences, and I have no answers.
As far as Los Osos is concerned, if you are a property owner and vote NO or do not vote, (an obstruction vote), and do not vote Yes, WE will seriously look at the value of your property, the assessed value of your property, and assume damages to MY property. Your vote is an INDIVIDUAL vote and you are responsible for your vote. You are also responsible for damages to others.
Please consider the effects of your
actions. What is in your pocket?
Ann: You better start writing about consequences. Ron also. You will be held accountable on conspiracy statutes.
This old lady is getting very tired
and her man friend is ready to put one hundred grand into the fray due to lack of good sex. I will do the same. 2 hundred thousand dollars.
He is a juris doctor, received by the Supreme court, has argued many times, lost no argument, and is really pissed off, because he understands the situation.
200 grand, and we will look for restitution. HE REALLY WANTS YOUR PROPERTY, and a piece of the fools ass. I do not totally agree. But have to go with him. He is protecting me.
So Ann and Ron: What is your position in a conspiracy suit? Have you provided "due diligence?" He feels that conspiracy is easy to be proved. It is on the blogs: PUBLIC RECORD.
He feels that you have been shouting fire in a public place without any fire. And I agree.
He wants wants what you got. I bet you both have nothing! "Worthless"
But we shall see.
We shall see. Perhaps it is the heat, and maybe we are getting very tired, but we are getting very, very pissed off at fools that want to damage us.
What is in your pocket?
What has brought the wrath of the water gods?
If it is not treasure, if it is not an affront to their impatience, then what?
Perhaps we insult their EGOS!
Woe be to us! We shall build as you decree, with wave walls and tot lots!
Even though we can only afford sticks and cardboard. Your desires we shall meet on the holy 218.
We grovel in your omnipotence!
On another note, had a great winetasting at my bar on top of my septic tank,
The "Le Vigne di San Domenico" 2004 Syrah was a winner, Great value at about 24 bucks, can only be bought at Sylvesters winery in Paso.
Mike Green (and others),
I suspect the reason the RWQCB is not happy about the County staff recommendation is that they realize that giving up an already approved permit will cost some additional time. Even if the county does re-apply, the permitting dance between the County and CCC will end up with an agreement which the CCC will approve but then someone from CCLO will raise an issue and then possibly more delay if some bonehead named Potter is still on the Coastal Commission.
As for other comments made by "Conspiracy Boy" and "keepmhonest" ... the thought comes to mind that the two might want to change names because the one who seems more oriented toward conspiracy theories in today's comments goes by a moniker which suggests truthfulness is important and the one who is focusing more on honesty goes by the conspiracy name.
Just a suggestion guys ...
On the one interesting issue Conspiracy Boy raises ... the financing situation of Orenco ... if GE loans money for a project, they will expect a market rate of return ... or, knowing Los Osos is a high-risk situation ... an above-market rate of return. I would also suggest that GE underwriting doesn't really mean that the sales team who is telling us lowball numbers is actually doing anything more than trying to sell us on their product. Do you expect that drug adds would include side-effect disclaimers if they weren't required by the FDA? Somehow I am thinking that Orenco's sales pitch here suffers from a similar problem ...
Sorry Shark, the extra time theory is weak, haven't they already signed off on the county and TAC process? That would indicate a willingness to accept some delay for the project , unless I'm wrong and the Water board demands TriW, as is ,for some other reason?
If thats the case then, if I were on the TAC I'd be really pissed because all that work would have been for pony show.
Crap sez:"Ann:
Why were you trying to delete the first comment? Because you read it?
"
Sorry, Crap, your paranoia is getting away from you. I was in a hurry to get to work, Noel King's email had just come in, rather than try to cut and paste an update, I simply deleted the original posting and plopped in the new one and left a quick comment to whoever had posted (I didn't even have time to read it) to please re-post again.
Crap, I've noted before that when you point a finger at someone, three fingers are pointing back at yourself. Interesting how, right out of the box, without knowing ANY facts or anything else, you assumed I had some nefarious purpose . . . . Hmmmmm, interesting. Also, I note, apparently whoever posted, re-posted. So, what's your problem, eh?
Crap also sez:"but I have never seen a regulating board or court heap punishment on anyone attempting to comply with the law and prevented from doing so by the action of those who would obstruct the law"
Were you not following the "trials" of The Los Osos 45? Clearly not.
Mike Green sez:"On the other hand, It can only be assumed that the RWQCB by taking a position against re-permitting that project is afraid that it wont pass muster next time around, I wonder how the SRF funds owed to the State fit into this mix?
