Pages

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Bwa-hahah. The Tribune makes a funny.

The Tribune story following the PZLDF hearing before Superior Court Judge Barry LaBarbera ruled that the PZLDF case could go forward was headlined: Osos residents get a win in court.

Bwahahahahah. Here’s the “win.” The poor Los Osos 45 who have spent over a year of their lives struggling with the looney tune insanity of the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Mad Hatter CDO/CAO/NOV/MoveTheGoalPostsMoreTeaMoveDownWhatever Tea Party, and then struggled to raise funds from an utterly apathetic and uncaring and clueless community (all of whom are under the same gun as they but apparently don’t know it), are now given a chance to try to raise about a gazillion more dollars to go back into court to spend gazillions in attorneys fees to argue some due process issues that LaBarbara was asked to consider and settle right then and there.

That’s not a “win.” That ju$t ju$tice as u$ual.

But even more fun, was the interesting exchange from Michael Hughes, the RWQCB’s guy, who argued in his filings that OH GAWD, THESE STUPID PEOPLE DON’T NEED AN ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD. THE OFFICIAL RECORDS ARE ALL POSTED ON THE RWQCB’S WEBSITE AND ARE LIKE TOTALLY ACCESSABLE AT THE OFFICE & ETC. (not true, there’s a whole mass of documents that are in such a muddle, what with the Board constantly shifting the goal posts, ruling then unruling on this or that, that it’s doubtful if ANYBODY knows what record goes with what at this point, and until it’s all carefully sorted through there’s the very real fear on the part of the RWQCB, which was nervously cherry-picking during the hearings to make sure that only things that helped their case got in and everything else was forbidden, that something “bad” could accidentally creep into the record that would open the door to a big mess.) AND ANYWAY, WE’RE NOT SURE THESE PEOPLE CAN PAY FOR THE RECORD SO WE’RE NOT GONNA PUT THE RECORD TOGETHER UNTIL THEY PAY UP FRONT AND SINCE THEY WON’T PAY UP FRONT IF THEY DON’T EVEN HAVE A BALL PARK GUESTIMATE OF THE COST WE’RE NOT GONNA PREPARE THE RECORD SO WE’VE BEEN DRAGGING OUR FEET FOR MONTHS.

And other Waltz-Me-Around-Again-Willy stuff.

So, LaBarbera said: Why don’t you prepare an estimate as to the cost (they discussed doing all this in electronic format, which would be cheaper than a hard copy record) and in the meantime, start preparing the record, one copy to PZLDF attorneys, one to the court ,and asked for a time estimate to do that..

OH GAWD, bleated Mr. Hughes, THERE’S SO MANY DOCUMENTS TO CHECK THROUGH (Uh, Mr. Hughes, didn’t you just argue in your written court submissions that all the stuff was posted on the RWQCB web site? Just hit “copy” and there you are? What do you mean, there’s so much to sort through?) BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

Finally, LaBarbera got the Water Board’s waterboy to guestimate that they might be able to have a price estimate together in maybe two weeks but AWW GAWD it would take at least THREE MONTHS (or 90 days) to assemble the record (you know, all the stuff that’s posted on the website? The stuff that Mr. Hughes referred to when he wrote “Petitioners have had ample opportunity to review the documents comprising the administrative record in this case. Petitioners have had access to the public files at the Regional Board all along, both in hard copy and on the Regional Board’s website . . . .” so they didn’t need an administrative record since it was all right there?), which of course puts getting the administrative record well AFTER the 218 vote, which keeps the Los Osos 45 in limbo until AFTER the 218 vote, which keeps all the residents of Los Osos under the gun (since judge LaBarbera chose not to rule on any due process issues at all or offer any protection to the citizens on any of those issues) until AFTER the 218 vote, not that the two issues are related in any way shape for form, or smack of illegal electioneering, AW GAWD, perish the thought, never crossed our minds, ever.

And so it was ordered done, all of which reminded me of several wonderful scenes in The Lion in Winter, wherein Henry II has promised his mistress Alais and her lands to his son Richard, to which Queen Eleanor notes, “He’ll keep the Vexin ‘till the moon goes blue from cold and as for Richard’s wedding day, we’ll see the second coming first; the needlework alone can last for years.”

Then later, when Henry is threatening to go to the Pope for a dispensation to dump Eleanor, she notes well: “I don’t have to stop you; I have only to delay you. Every enemy you have has friends in Rome. We’ll cost you time.”

Ah, yes. Blue moons, the Second Coming, and Time. The Tribune calls that a “win in court.” Bwa-hahahahah

Well, there were also some other interesting things I learned in Judge LaBarbera’s courtroom. One was that lawyers are free to file various motions and statements in writing to a judge that are full of false information and even screwed up facts and that’s o.k., which is interesting since rulings are often made on these filings and if they’re incorrect . . . Oh, well, doesn’t matter.

And this: LaBarbera stated, as fact and statute, that the Regional Water Quality BOARD is the ONLY entity who has any power to do anything, NOT their various CEO’s. Why is that interesting? Because on several occasions during the CDO hearings, the Board members themselves stated that THEY were helpless, that decisions to issue CAO’s or any other such thing was ENTIRELY up to the Staff. That they were the ones empowered to bring action, not them.

Talk about bait and switch. Just another clear indication of the old game of Ask Your Mother, as in, I’m not the decision maker, Ask Your Mother, Nuh-Huh, no, not me, Ask Your Father, thereby keeping the accountability ball moving so citizens seeking to safeguard their rights or due process are galloped around Robin Hood’s barn until their resources are exhausted running up and down deliberately falsified corridors. And all that’s o.k. with the judge as well.

Also, since I had signed on as an “interested party,” (as a test case for the rest of the community,) it was interesting to note, if I understood correctly, that the judge ruled that there was no such thing as “interested parties,” they had no standing, which means the rest of the community has no standing in this matter either. (Except, of course, they are all at the mercy of the RWQCB’s rulings, which can be changed at whim in the Alice in Wonderland Humpty-Dumpty fashion (see above, the old Ask Your Mother ploy.) So, even though a possible future case might have direct impact on all the “interested parties,” i.e. everyone in the PZ, only the single person with a CDO bringing the case will have to shoulder the entire burden alone, because only he/she will be allowed standing at this point.

And, finally, an issue that, so far as I could tell, was (again) left in the air: Resolution 83-13 cannot be challenged until some enforcement takes place. Define enforcement? The RWQCB apparently is now claiming that they’re not “enforcing” anything, that the CDO’s aren’t (heh-heh) really enforcement since, well, o.k. they’ve been issued, but they’re sorta, kinda not being implemented, well, o.k. the requirements put on those people who got a CDO aren’t really “enforcement,” they’re just uh, suggestions? Helpful hints? Sorta? And, o.k. their property may be encumbered, or maybe not since nobody’s clear just what the hell the CDO’s mean until the RWQCB makes up some meaning, and/or until either 2011 comes along or unless the 218 fails (not that we’re electioneering, no, no, ) and no, that Notice of Violation wasn’t a Notice of Violation even though it clearly said all over it NOTICE OF VIOLATION, it wasn’t, until we wish it to be then it will be considered as such, or something else happens THAT WE ALONE GET TO DECIDE CONSTITUTES “ENFORCEMENT,” so you can’t challenge us on anything since we are the Deciders about challenging anything we’ve written or created or asserted or claimed or anything, see?

And LaBarbera didn’t want to touch that one with a ten foot pole, even though it’s at the heart of due process. But then, this is a court of law and due process has no business showing up there!

All in all, a perfect example of “justice” in this county.

And finally, in the REEEELLY BWA-HAHAHAHAH department, The Tribune also notes a little noisy tet-a-tet in the courtroom after the case was finished between CSD Board member, Joe Sparks, and PZLDF spokesperson, Gail McPherson. Joe was loudly, and inappropriately (wrong time, wrong place, totally out of context, truly weird confrontation) pressing McPherson to right then and there officially come out in favor of a 218 vote, to which she tried to reply that PZLDF hasn’t taken an official position on the 218.

A hint to Mr. Sparks. Uh, Joe, when you’re in public, with a reporter standing near by (or was that the whole point?) you might try to remember that you’re not a plain ordinary citizen now but an elected official representing your community, so you might want to pull on your Big Boy Pants and behave accordingly. Sqawking like a fishwife while literally getting in someone’s face in a very inappropriate but public place isn’t really very professional behavior. (or, again, was your point to create a bit of loudly staged and witnessed theatre that was sure to make the news?)

Ah, well, I suppose it’s too much to ask that our elected officials behave like elected officials. After all, they do represent Los Osos, so what can one say? There’s clearly something in the water here that’s caused so many people to lose their marbles. Sigh.

78 comments:

Area51 said...

Here's a gigantic bwaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahah: Ann Calhoun, CSD apologist and Julie Tacker/Lisa Schicker/Gail McPherson cheerleader, lecturing on appropriate behavior in public. Bwahahahahahahahha!!!!

ATTA BOY JOE!!! You inspire me. It's time to take this more vocally to the streets. "There's a battle outside and it's raging...." It's time to recalim Los Osos from the whack jobs, the obstructionists, the idiots. It's time to stop leaving the lies and manipulations and the misinformation unanswered. It's time to stop the unchecked ego of a hell-bent-on-revenge rogue like McPherson and call her on her efforts and desire to harm every property and home owner in the PZ. (Of which she is not). It's time to call into question the devious and incredibly, unbelievably stupid motives of the current CSD board, who make comments like this by Chuckles Cessina: "nothing has changed in the lawsuit, making it difficult to come up with a reason for backing out." How 'bout your BANKRUPT STUPID!!!!!! Can you possibly be so dumb, or do you hold the tax-paying Los Osos homeowner in such low regard?