Interesting,"
Indeed. I'd also have to add in (again) that the RWQCB has GOT to have one of the worse tin ears in history. You've got a tainted permit (see Ron above) serious concern about "thumbs on the scale" and "bait and switchy," the utter lunacy of the appallingly misguided RWQCB year-long prosecution of The Los Osos 45, a hideously wasteful, useless, expensive pointless mess, a spooked, gun-shy community too aware of hidden agendas and scuttlings behind the scenes by certain folk both here and in Sacramento, a looming 218 vote that will only pass if the community perceives that The process has been a clean one, and here comes the RWQCB in to keep that FINES!FINES!YOU'LL ALL DIE IN THE STREETS LIKE DAWGS! old bait and switchy thumb on their Tri-W scale . . . gaaaaggghhhh, have they no sense of when it's smart to shut up and sit down and get their fingers out of this pie or else they'll ruin it AGAIN??? Yikes!
Crap sez:"As far as Los Osos is concerned, if you are a property owner and vote NO or do not vote, (an obstruction vote), and do not vote Yes, WE will seriously look at the value of your property, the assessed value of your property, and assume damages to MY property. Your vote is an INDIVIDUAL vote and you are responsible for your vote. You are also responsible for damages to others."
Who is the "WE" you refer to here? Is it just me, or do I read this as some sort of threat to voters (whose votes will be public) who vote in a way that Crap disagrees with? Please tell me I'm mis-reading what you have written? Please.
Crap also sez:"Ann: You better start writing about consequences. Ron also. You will be held accountable on conspiracy statutes."
MORE threats? "conspiracy statutes?" I write a opinion column in the opinion section of a local paper and comment on a blog clearly labled opinion with a comment section filled to the brim with more opinion and now "threats" from Crap? Under some sort of uncited "consiracy statutes??????"
Then Crap adds, about her "man friend," "He feels that you have been shouting fire in a public place without any fire. And I agree."
Really, Crap? Then you need to tell "your man friend," you know, the one who " . . .is a juris doctor, received by the Supreme court, has argued many times, lost no argument, and is really pissed off, because he understands the situation." and so forth, that he and you need to go back and read my columns on The Hideous Sewer Wars. He will see me shouting all right, but each shout is headlined: "Oh, Lucy, Jooooo gottta Lotta 'Splainin' to dooooo" and IF the elected offcials, regulators and community had been paying attention and 'SPLAINED, at the time, there would have been NO TRAINWRECK.
No, Crap, I think it's time for you and "your man fiend" to come in out of the sun. That 106' Atascadero heat's gone to your brain. Quick, pour some ice water over your head. You've completely lost it.
Shark Inlet sez:"I suspect the reason the RWQCB is not happy about the County staff recommendation is that they realize that giving up an already approved permit will cost some additional time."
There is a great tragedy here and it's this: Roger Briggs apparently never understood that sometimes the fastest course isn't always a straight line; sometimes the fastest course IS backward a bit then maybe sideways. Think of the number of key points at which a pause and/or a side shuffle could have avoided this whole mess. Tin ear. Guy's got a tin ear. And here he goes again. Yikes!
As for "delay," see Ron's posting above. Guy allowed 2 years of futzing around with nary a peep, so now he's again having a cow? Nope. Tin ear and/or something else is a work here, methinks.
Whole Lotta Laughs!
Fear, community loathing and McCartyism from TownKiller -- great fodder for voting "NO" on the twisted 218:
"WE will seriously look at the value of your property, the assessed value of your property, and assume damages to MY property. Your vote is an INDIVIDUAL vote and you are responsible for your vote. You are also responsible for damages to others... Ann: You better start writing about consequences. Ron also. You will be held accountable on conspiracy statutes."
It just shows all the quality of the characters voting for the town-killing assessment. All losers in life. Rich but soulless. Biased and corrupt to their black cores. No redeeming social value.
Another example of the weak, intellectually inferior and corrupt Shark:
"I would also suggest that GE underwriting doesn't really mean that the sales team who is telling us lowball numbers is actually doing anything more than trying to sell us on their product. Do you expect that drug adds would include side-effect disclaimers if they weren't required by the FDA? Somehow I am thinking that Orenco's sales pitch here suffers from a similar problem ...
No hard figures yet to praise or condemn Orenco, but Shark has to inject "suggestions," inferences, suspicions, comparison to drug companies, and the inevitable price jealousy to ease the pain and shame of disgruntled Tri-W Troglodytes who see the savings difference between $100 million and $300 million as insignificant to the community.
What kind of human beings are these? The lowest forms of life on the planet. Truly disgusting individuals. Bottom-feeding neighbor haters. I know we have to share the earth with this vermin, but can't we just keep them as pets and walk them twice a day?