The time has come to put up or shutup. Silence the no sewer obstructionists whose sole, twisted and incredibly selfish desire is to avoid paying for ANY sewer, consequently raining ruin upon our lifetime investments, by supporting the county and supporting the 218.

"There's a battle outside and it's raging.....it will soon shake your windows and rattle your walls...." The crazed anit-sewer obstructionists are coming full stream again Los Osos. Support the county. Support the 218. Protect your homes.

Jon-Erik G. Storm said...

The Trib thinks that was a win?

Then they don't get it. What happened is the case got delayed so that nothing substantive would occur until after the 218. In other words, their coercion will stand.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Are you telling us that the Trib was inaccurate in their characterization of Gail's comment ... that Gail essentially was saying "as a representative of PZLDF I would not be comfortable either supporting of opposing the 218 vote"? You see, the Trib made it clear that Gail wasn't willing to support a 218.

Let's re-phrase ... could you ask Gail (she sends you her press releases, you know) if she could clarify her position on a 218 vote? I would love to know that at least she isn't opposed and is willing to make it clear to the public that she isn't opposed.


On other matters ... while you suggest that the judge could have essentially ruled for PZLDF on a few issues, what was key here is that the judge didn't rule against PZLDF on the RWQCB's motion to blow PZLDF out of the water with extreme prejudice. I'll count that as a win for PZLDF becuase had it gone the other way, their suit would be over.

On your complaints about the RWQCB attorney, documents and the speed of the legal proceedings ... it would seem that one's opinion of such things always depends on what side one supports.


Ann, we trust you to let us know if Gail isn't opposed to a 218 vote ... otherwise her quote in the paper makes us think she is. It would be unfortunate if the Trib reporter didn't accurately portray her position ... but again, we are sure you will get us Gail's press release explaining how she was speaking only as a PZLDF representative and how PZLDF isn't going to take sides on this matter, either pro or con. Of course, their explanation of why they won't take sides on this issue which relates to clean water, one of the chief aims of the County process and 218 vote, would be very interesting as well.

Ron said...

I've said it before, and I'm going to say it again: I can't overemphasize how badly the Tribune has handled this story over the past seven... whoa... over the past TEN YEARS (because it was in 1997 that the Trib's satellite paper, The Sun Bulletin, ran a glowing series of reports on the Solution Group's ill-fated ponding system. Those reports lent that dead-on-arrival project badly needed publicity and credibility. That was in November of 1997... and it's been downhill ever since).

Horrible journalism. In my opinion, the Trib is THE NUMBER ONE REASON why there is a gigantic civics train wreck in Los Osos right now.

They NEVER wrote one word on the failure of the Community Plan... after publishing a favorable series of reports regarding that project three years earlier. And those reports led directly to the formation of the LOCSD in 1998.

Unforgivably bad journalism.

But to make matters so much worse, I -- little ol' SewerWatch -- penned a New Times cover story in 2000 that showed the Solution Group's dead-on-arrival plan was going down the drain, after they futilely chased it for nearly two years. One month after that story was published, the Community Plan was officially down the drain, and the Trib NEVER wrote a single word on its demise. As a lover of journalism, that just makes me sick. If they HAD followed-up the demise of the Community Plan, at all, none of us would be here right now, and Los Osos property owners would have saved somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 million.

Bill Morem, former editor of the Sun Bulletin, and long-time, first-name-basis-with Solution Group founder and number one vote-getter in the initial LOCSD Board election, Pandora Nash-Karner, wrote an editorial piece today in the Trib.

After reading it, I immediately sent Morem this e-mail:
- - -
Hello Bill,

I just read your piece, Osos sewer saga contains lots of lunacy, and in it you write:

"As it turned out, a "wave wall" hiding the plant would be its defining amenity."

That's wrong. Very, very wrong, and it is an extremely important point.

Here's the exact site plan that the LOCSD showed the Coastal Commission in 2001-02 after the "better, cheaper, faster" Oswald ponding system failed:

[I inserted this graphic here]

As you can see, included in the plan are MANY "defining" amenities, like an amphitheater, tot lot, picnic area, play fields and much more.

All of this happened more than five years ago, so I'm very surprised that, after all that time, your paper is still not clear on the situation.

You can quickly get up to speed on why Coastal Commissioner, Dave Potter, called the LOCSD "bait and switchy" in 2004, at my latest post here:

http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com

After reading your piece, I highly recommend that you read that post, and I also hope that you will print a correction to your "defining amenity" take.

You just confused Los Osos... even more.

Thanks,
Ron
- - -

In previous posts on my blog, I termed the Trib's handling of the sewer story as, "Worse than nothing."

That is so true.

It would have been MUCH better for everyone involved, including every single Californian, if the Trib had never written a word on the subject. Their horrible, misleading, inaccurate reporting has been devastating.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Ron:

Now you can see why Shirley at the last BOS's meeting, referred to the Tribune as the "T" -- it is the county's personal PR rag and nothing more. They HAVE made the problems in Los Osos worse -- for years! Yep, they've played their part.

SharkInlet:

Gail can not support the 218 vote. Her organization is non-profit. And I question Joe Sparks electioneering for the 218. I'll have to check that one out. But, to me, it's not ethical for him to do what he's done regarding his support of the 218 since he's the vice president of the CSD. I thought they weren't supposed to take a side on a vote.

Anyone know?

Area51 said...

"It would have been MUCH better for everyone involved, including every single Californian, if the Trib had never written a word on the subject. Their horrible, misleading, inaccurate reporting has been devastating."


...and the RWQCCB sucks and is against us, and the county is mean and against us, and Sam Blakeslee is the devil and against us and the Tribune is terrible and against us, and only Ron Crawford knows the truth, and I want a 218...no wait, I want a 218 that is ALSO private, and I don't want Tri-W, no wait, I don't want Tri-W AND I don't want gravity...and I want the water board to back off...no wait...I want the water board to back off AND say they'll NEVER both me again....and the SRF loan is illegal...no wait....I think I'll spend the SRF money on attorneys...and we have no money for services and we're jacking up your trash and water bills...no wait...here's some money to pay Gail McSullivan...and Joe Sparks can't say that, he's electioneering...no wait...Julie Tacker said the sewer would be at Tri-W "over my dead body"....and the sun got in my eyes and the dog ate my homework and why oh why is everybody against me.......

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

Thanks for the info about PZLDF not being able to support ... it would still be good for them to put out a press release explaining what type of non-profit they are and why this means they cannot take a stand on the vote (some non-profits can advocate on such matters, why can't PZLDF?).

It is also worth noting that Gail could make it clear that she, as an individual, supports the 218 vote or at least that she, as a citizen, doesn't oppose a "yes" on the 218 vote.

Again, the Trib reporting makes it sound as if she is opposed. If she isn't, she has been put in the unfortunate place where she needs to clarify the public impression ... an impression, by the way, which seems pretty well supported by circumstantial evidence.


As for Joe's support for the 218 vote, it doesn't seem wrong to me. After all, the LOCSD endorsed AB2701, so if you view his comments as from the CSD, they are just supporting the process the LOCSD had previously endorsed. Second, he is well within his rights as a private citizen to voice his opinion.

Gail's reluctance to say anything and Joe's willingness to speak out are in marked contrast. I won't agree with Ann that Joe ought to sit down and shut up. Perhaps his choice of time, location and words could be quibbled with, but not his desire to do the best for Los Osos.

Shark Inlet said...

Area51 ...

Kudos on the most insightful and fully comment in the last month!

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

AB 2701 was not a vote of the people. Prop 218 is.

Joe has supported and electioneered for the 218 as he sat up at the board in his position as a CSD Vice President at CSD meetings, so he hasn't just spoken as a citizen.

P.S. I wondered where CrapKiller was....and you think that was an insightful post? Wow....

Area51 said...

Nice try Conspiracy/Orenco Boy. Sorry to disappoint you, but Crapkiller I am not. And to paraphrase you, show me one thing in my last post that isn't true about you and your obstructionist friends.

Maria M. Kelly said...

I would be interested in an accurate clarification of a 218 vote being an "election". As a private citizen whose property is being affected, they can speak when and where they want to on the issue. As a director, I think Joe has a responsibility to the property owners of Los Osos to point out the potential ramifications of a failed 218 vote.

218 votes do not fall under the same expectations from the FPPC as typical "elections". So until we understand the delineation, it would be irresponsible to point the finger at Joe. I heard Director Cessena claim that there was a petition to oppose a 218 if TriW was left on the table. Is that electioneering too?

We have turned into such a nit-picky community of finger pointing and loophole searching that it makes any constructive dialog elusive.

Supervisor Gibson has tried to bring an arena for participation and instead we continue to squabble. Frankly, I support Joe and to dismiss his right to speak up and state his position would be to undermine the Democratic process. But who is really going to notice anyway, with so many voices silenced with ongoing suggestions for CERTAIN community members to "shut-up" has rendered the Democratic process in this community to a state of useless.

Instead, we have an Orwellean state of self imposed confusion based on inaccurate perceptions and "golden calves". It is a tragedy and one that I hope is mitigated with some relief from a passed 218. And I say this as a home owner in the PZ. People need to remember that right now, the 2700 CSD water customers are paying for budget overruns through un budgeted and unexpected legal actions that are not considered "assets" of the district and only unsecured "liabilities". They/we will also end up paying the higher price on the bankruptcy even if it is "pennies on the dollar".

Frustrated, you bet. Supporting the 218 - 110%. Director Sparks is the only director who I trust that actually seems concerned about the mounting liabilities and unresolved bankruptcy and what that is going to do to those of us footing the bills.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Maria,

I find it ironic how you are the one who trys to be the voice of reason. That's funny!

You and your TAC members have shown nothing but bias towards the mega sewer. That became more obvious with each TAC meeting.

More than half of the TAC team has a definite conflict of interest. That was a deliberate action by the county.

Maybe you want to vote for a blank check, but don't ask anyone else to do something so stupid. Please.

I know that it's against the law for the county to electioneer for a yes on the 218. I would only imagine it would be the same for our local elected officials.

If it's not illegal for Joe to electioneer -- it's certainly unethical. That goes for all CSD board members not just Joe. And, yes, the CSD (Chuck) should let the voters know what will happen if the 218 passes and what will happen if it fails. It's their responsibity to keep the public informed. That isn't happening.

Joe's the only member you trust regarding liabilities and unresolved bankrupty??!! That's nice Maria, because he doesn't give a damn about people and the impacts of a megasewer on them -- just make sure that it happens at all costs.

Funny, isn't it, how every single expert and professional who's weighed in on the subject says that they prefer anything to gravity! Have you ever picked up the phone to talk to any experts (rather than Gordon or Richard or now Paavo?)

You haven't been here long, but you've had enough time to think for yourself -- but you chose not to. You picked the side of the fence that is on the wrong side of moral issues. That's your choice. That's your choice to think of yourself and your family's financial gain from what a megasewer will bring to you and your friends. You choose money over people.

What about footing the bills for contracts that were $36 million over bid? Did you care about footing those bills? That's okay with you?!

Another day in Los Osos...

Sewertoons said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sewertoons said...

Ann says:
"…and then struggled to raise funds from an utterly apathetic and uncaring and clueless community (all of whom are under the same gun as they but apparently don’t know it)"

Stop dissing the community as being "clueless." The lack of funding for PZLDF is clearly because we do NOT see any value in being represented by them.

A far more sane way of approaching this is to vote YES on the 218. CDO's CAO's NOV's will all just vanish with a WWTF. We will come into compliance with the law and we will stop polluting our drinking water aquifers.

Area51 said...

"You picked the side of the fence that is on the wrong side of moral issues."


So Conspiracy Boy weighs in on "moral" issues. He wags his finger at all those who opposed the recall and voted instead for a sewer in Los Osos as "immoral."

Hmmmm.

Well Conspiracy Boy, you weak, spineless, sanctimonious twit, by all means vote no on the 218. And by all means say a prayer for me and all of us home owners with our newly appreciated homes living in our beautiful newly sewered community, on you way out of town to Bakersfiield or where ever you end up. We certainly will not miss you in our "new" communtiy you sanctimonious weasel.

4crapkiller said...

Ann:

Great rubbish, all of it! Tacker can talk, Schicker can talk, Cessena can talk, Senet can't talk because he is dumb, but Sparks can't talk. In the meantime the Tribune has been worse than no paper at all on the Los Osos sewer situation. I give you Bill Morem!

Well, I am glad the PZLDF is getting a hearing, even though it will probably go nowhere and become moot after the 218 passes.

$900 a month as opposed to $250 a month is a really good reason to vote to assess oneself.

To Conspiracy Boy: area51 is not me. However, I agree with his comment about you completely.

TCG said...

From Conspiracy Boy: "AB 2701 was not a vote of the people. Prop 218 is."

Actually, AB 2701 was a vote of the elected representatives of the people. Prop 218 will be a "majority protest" vote of PROPERTY OWNERS subject to the related property assessments.

Ms. McPherson, and the CSD Board as a group, have many property owners looking to their lead in this important issue. Ms. McPherson can, and should, give her opinion as an individual about the likely chances of a successful sewer being constructed in a timely manner, and the regulatory mandates and threats removed, if the Prop 218 passes, and if it does not.

The CSD Board should do the same, in a public CSD discussion, and should do so ASAP.

If these people are our community leaders, let's have an honest and realistic pros and cons discussion from them, and some concluding recommendations. This should include realistic information about what we can expect from them if the 218 fails.

Ann Calhoun-what say you?

steve said...

franc4 sez;
Most of you "pro Joe" folks are nothing but hypocrites.
Joe can do/say anything he wants but, let Lisa, Gail or Julie voice and opinion or make a statement and they are mocked, insulted called non-caring folks and accused of violating the Brown Act or any other things y'all can dream up. If they were non-caring or many of the other things you "pro Joers" bring up, why do you think they "stepped up to the plate " and ran for office? Financal gain? (That's a big laugh.) Revenge?..on who? Over sized egos? You are talking about the past CSD, not these dedicated people. You think your boy Joe (the mouth) is the only board member concerned with solving the bankruptcy thing. You're all just wrong...period.
Why is it so import to you all that Gail state her position or your 218 vote? Are you looking for someone to make up your uneducated minds....or what? To quote a nemesis of mine, "I'm laughing at you, not with you"

Mike said...

Well Steve, it is quite interesting that you can focus on Joe as the true mover and shaker on that bankrupt CSD. My God, is he so powerful that Gail and the CSD are that afraid of him? I'm amazed at the progress of the CSD in preparing any plan for recovery from the bankruptcy. Oh well, next moth ought to be fun when they go before the bankruptcy judge with their realistic plan. That is the plan, which like the sewer plan, will only be another round of blame and further delay. up, it's shame Joe is trying to get the Board to consider making some realistic plan beyond paying Sullivan to defend 15 folks against the RWQCB. Oh, you might notice, the State Atty General is getting on board to defend the RWQCB. Yup, better hold a lot of bake sales to pay to be in that game. I'm sending my bucks to TW, NOT to the Pizzleflops! I want to see the egos who got us in this mess to see the inside of a cozy jail cell! You see, unlike your friend Gail, I do live and pay property taxes in the PZ! Neither Gail or you don't represent me or my family!

Conspiracy Boy said...

TCG:

You say, "Actually, AB 2701 was a vote of the elected representatives of the people. Prop 218 will be a "majority protest" vote of PROPERTY OWNERS subject to the related property assessments."

And I still say that the county is not allowed to electioneer for the 218 and the CSD shouldn't either.

Are you a lawyer? I've talked to one about this, and the county can't do it. How can the CSD (Joe) do it?

Mike said...

How can Ms Wide Body continue her "electioneering"? If Tacker can open her mouth so very much and always against any sewer, then Joe certainly is free to make his position known.

As a by-product of this whole damn experiment in local government gone sour, we have seen that apparently no law enforcement will ever touch Sewerville! Remember, they don't have the time or man-power to enforce any laws in Los Osos.

Conspiracy Boy said...

To Area 51:

Boy, are you stupid.

You say, "newly appreciated homes living in our beautiful newly sewered community..."

First of all forget about your appreciated home -- that's over with!

In LA, foreclosures are up 800%. You think it's going to get better? And in SLO? And in Los Osos?

Your big fat expensive sewer isn't going to help anything. But it's going to cost you and your children big time.

Could this be the first $1,000. a month sewer? When all is said and done? Could be. The county can't say that it won't.

And what is immoral is forcing a big unnecessary sewer in the heart of town that would absolutely ruin Los Osos. What is immoral is looking after your own financial gain at the expensive of your neighbors' lives. What is immoral is trying to cleanse a town. What is immoral is the big lie that all this is based on -- and you know it's all been a big lie. Everyone knows it's all been a big lie.

P.S. Your plan to rid the town of riff-raff may just backfire. Maybe now homeowners will have to take on a tenant or two to help pay the big bill and they'll be even more cars in the driveways -- more renters -- and still no real roads. How beautiful is it going to be? You're in fantasy land.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike:

Julie shouldn't be electioneering either. Has she come out for or against "the vote?" That's what we're talking about.

That isn't a good defense for Joe anyway.

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

Some would consider exaggeration ... just to win ... immoral as well.

Whatever sewer system we get, it will be expensive. The least expensive option (in total, including other appropriate water issues ... over the long run) is the best choice.

That is why some here have advocated for TriW or against the whole "move the sewer" thing ... delay means additional costs. Face it ... according to the numbers the County presented, the least expensive it will be (including the dealing with the debt issue) will be about as expensive as TriW was going to be before the project was stopped. It could quite easily be much worse.

While the County is to blame for not sewering the community in the first place back when it could have been done quite reasonably, those who live in Los Osos are definitely guilty of stopping at least two or three well-defined sewer projects because they were "too expensive" or because they weren't right in one way or another.

Let's not do something stupid yet another time ... vote "yes" on the 218!


ps - the technological and financial questions about the sewer are not moral issues in the mind of most of us. If you want us to believe they are, you should at least tell us the basis of your moral standards ... the Bible, the Torah ... Humanist Manifesto ... what? Then explain how your belief system dictates a particular action on this complex issue. I would find that discussion quite interesting because, as a Christian who feels that we ought to do our best to look out for the weakest members of our society (so, I'm pretty liberal, sue me!), I think that any delay which raises our likely bills should only be tolerated if there is a clear benefit that makes the delay worth it.

Area51 said...

"Could this be the first $1,000. a month sewer? When all is said and done? Could be. The county can't say that it won't."

And the county can't say pigs won't fly from your butt either. And you call me stupid. God you make me laugh. (Nice moral choice, by the way, calling someone stupid).

No CP. We'll all wave and wish you luck when you board your ox and cart and squeak out of Los Osos for the nearest sewerless shanty town you can find.