That's far better than they deserve.
Mike wrote:
"If we don't get rolling on the Tri-W site, I'm willing to bet it will take 4 to 5 years before another pipe is put in the ground!"
According to the 2004 LOCSD, to move the sewer out of town takes "2-3 years." That's from Item 3-C that I don't feel like linking to right now. And a lot of the studying has already happened so we can probably lop off a year from the 2004 LOCSD's estimate.
Anonymous commentor:
"Second, as some have told us, the park was scheduled to cost some $3-5M."
Plus another $5 -$10 million for O & M over the next decade or so, plus the $20 million for "urban compatibility" due to the park = $30-plus million for Nash-Karner's silly little park that she, when everything went south (translated: Three Blocks/SewerWatch) tried to blame on the Coastal Commission, a silly little park that is dictating the Tri-W location, and a silly little park that cost taxpayers a fortune and ripped LO Osos apart. That's what the park cost.
Mike:
"WHY in the world would someone who doesn't live in our community have such an intense interest in stirring up as much dissention as you do Ron? Don't you have a life or is our sewer what keeps you breathing?"
You know, I've answered that question a number of times both here and on my blog, and I started to answer it again, until I realized that what I was writing is a very interesting chapter in my book. So, Mike, gots to do it... you want an answer to your question? Then you're going to have to wait for my book. How's that for a tease?
By the way, the answer to that question is excellent. Very interesting.
KMH:
"It sounds like he's getting a new permit rolling for the same Tri-W project outside of the town. That's nothing to be grateful for, certainly nothing to celebrate. That's the Same Gravity Disaster -- the same unaffordable sludge monster -- moved up the road and out of sight."
Perhaps, but at least there will be rationale behind that location, unlike Tri-W, which doesn't have a shred of rationale behind its siting. None.
"So who wins here, anyway?
Just you, Ron, because you don't live "here." But you're still wrong...yet AGAIN. You can't kill Tri-W. At least you haven't yet. But keep trying."
First, I'm never wrong. I won't write something unless I have it massively sourced out using excellent sources, so, it's impossible for me to be wrong. I learned that little trick in journalism school. Second, by "here," do you mean California? Because "bait and switchy" has cost "here" somewhere in the ballpark of $100 million. So, yes, I do live "here." Third, I'm never wrong. Fourth, all of Los Osos wins because Tri-W was never going to work, and if it didn't get stopped, everyone would have discovered that fact that about a third of the way through construction, and the situation would have been about 1,000 time worse than it is today. So, by me killing Tri-W, which I did by being the ONLY reporter that got Monowitz up to speed on the "bait and switchy" lie, and then having him inform county officials about what I informed him about, I'm going to guesstimate that I saved Los Osos somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million, because you won't have a half-built sewer plant in the middle of your town that's never going to work.
You're welcome.
4CK:
"So Ann and Ron: What is your position in a conspiracy suit? Have you provided "due diligence?" He feels that conspiracy is easy to be proved. It is on the blogs: PUBLIC RECORD."
That is so rich. Now THAT's what my book needs, a good, robust freedom of speech chapter. That'd be sweet.
"... lost no argument... "
He's never argued against me.
By the way, your "man friend's" logic got me thinkin'...
You wrote:
"... received by the Supreme court..."
He wouldn't have happened to have been Gore's representation in 2000, would he? That sure would explain a lot.
Mike Green wrote:
"... had a great winetasting at my bar on top of my septic tank..."
That is so funny.
"The "Le Vigne di San Domenico" 2004 Syrah was a winner, Great value at about 24 bucks, can only be bought at Sylvesters winery in Paso."
There must be something about the '04 Syrahs. We just had a Tobin James '04 Syrah, and it was dynamite.
Ann wrote:
"Guy (Briggs) allowed 2 years of futzing around with nary a peep"
The guy allowed 2 years of futzing around with nary a peep... when he had a gigantic stack of excellent evidence sitting on his desk the entire two years that screamed at him to, "PEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!! For the love of God, PEEP!"
And the only way that's not going to come back and bite him in the ass, is if the Tri-W project moves forward. MASSIVE conflict of interests. What a joke.
As I recall, your words echo those from the other side concerning the tactics and words of the recall folks, the Schickers, Tackers, Racano's, Calhouns, Crawford, Barrows and those sweet individuals. Has the retoric come full circle? "What kind of human beings are these? The lowest forms of life on the planet. Truly disgusting individuals. Bottom-feeding neighbor haters. I know we have to share the earth with this vermin, but can't we just keep them as pets and walk them twice a day?"