I have much respect for Shark, who has the patience and good will to answer your charges with class and good sense. I wish I could do the same. But I can't. I'm so tired of people like you in this community that I do hope you all leave. There you have it. If you think of that as "cleansing," so be it. I think of it as ridding my community of selfish malefactors who care nothing of their neighbor but only their own stinking wallets as they continue to degrade our investments, our water supply, our environment.

Oh, I've got no problem with which side of the moral fence I'm on here Boy. I'm very comfortable, very comfortable indeed.

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

SharkInlet says, "Some would consider exaggeration ... just to win ... immoral as well."

I ask you then, what's the exaggeration? Can you tell us it won't be $1,000. a month after everything is said and done?

I'm not trying to win anyone. I'm asking a question.

Paavo's already stated on the record it would be $250 (with hook-up) and more with monthly service fees. Let's see, that's $275-$300 for starters. When will it end? That's with no problems. That's before other 218's on water, etc. That's before imported water (we know that's what will happen, and is planned to happen so the developers can build.)

Am I wrong Mr. Inlet?! Please tell me.

I stick with what I say.

Also, you say, "While the County is to blame for not sewering the community in the first place back when it could have been done quite reasonably..."

HOW ABOUT WHEN IT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE FREE AND PAID BY THE GOVERNMENT??

You further state:
... "those who live in Los Osos are definitely guilty of stopping at least two or three well-defined sewer projects because they were "too expensive" or because they weren't right in one way or another."

HOW ABOUT THE REGIONAL WATER BOARD STOPPING PONDING AT TRI-W?

HOW ABOUT THE STATE GIVING MONEY BEFORE AN SRF SECURE LOAN?

HOW ABOUT THE COUNTY GIVING IT TO THE CSD AND NOT DOING WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE IN 1983?

Who stopped the sewer (s)???

Give us a break, please.

I'll take my chances in court with the RWQCB instead of getting a few big fat liens on my property for a big fat system they are chosing when they can't by law!

Lies, corruption, and tricks.

NO THANKS!

P.S. Why doesn't ANYONE EVER address my concerns that the county and you all won't listen to every single expert that's weighed in on the sewer say that gravity is the worst for us?!?

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

The exaggeration was when you wrote "what is immoral is forcing a big unnecessary sewer in the heart of town that would absolutely ruin Los Osos."

You cannot say that TriW will be the site they selected. This should be especially clear after the BOS did not take over and extend the CDP and after their preliminary results suggest all the other sites would be less expensive.

The $1000/month is also an exaggeration as well, because even if we borrowed $500M at 10% interest over 30 years, the P&I plus O&M payments would still be lower than $1000/month. To suggest such a number which is based on tripling the cost and quadrupling the interest rate seems irresponsible in a reasoned discussion. If you were to provide some reasoned argument that it could be $1000/month, fine. Until then, your rhetoric is out of line.

You would surely complain if I were to write "If we vote yes on the 218 vote it could result in a sewer that costs only $50/month". Even though you cannot prove it is impossible, we all know that it is very unlikely. To use extreme examples to frighten or sway people is beneath you and belittles our whole town.

Paavo did not state it would be $250/month ... he said it could be as low as $140 and with grants and the like could get even as low as $100.


As to a few of your other comments, the RWQCB did not stop ponding at TriW. They simply said they would not support a low interest SRF loan for such a project because of a lack of scientific support for nitrate reduction from such a treatment method ... and without such a loan, that project would have been more expensive than another technology. The LOCSD made the choice to go with the low interest loan. To say that the RWQCB stopped ponding is pretty sloppy at best.


Who stopped the sewer? It was us. Are you telling us that that a County effort wasn't stopped when we voted in the LOCSD? Are you telling us that the TriW project wasn't stopped when we voted for the recall? To make that suggestion makes you look uninformed at the best and a deliberate truth-bender at the worst.


While you may be happy to take your chances in court with the RWQCB, I don't think you are in the majority. I hope you are not in the majority. The wise among us realize that voting no on the 218 is just asking for continued delay, inflation, pollution and likely CDOs.


About whether the County listens to experts about gravity versus STEP ... it seems that you've not read the TAC report where they suggest that STEP/biolac/Giacomazzi is the likely cheapest solution. You discredit yourself when you make such statements.

TCG said...

I am amazed by the people who say that the County is to blame for not sewering the community in the 80's and 90's when the cost was cheaper and there was more grant opportunities. Has everyone forgotten that the County was more than willing to build a sewer, and Supervisor Coy was very supportive, but the contrary people in this town argued against the need? Then, they voted in Bud Laurent as Supervisor, so that he could help them stall several more years, while endless studies were conducted and task forces convened to try to prove that a sewer was unnecessary.

The people in this town are to blame for the delays and, amazingly, in spite of the history lessons here, some are still doing everything that they can to stop or delay the process of building a sewer system. Am I the only one that this is so obvious to?

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

There is no use arguing with you.

When I ASKED (I repeat, when I asked) if we could be looking at a $1000 sewer, I mean in the future -- look way into the future Mr. Inlet and then tell me. When all is said and done and construction is over and imported water is here, and all the added costs are tallied up. Tell me what we'll be paying in 2014! or 2015!

What do you think the cost will be THEN?

You expose yourself by not listening to what the county is REALLY saying (Paavo & Bruce) there are just too many objections to Step by the county and the water boards.

What do you really think they'll do?

The water boards have made their feelings quite clear...didn't you read Briggs' 8/3 letter to the BOS??

Can the county assure us, sign a contract with us that it won't be over $200 a month -- $300 -- $400?!

Paavo did say the cost would be $200 at the BOS a week ago. He said for the laterals we could get a home equity loan and that would add another $50, then he said we would have services charges. That's your $275-$300. There is absolutely no guarantee of federal dollars, and NO State dollars for grants with the outstanding SRF loan out there!
Don't talk to me about grants, that's only a PR tool for the county to trick people with for a positive 218 vote. Give me a break!

P.S. I never said that the TRI-W would be selected. My money's on that they'll go with a regional operation out of town...
P.S.S. The RWQCB did say no to ponds at Tri-W. Where are YOU getting Your information?

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

Pretty clearly you are interested in an argument as opposed to a discussion. I'm not going there.

As for your claim "I never said that the TRI-W would be selected" ... what, then, did you mean when you wrote about "what is immoral is forcing a big unnecessary sewer in the heart of town that would absolutely ruin Los Osos"? The only other folks who use this rhetoric use it only to refer to TriW. Certainly the other sites even being considered by the Count are not in the heart of town.

'Splain yourself.

Mike said...

Shark, you are so right!

These folks only want to argue.

Never will the Ron's and Ann's and the Consipiracy Chump produce anything positive toward building a sewage system. Never will this CSD get over the loss of the sewer project to the County.

They have no facts, no logic, no consideration of compromise or real legal knowledge. They only run on emotions and have unfortunately been so vocal that most in the community have simply said to hell with trying any discussion. Hopefully they will vote yes on the 218 ballot to get past the delays brought on by argument for argument's sake (ie Ron Crawford), and pure emotion (CB.

Those of us in the PZ are tired of the CSD and Gail running around doing everything to discredit the County and spending what remains of District funding on fighting the RWQCB. The sooner we get the vote, the sooner some of these obstructionist can move on to save some other community from themselves! Oh yes, even with a 218 vote, these same folks will come up with 10 other reasons why any County plan won't work and folks like Ron and Ann will nit-pick everything all in hopes of continueing the delay. That's all this is about, delay, delay and delay!!!

Conspiracy Boy said...

SharkInlet:

I had been responding to Area51's comments to me:
"So Conspiracy Boy weighs in on "moral" issues. He wags his finger at all those who opposed the recall and voted instead for a sewer in Los Osos as "immoral."

And this was not a true statement. I was not pointing my finger at ALL those who opposed the recall, etc.

My point was that it was immoral to force a project without a vote, to put a project in the heart of town when 50% of the citizens opposed it and how it morphed from ponds and affordable to a big plant that could dump into the bay. And that Tri-W had no cap either and would force thousands out.

So, you see, I was not talking about the county, I referred to the old Tri-W project.

Do you understand now?!

Besides the county has the obligation to bring us the "best value" project...we'll see how this all plays out. I wish I could trust the county, but I can not after what I've seen and heard. They had plenty of time to do a proper 218 with a specific project to vote on and we would know the price tag. But we don't and won't until it's too late. It was set-up that way and it's wrong (my opinion of course!)

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike:

How come you spell exactly like CrapKiller?

It's a dead give away!

It's not about delay. It's about selecting the proper project for this day and age. This is a real expensive project, therefore we should do it right. It's just too expensive to be wrong!

We should listen to the experts that do this for a living, and pick something affordable (not just go with MWH because monies and deals have already gone down for a few.)

I suppose you think your house will be worth more too. ... right? and I suppose you don't believe me when I say foreclosures are up 800% in Los Angeles. And I suppose you think that won't happen here.

You said, "They have no facts, no logic, no consideration of compromise or real legal knowledge. .."

You are talking about yourself, not me!

Mike said...

CB... I think you are insane! Plain and simple, just a crazy loon.

I really don't give a damn who you think I am, you have offered nothing but venom and absolutely nothing except your boo hoo crying about a "mega sewer" and big pipes...and the world of conspiracy against you personally!

I certainly hope the first big pipe gets laid right in front of your house... or if some other neighborhood sludge pump is selected, I do hope the most leaky, stinky one ends up in your driveway!

So have fun in your rubber room and may your stroke be quick and merciful!

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

You wrote "
It's not about delay. It's about selecting the proper project for this day and age. This is a real expensive project, therefore we should do it right. It's just too expensive to be wrong!"


And "We should listen to the experts that do this for a living, and pick something affordable (not just go with MWH because monies and deals have already gone down for a few.)"


Pretty wise stuff.

There are only two things I would like to bring up now for your consideration.

First, additional delay means that the best project (whatever it is) will be less affordable because of inflation.

Second, the experts hired by the County as well as the Ripley folks and the group the LOCSD hired to evaluate the Ripley study all agreed (even if there is some bias) that out of town and STEP are preferable.

This county seems to be aiming for a project much like what you say you want yet you say you remain doubtful. The real problem I see here is that our sewer costs will be 5-10 times more than the sewer costs of other communities in the area. Some would say this means the project is not affordable. Well, no project will be affordable if by affordable we mean $80/month or less.

We still ought to do the right project ... but let's not reject what the County intends on doing by voting "no" on the 218 unless the alternative to the County project is well though out and clearly preferable in terms of cost or quality.

This is why I suggest finding out whether the LOCSD can promise us they'll have something better than the County ... and even if they say "yes, we've got something at $100/month that is out of town and ready to go" (for example) we ought to only go with the LOCSD if we're convinced they've got their ducks more in a row than the County does.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike:

Wow, another thing you have in common with CrapKiller -- you wish people strokes. Nice -- just like CrapKiller! ie "may your stroke be quick and merciful!

Another dead give-away!

Sewertoons said...

Shark, you are way too nice. The CSD couldn't find its arse with two hands. The only ducks it will line up will be dead! (Except for poor Joe, the only one who knows what is going on! Bless you Joe for hanging in there! Your presence is appreciated more than you know.)

Seriously, the CSD couldn't figure out what Bleskey was up to and Orenco is a lot smarter than that - we would wind up owning a poorly maintained system in 25 -30 years after we pay them back, then we will be stuck paying to get it repaired. No income from it either during all that time, plus who knows what the rates and charges would be. Paavo himself said that these companies come in and bid and build low, then make up their losses on the rates.

Sorry, I normally agree with you completely, but it is useless to reason with a drunk-type personality such as CB. You do show a lot of compassion which is admirable. I'm just fed up with CB - who is clearly stuck and can never learn anything new. He/she appears to really not want a sewer at all or is mentally impared.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:" I won't agree with Ann that Joe ought to sit down and shut up. Perhaps his choice of time, location and words could be quibbled with, but not his desire to do the best for Los Osos."


God, this is getting so tiresome: AGAIN, Inlet fails to read and understand what my point was. I did not say Joe should sit down and shut up. the point was, as an elected offcial, he SHOULD remember his position and act accordingly. That little tet-a-tet was wildly inapprorpiate both to time and place and tone of voice and body language and everything. Jeesh, Joe. Start watching Mr. Gibson when he's out in in public. You don't see him quarreling with citizens or getting up in their faces sqwaking about some issue, DEMANDING they make statements about this or that. Naw. He must have studied up from the Big Book Of Miss Manners Manners For Elected Officials or some such. I'd suggest Joe do the same. And if he has anger management issues, well, better go get some help with that. If not, what you'll be seeing here is more Oh Good Let's Publicly Shoot Ourselves In The Foot Some More. Does anyone want more of that? Sigh.

Maria sez:"As a private citizen whose property is being affected, they can speak when and where they want to on the issue. As a director, I think Joe has a responsibility to the property owners of Los Osos to point out the potential ramifications of a failed 218 vote."

Joe DID point out "potential remifications" in his Viewpoint, which was printed in the Tribune & the Bay News and posted on this blogsite. As a Director, he has a bully pulpit that may not be available to ordinary citizens.

Elected officials are always in a curious state of limbo. They are private citizens, free to say anything they wish when they're speaking for themselves. Their opinions carry no legal weight, though their elected office gives them extraordinary access to a variety of places and microphones denied to mere mortals. But it is only the majority VOTE of the Board as a whole that carries any legal weight.

HOWEVER, as a Board member, they represent the whole community, which in Los Osos, means they represent pro & con Whatevers, so it behooves them to remember that when they're speaking as citizens. And, as representatives of the whole citizenry, it also behooves them to try to act like Caesar's Wife when in public, not only above suspicios but appearing to be above suspicion. In other words, Professional.

tcg sez:"The CSD Board should do the same, in a public CSD discussion, and should do so ASAP.

If these people are our community leaders, let's have an honest and realistic pros and cons discussion from them, and some concluding recommendations. This should include realistic information about what we can expect from them if the 218 fails.

Ann Calhoun-what say you? "

When the BOS and county finish the assessment paperwork, hold their town hall meetings to 'splain it all, then absolutely, the CSD needs to also have a discussion and outline contingencies. Personally, I think the 218 will pass (as I noted in a previous blog entry, so far the county's batting three for three (cheapER, out of town, 218 vote) BUT, there's a sufficient number of Sewer Jihadis on all sides whose sticky fingers are busy trying to sabotage or derail the County's PROCESS. So, this community needs to have a pro/con discussion as to what options are available should that happen.

Area51 said...

I'm more than leery to see the CSD engage in a "pro/con" discussion, at a scheduled meeting, on Channel 20, paid for with public money. Simply because I'm certain they will ultimately not support the 218, and will once again lie about some pie in the sky plan they can do for less than $100.00 per month, etc etc etc. I can see the Al Barrow slide show in my mind already.

Nope, I just don't trust these people. And why should I? Their track record speaks for itself. The less we hear from these miscreants the better.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Don't presume I didn't get your point. I was just taking your over-the-top comments and pushing them half a step further to show how silly they were.

I also don't remember you criticizing Lisa for her past petulant fits, let alone Julie. Both have been at least as bad as you tell us that Joe was, yet nary a peep from you.

You ought not take Joe to task for the very same thing you refuse to criticize others for.


Your willingness to defend Al's intimidation of an office assistant as just political Mau-mauing is interesting to compare to your suggestion that Joe's willingness to push a de-facto LOCSD board adviser and wanna-be kingmaker into making a public statement is curious. Joe was right to press Gail. Gail's unwillingness to publicly support (as a private citizen) the 218 vote is troublesome at best. As someone who wants to be a public mover-and-shaker in Los Osos, she should make clear her opinion.

And if her opinion isn't pro-218, she owes it to this community to explain why she opposes the County process.


Joe is certainly not the most polished individual ... which is one reason people trust him. Politicians who are too smooth are typically the ones who will stab you in the back while giving you a kiss. With Joe you know what he thinks and you know he's put quite a bit of thought into his opinions ... which is more than I can say for many who feel quite comfortable commenting on all-things-sewer.


I trust that because you didn't bring up Gail at all, she hasn't yet let you know that she supports the County position. Hopefully you will again try to contact her and ask her to clarify her position. Again, until she does so, many will sadly think she is opposed to the County process because of her past comments ... like the one to Paavo where she said essentially "so far you've done what you've said you would do ... hopefully you will continue that ... (but I doubt it)".

Apologies to Gail if I've misunderstood your intentions or if my words sound unfair ... but please realize that you are a lightening-rod in our community, much like Richard, Julie and Al. A clarification would help us resolve the issue. I trust you will resolve the situation in a timely way.

Mike said...

Some folks still seem to think that our CSD has any say over the Sewer Project. How about those same folks explaining just how the District will be resolving the Bankruptcy? There is no sewer in this CSD's present or future, but there is a very large debt and no means of paying.

Doesn't it seen rather foolish to even consider what a broke and failed local government might think about how a major County public works project may be put together?

These current "community leaders" will in all probablity, not even be living in Los Osos, when or if, the completed waste water system is turned over to a CSD, if a CSD still exists. Chuck, Lisa, Julie and what's-his-name do not need to be thinking sewer, they need to be thinking about how to pay for the HUGE Bankruptcy which THEY caused! Joe Sparks is the only one on the Board trying to address the only real legal concern in front of this District!!!!! Her has been too nice and needs to kick the table over and demand some action toward resolving the BANKRUPTCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Sewertoons (Lynette):

You say, "I'm just fed up with CB - who is clearly stuck and can never learn anything new. He/she appears to really not want a sewer at all or is mentally impared."

You are the one who can't learn anything new. New is NOT an out-dated gravity system (that you and your friend Joe is pushing WITH the county for.) Expert after expert says so.

So, tell me, what "new" thing do you want me to learn?

Why can't you get it? Why can't you get that the sewer you promote has an endless price tag?

Step is better (no matter the company) it's safer, healthier for the environment and less expensive for construction and O & M. It has fewer employees and if we hire an build/design/finance company we won't have to have liens on our houses.

Why do you continue to be in love with gravity when it's the worse option?

Ron said...

tcg wrote:

"... Supervisor Coy was very supportive, but the contrary people in this town argued against the need? Then, they voted in Bud Laurent as Supervisor, so that he could help them stall several more years, while endless studies were conducted and task forces convened to try to prove that a sewer was unnecessary. "

Wanna see something interesting? I recently e-mailed Bud this question (among others):

"Was Pandora Nash-Karner your campaign manager in 1990 (I believe that was the year you were elected to the BOS). If she wasn't, did she play a role in your campaign(s)? If so, what?

... and he replied:

"YES, MY FIRST CAMPAIGN WAS IN 1990, AND I TOOK OFFICE IN JANUARY, 1991. PANDORA SERVED AS THE VOLUNTEER COORDINATOR OF CAMPAIGN MATERIALS..."

And Area 51 wrote:

"It's time to recalim Los Osos from the whack jobs, the obstructionists, the idiots. It's time to stop leaving the lies and manipulations and the misinformation unanswered."

See? That's why I'm so confused on who the "obstructionists" and "whack jobs" are?