These wonderful community leaders have proven themselves as totally incompetent financial managers. Then to cover their lies, they jump up and down jeering the County and State and playing cheerleaders to aggitate the true bottom feeders into yet another campaign of misdirection. They would have us believe that the County and State can't possibly build a sewer in Los Osos, that only they can somehow pull some rabbit out of the hat and magically produce a design and funding.
Well, their record has proven that they are incompetent, that their only "plan" was to delay any plan by anyone. They bankrupted the District treasury with the excuse that the past Boards really did it, it couldn't have been the way this Board threw away all the funds on lawyers to sue everyone except the President, and even that may come form these "professional" wastewater planners.
Keep cheering and jeering, we'll see what happens AFTER the 218 vote!
Ron, Please sign me up for the advanced copy of that book!
Thanks
And the Yucks Just Keep On Coming!
TownKiller laments: "Keep cheering and jeering, we'll see what happens AFTER the 218 vote!"
Happily, your view of Los Osos will be getting smaller and smaller in your rear-view mirror on your way out of town with your U-Haul full of porno, bias and bile. I don't see why you and the other TownKillers (Pandora, Sharky & Wonky Pandora, Pinky LeGross, Humpin' Hensley and daddy dingbat) should benefit from a better project you fought to steal from us with our money. There must be consequences for such treachery.
Yes, I asked: "Can't we just keep them as pets and walk them twice a day?" But you conveniently leave out the cruncher: "That's far better than they deserve." I regret my comment because I love my animals, all animals, and you are not even good enough to eat out of their bowl.
Hey, Ron, good luck with your book! I have a suggestion for saving many pages. Take all the "I's" out of your book, and your book will look a lot like the long lost sequel to your last New Times article.
You're welcome.
KMH
Just the response the community has come to expect from the "leadership" and aren't we pleased with such mature reasoning!
I just received an email(actually it came yesterday) stating that there is a special meeting being called for the TAC and it's going to be at Sea Pines so we can listen to Paavo and the PZLDF Q&A- 7:00 this Tuesday. This will be a great opportunity for anyone who has an hour or two to spare, just in case you are interested.
Maria
TO: Maria
Could you please ask the county/Paavo to tape this scheduled meeting?
It is such an important topic that the whole community is entitled to see and hear it. Can you please respond? Thank you.
What a Hoot, These L'il Buggers!
TownKiller/Mike scrawled: "Just the response the community has come to expect from the "leadership" and aren't we pleased with such mature reasoning!"
It's way past time you recognized my "leadership" abilities. "Mature reasoning" really does show through, doesn't it? It's good to see you toeing the line for a change. Though I don't hold out much hope for the rest of your cell -- Sharky, Pinky, Gordo, Pandy, Lessy, Mike1, Mike2 and Mike3.
Maybe you could share the tender experience of your conversion with them, and since you all share the very same "Agenda for the Destruction of Los Osos of, by and for the Carvers," I'm sure they will do exactly what you tell them to do!
I mean, if any one of them had ever considered thinking for themselves, had ever considered putting the greater community ahead of their MASSIVE EGOS and GET-RICH-QUICK-SCHEMES, they would have shown signs of it a long, long time ago.
KMH
KMH, You've been chatting with Mr Edwards again have you? You have a piece of the action too? Oh well, the little park will look real nice next to the low income Condo project on the Tri-W site. and it's a nice touch moving out all those trailer shanties so the new wine bar will have the view of the mud flats. Yup, ya dun good. I better let you get back to your nose candy, have a tryly wonderful load.
KMH wrote:
"I have a suggestion for saving many pages. Take all the "I's" out of your book, and your book will look a lot like the long lost sequel to your last New Times article."
That's funny.
I'd take you up on your suggestion, but if you ask me, my 16-year-and-counting involvement in this story is one of the more interesting aspects of the story.
Plus, I have saying around SewerWatch: "I put the "me" in "media."
Mike Green wrote:
"Ron, Please sign me up for the advanced copy of that book!"
You got it. And all the fine, handsome, intelligent, generous, people, with impeccable taste in journalism, like Mike, that have donated to my blog over the years will get signed copies... wink... wink.
Dear CB,
I would have thought that a taping would be between PZLDF and the County and how to share that expense.
Paavo has been here many times talking about this with different groups and I don't know why this one should be taped over any of the other opportunities that have been provided.
I supposed it never hurts to ask but I'm not clear on the urgency of taping this session. Regardless, I do urge people to come and listen for clarification of the issues surrounding a 218.
Maria
Post a Comment