TCG is absolutely right, that 1990 election DID stall everything for several years, just long enough for Nash-Karner's Solution Group to form in 1997 and stall everything several more years, and yet she and her ilk are the ones running around labeling everyone that's not on their side as "obstructionists." Totally unfair.

Looking back, that 1990 election was THE MOST important sewer election ever. If Coy wins that, none of us would be here right now, and he would have won that election if it wasn't for Nash-Karner's over-the-top campaign in Los Osos on how the county's project was going to be "ruinously expensive." Which means, clearly, people like Nash-Karner, and Hensley and Gustafson and Semonsen, et al... are the obstructionists, aren't they? I mean, they're the ones that obstructed everything for 12 years, before they went to the "bait and switchy" card, and that obstructed everything for another five-years-and-counting. Yet, it's people like Schicker and Tacker, that didn't even arrive on the sewer scene until the early 2000s and simply wanted to undo a gigantic "bait and switchy" mess, that get tagged with the "obstructionist" label by the same people that obstructed a sewer in Los Osos for 17 years... what in the hell is that?

Behavior based marketing at its dullest.

How 'bout that Laurent quote, huh? Wow. Nash-Karner was working her behavior-based marketing in Los Osos political circles waaaaay back in 1990, and it's been downhill ever $ince.

I mean it, THE story in Los Osos is Nash-Karner's saturation marketing techniques in the town over the past 17 years. The sewer story is just a by-product of that.

I wrote about her marketing techniques in Los Osos here.

So interesting.

Mike said...

Ron, Are you avoiding the previous questions and comments or now trying to shift/misdirect as usual?

You have omitted the fact that the maker of the 'bait and switchy'comment, commissioner Potter, VOTED YES TO ISSUE THE CDP after CC staff explained to him the park situation.

How about Mr.Crawford actually doing a piece of investigative journalism on the the "...whole "we have a plan", "ready to go" and "$100/month" promises of the recall candidates"????????????

Ron continues to sink his teeth into ONE comment, made by ONE commissioner, who (as you pointed out) subsequently voted to issue the CDP.

Out of the thousands of "official" comments made on a complex project that passed EVERY legal challenge it faced prior to its approval - this is the comment he focuses on because it conveniently feeds his "Pandora is the Devil" obsession every time he uses it.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Ron:

Our government failed Los Osos.

When the feds would have paid the sewer, it wasn't done by the county. All the federal help ended in '84. Right?

Ever since, the county, the RWQCB and Pandora have worked to try to figure out a way to have Los Osos pay. This included the county putting liens on every PZ home in the (early) 90's (and without legal notice to the homeowners that their property was going to be liened!)

.... ah, they want us to trust the county...

Pandora and her marketing smarts have dragged Los Osos down to where it is right now. Plain and simple. Her hands have been in everything. Her hands are far from clean.

Has anyone noticed she's the only one with a street light at her home?...

During the time of the Recall, she rallied her supporters and told them to blame the current CSD for the entire mess and to label them "no sewer" obstructionists. Look at the blog today, it's still being harped on by CrapKiller/Area51/Mike. Same for the Tribune blog...

It's that theory that if you say the lie often enough, people will start to believe it.

Interesting...

4crapkiller said...

To Conspiricy Boy:

I have never wished a stroke on anyone. I am not Mike. I am not area51. I am the killer of YOUR crap and unfounded allegations.

By the way, what has GE Finantial offered as an interest rate to Orenco, 11%? Your possibility of earning anything from these people seems very slim, unless you are being paid now. $5000 a week would be in order for an artist that can blow smoke out his arse. Poof on!

Conspiracy Boy said...

CrapKiller,

You say, "YOUR crap and unfounded allegations"

...Why don't you tell me what you're referring to when you say "unfounded allegations?" Why don't you be specific?!

Mike said...

CB... I'm NOT CrapKiller or anyone you know and I really do wish your impending stroke is swift. I would hate to have to pay any medical assistance to support you any longer than I have to!

Everything that has dribbled out your mouth or keyboard is merely allegations, baseless misconceptions, yet you seem to thrive on only what your fantacy world shows you. You really are an ass with no knowledge, only paranoia! Sweet dreams!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike,

then why are you answering for CrapKiller?! (if you're not CrapKiller) --

I asked for my specific unfounded allegations?

I'll wait (and can't wait to hear them.)

4crapkiller said...

To Conspiracy boy:

Mike does not have to answer for me. Morons, like you, who cannot understand all sides of a problem are obvious.

Lets start with financing for Orenco. The rest your conspiricy allegations are just foolish drivel based upon total ignorance. I just want to know what possible options the bunch of idiots on the LOCSD board may be looking at. (Joe excepted).

I need to make up MY mind if it is worthwhile to keep the LOCSD. In the meantime, if WE are not able to have the bankruptcy accepted, just add 42 million on to property owners bills. Orenco? Forget about it! Who in their right mind wants to dig up their yard for one of these septic tanks, rewire for the alarm system, undergo pumping, and then there is filter change.

I like the concept of "flush it and forget it". Take your issues to the BOS if you disagree.

As I have said before, I do not care where the sewer plant is, or what kind of system the plant uses. My concern is water, and the prevention of Los Osos from becoming a slum. I have an investment in excess of 1 million dollars in this community, and a responsibility to the renters who rent from me.

I think you owe yourself to Orenco.

The only person I know who would want this is Al Barrow, who is not even a property owner. However, he IS to be commended for his research on step/steg. The only problem is that he constantly steps on his own dick: (pun). (A little feminine humor for you).

I would suggest that you join a circus and let people watch the smoke from your arse.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"Joe was right to press Gail. Gail's unwillingness to publicly support (as a private citizen) the 218 vote is troublesome at best."


Let me get this straight. You think it's right that an elected offcial is acting properly when they get inches from the face of a private citizen in a public place and DEMAND they answer certain questions RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NOW, HUH, HUH, WHY DON'T YOU ANSWER HUH?

Are you joking? Sparks was totally out of line. I mean, can you imagine Mr. Gibson pulling that stunt? And as for your claim that I excused Al Barrow's behavior. Once again, Inlet, you have demonstrated you simply don't understand anything I say at all.

Inlet also sez:"Again, until she does so, many will sadly think she is opposed to the County process because of her past comments ... like the one to Paavo where she said essentially "so far you've done what you've said you would do ... hopefully you will continue that ... (but I doubt it)".

Apologies to Gail if I've misunderstood your intentions or if my words sound unfair ... but please realize that you are a lightening-rod in our community, much like Richard, Julie and Al. A clarification would help us resolve the issue. I trust you will resolve the situation in a timely way."

Here you go again, twisting Gail's words and meaning. Even more interesting, you write that"many will sadly think she is opposed to the County process because of her past comments ... " No, Inlet, YOU want people to think she's opposed to whatever and so PRESUME that and then present that AS IF IT WERE A FACT when it isn't.

This is so typical of your approach to this whole sewer issue, and indicative of why things are in such a muddle: Presumptions masquarading as fact, totally incorrect "interpretations" [yours] pretending to be ["sadly" sigh} true, twisted statements muddled into a mess presented as correct & etc.

Inlet sez:"I trust that because you didn't bring up Gail at all, she hasn't yet let you know that she supports the County position. Hopefully you will again try to contact her and ask her to clarify her position."

When and if PZLDF issues a press release on the Assessment vote and sends me a copy, I'll be happy to post it here then you can mis-read and mischaracterize what's written all you like.

Mike said...

Why would YOU expect Mr.Sparks to be such "civilized" saint just because he is a Board member of the sewerless LOCSD?

Why didn't you climb up on your sanctimonious soapbox and take Liza and Julie to task when they were creating the disruptions to the business meetings of the CSD? Where were you when that ass with a megahone was assailing the citizens of the community? Why was it acceptable to allow Alan Martyn and Kieth to attack and verbally abuse?

Sorry to have to stick a pin in your dream that Los Osos should blindly accept your view of how it is perfectly correct to yell, scream, and punch those who used to think we were doing the right things within the community to provide and protect our water with a waste collection and treatment system. No Ann, we are damn tired of listening, because "you have a right to speak your mind". Well Ann and all you who have obstructed the efforts to build a sewer and continue now to attempt to block the County process, we've had enough and the gloves are off. We laud Joe Sparks, we are 100% with him and will go nose to nose from now on! If you don't like the County process and have already closed your mind about the 218 ballot, then get out of town!!!

We will not let you continue to delay any sewer!!!

4crapkiller said...

Churdogs sez to Sharkey:


"This is so typical of your approach to this whole sewer issue, and indicative of why things are in such a muddle: Presumptions masquarading as fact, totally incorrect "interpretations" [yours] pretending to be ["sadly" sigh} true, twisted statements muddled into a mess presented as correct & etc."

Ann, you are losing your mind! This is total transferance! You are talking about YOURSELF!

Starting to feel a little guilty about what YOUR obstruction has done to this community? No mind, only ten people read what you write on this blog, as the Bay News just rots in driveways as litter.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike/CrapKiller:

You are the obstructionist.

Joe is the county's, the RWQCB's, and Pandora's stooge.

The recalled CSD obstructed a sewer because they did EVERYTHING WRONG.

If they would have done things right we would have a sewer. If the county would have done things right we would have had a sewer.

I'm getting real tired of your promoting Pandora's marketing scheme that this CSD caused all the problems.

They had a plan with Ripley, they paid Ripley, Ripley did his job -- but, oh, no the county and Pandora and the RWQCB couldn't have that! They had to snatch the project away (with LAFCO & Blakeslee's help.)

They snatched it away so they could build the big gravity system. They snatched it away to keep MWH in the picture. They snatched it away because the state wanted their money back.

Crapkiller/Mike/Area51 you have it all backwards. The bankruptcy was intended and created and planned by Pandora, the county and the RWQCB. You've seen the email exchanges.

The county has put up road blocks against step. TAC has put up road blocks against step. You put up road blocks against step.

Now you want to try to convince some poor fools that the county will consider step -- not a chance.

Paavo's PR skills may be as good as Pandora's but I don't think it will work this time.

Conspiracy Boy said...

CrapKiller:

P.S. You have no experts or real facts on your side, so you have to resort to calling names, throwing temper fits, lying, everything but the truth. You wouldn't know the truth if you tripped over it!

4crapkiller said...

To CB:

With 20/20 hindsight how can you write this RUBBISH? Get on to your career in the circus: "The mindless person who blows smoke out his arse!" $5.00 a ticket! Watch the smoke ring (O) that stands for Orenco.

I say "Flush it and forget it!"

Mike said...

CB... Excellent logic, enjoy the Mega Sewer and the Big Pipes 28 ft deep across the front of your yard. We'll see if Pandora will do the dedication ceremony from your driveway. It would be nice if you would do a little landscaping and haul way some of the trash in you side yard.

Remember, today is one day closer to a real sewer and your stroke!

Shark Inlet said...

Jeeze Ann,

Take a chill pill or something.


Gail is a public figure. She's put herself out there as such in many ways at many times. As such, it is the right of citizens to ask her such questions as Joe did.

I am not asking for PZLDF to come up with a press release here but for Gail to tell us where she stands. If she were a lawyer or paid PR flack for PZLDF I would expect her to hide her opinion and represent only that of PZLDF. Others ... especially others who have a history of trying to influence the community ... have a moral obligation to be open and honest.

If you disagree, that is fine, but I see all those trying to influence the public debate as having this obligation. It seems dishonest at best to try to get people to vote no on a 218 vote via subtle means if you aren't willing to come out and say it in public.

And I am not presuming anything about Gail's point of view. Again, you try to misread and mischaracterize what I say. I almost wonder whether you've signed up for a course at the Ron and Pandora school of behavior based marketing because you continually read stuff into what I've written that is no where close to what I said. Perhaps if you would ask for a clarification rather than assume the worst of me, discussions in Los Osos would go far more smoothly. Your approach is (to quote an often wise woman) "so typical of your approach to this whole sewer issue, and indicative of why things are in such a muddle".


Lastly, back to Joe. As I've said before, you might not like Joe's time and place and even his style ... and I would agree (but I would also be far less harsh with him than you were, after all, you have never taken Lisa or Julie to task for their outbursts while in office). Even so, he was 100% correct to press Gail to state her opinion.

I would appreciate it if you would also press her for her opinion. My reason? Unless she tells the public her honest point of view on this issue it will be natural for most folks to assume she's opposed to the County plan. Maybe you don't see her words as showing a mistrust of the County but there are many who do. I would love Gail to just come out and tell us we are mistaken if we have this impression. She has the opportunity. Again, that she has not yet done so suggests even more that she opposes the County. Presumably she will let us know if this natural and reasonable conclusion is incorrect.

I don't want people to think she's opposed to the County. I want people to think she supports the County. I think everyone should support the 218 vote.

Ann, will you vote to support the County during the 218 vote? If not, please let us know why not. To me it seems that the reason to vote yes are pretty obvious.

Shark Inlet said...

Conspiracy Boy,

I agree that had the recall board done things right, we might have a sewer under construction by now.

That the SWRCB worked with them to form the "compromise" makes me think that the SWRCB was open to creative solutions. It is unfortunate that the LOCSD chose not to take them up on their offer.

The key to both of these issues is that the LOCSD really needed a 218 vote right off the bat to fund whatever their next move was going to be. They needed some cash to study, design, permit and build a plant. The only money the had was owned by the state and was only for the purpose of building TriW. When they chose not to continue that process, they should have returned the money and asked us to borrow more so that they could pursue their "out of town", "ready to go" "less than $100/month" plan. Had we voted yes on that 218 it would have indicated we, as a community, supported their ideals. (Presumably they should have also told us ... when they were running ... that they would come-a-beggin for cash right after they were elected.)


Where you are wrong, CB, is when you discuss Ripley. By the time they hired Ripley their fate was already sealed. They were already out of money. By March of 2006, their earlier poor choices had already doomed this board and our community to failure.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Mike/CrapKiller:

Where's the Rubbish? You said, "you write this RUBBISH"

Let's hear the rubbish! You can't tell me.

You talk about 28 feet pipes when that's what the TAC had in the pro-con. I never said ALL pipes would be that deep. Boy, oh, boy, Crap's Crazy!

Is that it? You can't do better than that?

At least you admit you'll flush and forget -- I mean, flush ALL YOUR MONEY DOWN THE TOILET AND THEN FORGET ABOUT IT! ... now that is crazy!

4crapkiller said...

conspiracy boy:

Tell you problems to the county. Expect not to be heard. They only listen to intelligent people, not used car salesmen working for Orenco.

Conspiracy Boy said...

CrapKiller:

If you were intelligent, you wouldn't support a big fat out-dated sewer.

The county wants us, just in the PZ, to pay so that the developers can finally build and the realtors can finally cash in.

Maybe that's intelligent for some of the corrupted people like you, but not for the average homeowner that will be taxed right out of their home.

Step is best, the PZ is wrong. Why not sewer the whole place if the Water Board doesn't want septics? How intelligent are they?! NOT!!!

Why just some homes, if the septics are polluting, why wouldn't they want them all gone?

Can you answer?

Conspiracy Boy said...

CrapKiller:

P.S. You can't answer to what you said was "rubbish" so you just throw out some more hate.

Again, all you have is lies (and hate), so you can't address your very own accusations that you've made against me.

What have I said that is rubbish? Since you can't and won't answer my comments, I must be 100% correct.

Churadogs said...

Mike sez:"Well Ann and all you who have obstructed the efforts to build a sewer and continue now to attempt to block the County process, we've had enough and the gloves are off. We laud Joe Sparks, we are 100% with him and will go nose to nose from now on! If you don't like the County process and have already closed your mind about the 218 ballot, then get out of town!!!

We will not let you continue to delay any sewer!!!"

Yet another "commentor" who didn't and doesn't bother to read what I've written. I suggest you go back and read my columns, starting YEARS ago, and if you're too lazy to do that, I suggest you scroll up a few postings ago and read what I've written. Instead, you make a totally incorrect judgement -- as if it were true -- then start railing. If you want to know why things ended up in such a mess here, I suggest you go look in the mirror.

Crap sez:"Starting to feel a little guilty about what YOUR obstruction has done to this community? No mind, only ten people read what you write on this blog, as the Bay News just rots in driveways as litter.

9:15 AM, August 26, 2007"

Once again, you haven't been reading what I've written, haven't been paying attention to my points. You're making up stuff and claiming it's real. (Interesting aside: I am being assailed by some folks who haven't bothered reading what I've actually written as being some sort of highly influential personage who's single-handedly responsible for this train wreck while at the same time it's noted that only 10 people read my column. So, which is it? Can't be both.)

Inlet sez:"Perhaps if you would ask for a clarification rather than assume the worst of me, discussions in Los Osos would go far more smoothly. Your approach is (to quote an often wise woman) "so typical of your approach to this whole sewer issue, and indicative of why things are in such a muddle"."

Then Inlet also sez:"Again, that she has not yet done so suggests even more that she opposes the County. Presumably she will let us know if this natural and reasonable conclusion is incorrect."

Now, what were you saing about assuming the worst? Why would you assume Gail opposes the county, why would her not commenting on 218 at this point "suggest" to you she opposed 218; perhaps she's waiting to READ the thing, which at this point, hasn't been written or made public yet (BOS meeting on it tomorrow) while expressing umbrage that I assume you have some sort of impairment when reading what I've written since your intrepretation of it is so often so off the mark?

Also, why do you want everyone to declare whether they're for or against whatever it is you're for and against? I can't say I support or don't support the 218 because it hasn't even been written yet. One group is already saying vote No and the other group is already saying vote Yes on something they haven't even read yet. How smart is that? Wouldn't it make more sense to wait to see just what the 218 assessment entails before taking sides and beginning to campaign for or against?

Inlet sez:"Lastly, back to Joe. As I've said before, you might not like Joe's time and place and even his style ... and I would agree (but I would also be far less harsh with him than you were, after all, you have never taken Lisa or Julie to task for their outbursts while in office). Even so, he was 100% correct to press Gail to state her opinion."

Apparently you forgot to read the column I did on Julie? Or the blog entries on Al mau-mauing the Blakeslee office and landing in the Tribune? Joe was free to ask Gail anything he wished, but it was HOW it was being asked that caused the problem. If Joe has anger management issues, he needs to deal with that. If he simply doesn't understand the unique role he should maintain as an elected official, then he needs to do some research into proper conduct that comes with the job of being an elected official.

Inlet sez:"I agree that had the recall board done things right, we might have a sewer under construction by now.

That the SWRCB worked with them to form the "compromise" makes me think that the SWRCB was open to creative solutions. It is unfortunate that the LOCSD chose not to take them up on their offer."

The real question (likely never to be known unless the breach of contract lawsuit moves ahead) is this: Just who in Sacramento, Los Osos and at the RWQCB wanted that compromise to fail? THAT's the really interesting question. I have absolutely no doubt that without some hidden agenda at work (secret e-mails? a few tet-a-tet phone calls? a wink, a nudge?) that project could have been put back on track and we'd have ended up with a gravity collection, (already designed and being dug,) a Biolac/oxidation ditch type system out of town and if the State had insisted, a quickly held 218. What's missing from this history is a form of "Who Killed J.R?" so to speak. Who pulled the plug on the SRF loan thereby triggering the breach of contract, Who put the poison pills in the bonding proposals, who was working behind the scenes to scuttle the compromise? Who was working to make that compromise actually happen. None of those questions will get asked unless under oath with serious perjury penalties hanging overhead.

Until and unless those questions are answered and truthfully answered, this community has to live with the possibility that just as Pandora emailed Briggs to "fine the CSD out of existence," (before the CSD had even had a chance to meet as a Board) there may well have been folks working behind the scenes to scuttle this compromise. (If the recalled three were willing to gamble gazillions of dollars of homeowners money by pounding it into the ground weeks before a recall, in a kind of Medean rage, then I have to wonder just who was also prepared to do what other Medean things? The answer to those questions is yet another critical turning point for this community, wherein a failure of cool heads and/or hidden agendas working behind the scenes, kept that train heading for the cliff.)

Richard LeGros said...

Hi Ann,

Based hpon the speculation you have posted in your last blog (in which you opine about the causes of this and that) I am sure you will support the State's fiscal and performance audit.

You will be pleased to know that with the State adopting their 2007-2008 budget last week that the Joint Legislative Audit Committee's budget , including funds to perform the LOCSD audit, were approved. A realistic date for the audit to begin would be early 2008.

I hope you support this audit for it will answer all your questions about what transpired here in Los Osos over the last 4 or 5 years.

Regards, Richard LeGros

PS: FYI: G Hensley has been appointed to the Creditor's Committee by the bankruptcy court administrator.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

It seems that sometimes you write like a reporter of facts and sometime you write like a commentator. Both are good, but it would be really helpful for us if you would differentiate between those two roles.

Just so that we understand what happened with Joe and Gail and what you're writing about what happened with Joe and Gail (because clearly you claim that many of us are confused about what happened and what you've written about what happened) ... I would like to ask you a few questions like a reporter might. I hope you will answer them so that we could understand the story more clearly.

1. Were you present when Joe and Gail had their "incident"? If not, where did you get the information about the incident? Was it just from the Trib?

2. Have you contacted either Joe or Gail (two people who were there) for their story? Have either contacted you about the event? What did they say?



From what you write about me "assuming the worst" about Gail when I write that a reasonable person would think she was opposed to the 218 vote based on the Trib story and based on her past statements ...

You have a good point about waiting until the actual 218 vote wording is determined before supporting or opposing. (Although it must be said that it is likely there will be nothing that isn't already known ... so when someone comments at this stage they are essentially saying that they supporting the idea of the County doing the project.) Okay, I trust then that you'll let us know where you stand and where Gail stands after the final wording is revealed.



About your "criticism" of Julie and Al ... you are right. You did criticize them (however gently in the case of Julie). However, you haven't criticized Lisa for any of her public outbursts ... especially the one during the CSD meeting when she was sitting as president. Maybe you missed that meeting.


About who "wanted that compromise to fail" ... I don't think that anyone wanted it to fail. I think the SWRCB wanted to get some security for their unsecured loan ... so they required a 218 vote before they would sign off on the plan. The LOCSD was the group that refused that requirement and didn't come back with a counter-offer. One could portray this as the SWRCB requiring too much from the LOCSD or the LOCSD not having the willingness or ability to compromise. No matter ... we are where we are today and these are not the questions that are most important right now.

Steve said...

LeGros said... "PS: FYI: G Hensley has been appointed to the Creditor's Committee by the bankruptcy court administrator."

Richard, did Gordon agree not to share confidential information received from the committee by signing the confidentiality agreement?

Sharky said... "you haven't criticized Lisa for any of her public outbursts ... especially the one during the CSD meeting when she was sitting as president. Maybe you missed that meeting."

I missed that meeting... do you know what date that meeting was held? Do you happen to know about what time?

Ron said...

4CK wrote:

"No mind, only ten people read what you write on this blog"

I always love that take from anonymous commentors. They leave a version of it on my blog all the time.

The... "You're a hack and no one reads you, that's why I show up at your blog all the time and post comments several times a day" ...take.

The Extreme Tracking stats for Ann's blog says she averages 4,297 unique visitors a month.

Nice job, Ann. Aren't blogs great?

Rich wrote:

"I hope you support this audit for it will answer all your questions about what transpired here in Los Osos over the last 4 or 5 years."

Sweet.

Will it answer the question on why the SRF loan was funding millions of dollars of decorative items in the Tri-W project when that loan's own policy clearly states: "Ineligible (for SRF funding): decorative items"?

The fine folks out in Mariposa would love to know the answer to that question, as with the rest of California, because that question cost us all a fortune, and created a huge, expensive ditch in the middle of beautiful ol' Los Osos.

Christopher said...

Steve,

I don't remember the date or time of the meeting. Lisa's outburst, however, was in response to a comment made by Bob Crizer.

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
4crapkiller said...

To Ron:

Thanks for the information! Very helpful. You definitely are good for something other than your opinions. Why do you not post your statistics for your blog here? I am glad Ann gave you the key to hers.

I ASSUMED that because of the lack of many commentators on this blog (same old bunch) that it was not being read by many. Perhaps a false assumption. However, the statistics submitted , when one looks at them, would seem to show that many hits might be accidental. Especially google hits. Especially notable is that there are some in Sacramento who are watching carefully.

The last time you put any significent statistics on your blog was the property owner survey as to the "park amenities" for a sewer site. I noticed how you cherry picked multiple questions when there were other questions and answers that disputed your findings. Please correct me if I am wrong. I CANNOT miss details which you feel important to make your case (you blow them out of proportion), however when you leave out details that would deny your position without full discussion and analysis it makes it very hard to accept your conclusions. This really makes no difference now but surely has hurt your credability (for me) in the past. Especially when you base so much of your arguements upon your cherry picked answers.

While there is some value to raw statistics, it is only statistical analysis that makes them worthwhile. Ego or bias does not count.

Conspiracy Boy said...

Richard:

You said, "But rest assured....Gordon will keep an eye on the bankruptcy proceedings to protect the property owners as much as possible...."

Is this the same Gordon that worked with you and Pandora to write to Roger Briggs asking the RWQCB to fine this very same community out of existence???!!

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Richard LeGros said...

CB,

Gee, you must be referring to a different Gordon or I, for neither of us have ever asked the RWQCB to fine Los Osos "out of existence".

In fact, every time I mention this idea of yours to those folks that were actual participants in the 'October Compromise', they all say that you must be referring to a different process because none your allegations occurred. The October Compromise failed because the LOCSD and the SWRCB could not agree. Simple as that.

Regards, Richard LeGros

Mike Green said...

Well, well, look at this. I go for a nice cross country ride on a motorcycle and Los Osos goes to hell in a handbasket!
Seriously, I am dismayed by the lack of judicial involvement (but not surprised) Of course CB is as clueless as humanly possible on how this destroys his theory of voting no on the 218 and taking his chances with the water board and the courts, talk about lack of comprehension!
HELOO! read the article you dummy, the courts will not help us!
Anyway the ride has been spectacular, I'm in Arkansas now, along the way I always try to read the local papers, Nowhere have I found (yet) any story one half a wierd as ours.
Don't blow the place up till I get home!

Conspiracy Boy said...

Richard:

You mean Pandora asked (us to be fined out of existence) all by herself?!? You want me to believe you weren't at her side?... and that Gordon wasn't either? And that Jerry Gregory wasn't at her side either?

How unethical was that anyway; for her to write to Roger Briggs like she did (same goes for Roger emailing her.) Incredible!

Investigation needed into this.

Besides that, your last comment about the "compromise" was not something I brought up at all! You must be confused Richard. You must have gotten mixed up. Where did I talk about the compromise?! What the heck ARE you talking about?

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"1. Were you present when Joe and Gail had their "incident"? If not, where did you get the information about the incident? Was it just from the Trib?

2. Have you contacted either Joe or Gail (two people who were there) for their story? Have either contacted you about the event? What did they say?"

Like Sona Patel, I was standing 3 feet away watching and listening to this ridiculous kerfluffle. I later got an email from Joe, which was a private correspondence. I replied to him, also privately.

Inlet sez:"You did criticize them (however gently in the case of Julie). However, you haven't criticized Lisa for any of her public outbursts ... especially the one during the CSD meeting when she was sitting as president. Maybe you missed that meeting."

Characterizing the column I wrote on Julie as "gentle" really supports my contention that you simply don't comprehend what I write. There is no way that column could be considered "gentle." As for the CSD meeting, I likely wasn't at the meeting since I don't recall some big stupid kerfluffle. If it happened at 1 a.m. I for sure wasn't there.

Richard sez:"You will be pleased to know that with the State adopting their 2007-2008 budget last week that the Joint Legislative Audit Committee's budget , including funds to perform the LOCSD audit, were approved. A realistic date for the audit to begin would be early 2008.

I hope you support this audit for it will answer all your questions about what transpired here in Los Osos over the last 4 or 5 years."

Hooray. We also need a Grand Jury Investigation since what they look at are generally Governmental Systems Failures and this whole train wreck was nothing if not a HUGE governmental system failure.

Ron Sez:The Extreme Tracking stats for Ann's blog says she averages 4,297 unique visitors a month."

Holy Cow. That's interesting. It becomes especially interesting considering that only a minute handful of the same people add comments repeatedly. Then complain that I'm a hack and a liar and a moron and nobody reads what I've written then go on to call each other idiots and morons and engage in other sorts of verbal neener-neener sophomoric "anal leakage"
nonsense. sigh.