Calhouns Can(n)ons

Friday, October 26, 2007

Calhoun’s Can(n)ons, Bay News, Tolosa Press, San Luis Obispo, CA for Oct 26, 07

Bye-Bye Big Lie

Predicting anything Sewerish in Los Osos is a foolishly dangerous occupation. The Hideous Sewer Wars have go on for so long that they have turned into a Saga to rival the endless, arcane and unreadable Beowolf (soon to be a major motion picture), and have had so many soap-opera, cliff-hanging, breathless changes of fortune that the Saga has now become Beowolf Meets Star Wars, Part 37.

And since the copy deadline for this column is a week before the paper’s publication date, as I write this, I do not know how the Proposition 218 vote will go, nor do I know what the numbers will be when the ballots are opened on October 24th.

But here’s what I do know: The time for the Big Lie is over.

For years, the Big Lie has portrayed Los Osos as a community of Anti-Sewer Obstructionists, urine-swilling Moonbeam McSwines opposed to doing anything to protect their groundwater, willfully cocking a snook at regulators, stupidly recalcitrant and thus worthy of the harshest kind of judgment and punishment.

When citizens questioned the viability, cost and placement of the Tri-W project, they were vilified as Anti-Sewer Obstructionists. When a technical task force presented their concerns to the State Water Board in Sacramento, the Board was told, Pay no attention to anything those folks have to say, they’re Anti-Sewer Obstructionists. Present evidence of “bait and switchy” to the Coastal Commission that should have required a closer look? Nonsense, closer looks are not required when dealing with Anti-Sewer Obstructionists. When several pre-recall CSD members pleaded with the State Revolving Fund NOT to add on gazillions more in unsecured SRF loans shortly before a recall election, the message to Sacramento was simple: Don’t listen to those Anti-Sewer Obstructionists.

Even after the recall, before the new CSD Board was even certified, the word went out to the regulators to “fine the CSD out of existence,” and why not? Clearly they were all Anti Sewer Obstructionists! The Blakeslee Compromise? You can’t compromise with Anti-Sewer Obstructionists. Single out and drag 45 hapless citizens through a Regional Water Quality Control Board CDO Mad Hatter Tea Party And Torquemada Auto de Fe Kangaroo Court and thereby ruin their lives for nearly two years? That’s the only thing you can do with Anti-Sewer Obstructionists!

And so it went. The Big Lie was whispered from Los Osos to Sacramento and all around the county. If anyone raised any valid questions or concerns, they were decried as obstructionists. It was an effective lie designed to silence debate, cut off any questions and even shut off critical thought itself. Is it any wonder then that so many government agencies that should have kept this sewer train from the cliffs, thereby preventing the totally unnecessary train wreck that nearly destroyed this town, shrugged instead and turned away? After all, why should responsible agencies listen to anti-sewer obstructionist crazies?

Now, however, the Big Lie’s reign is over, killed off by the County Process, starting with the TAC’s preliminary fine screening report. And if my guess is correct, the Prop. 218 vote will likely show that the majority of homeowners (you know, all those Anti-Sewer Obstructionists?) signed and returned their ballots scant weeks after receiving them, all voting Yes on moving this project in the right direction -- this time away from the cliff.

That likely will be the good news. However, this is Los Osos, so it’s possible that there will be some deus ex machina demented ju-jitsu Grendels popping up to scare us silly before this Saga comes to a close, so vigilance on the part of this community – and a good dose of tranquilizers – will still be a good idea. In short, BREATHE. And keep your eyes open.

POSTSCRIPT: According to the Tribune, nearly 70 percent of the ballots were returned, (about 10% more than the original mini-assessment vote a few years ago) and of those, 79.6 percent voted Yes, and 20.3 percent against.

Like I said, The Era Of The Big Lie is over . . . for now. But, unlike last time, this community better not fall asleep again. Eyes open, stay involved, speak up, keep watch. Otherwise, we could see deja vu all over again.

35 comments:

Ron said...: Ann wrote:

"Like I said, The Era Of The Big Lie is over . . . for now. But, unlike last time, this community better not fall asleep again. Eyes open, stay involved, speak up, keep watch. Otherwise, we could see deja vu all over again."

I don't see deja vu happening again. (Take that, Yogi!)

Here's why:

1) You and I have blogs, and we know how to use them.

2) Behavior-based marketing only works when it is aimed at marks that don't know they are being behavior-based marketed, and a significant amount of Los Osos, these days, knows when they are being behavior-based marketed to. That's huge.

For example, if the county were to all of sudden start saying things like, "We've identified a 'strongly held community value' for a sewer plant that also doubles as a 'centrally located recreational asset,' so we're going to toss in an amphitheater, dog park, and tot lot -- even though doing so will add an additional $30 - $50 million to the project -- and then we're going to jam the whole mess in the middle of town so you guys can easily get to it."

If the county were to try that these days, it wouldn't work.

"Anti-Sewer Obstructionists" -- that is classic behavior-based marketing. I've witnessed that tactic for almost two decades now -- manfacture some type of label/slogan ("better, cheaper, faster", "move forward, save the dream", etc, etc., ad nauseam), and then get a small group of followers to repeat it over, and over, and over again, everywhere, and then, after a relatively short period of time, that label/slogan begins to stick, especially with regulators.

I've watched that happen in Los Osos so many times, it's sickening, since 1991, when Nash-Karner saturated Los Osos with, "Take a stand, make a difference." That was Bud Laurent's campaign slogan that year, and Nash-Karner was in charge of his publicity. Laurent was a "no" vote for the county's project -- for 8 years -- and Coy, the person that Laurent defeated in that 1991 election -- with a heaping amount of help from Nash-Karner's "behavior-based marketing" saturation techniques -- was a "yes" vote for the county's project.

That was all in 1991.

"Now, however, the Big Lie’s reign is over, killed off by the County Process..."

... and Calhoun’s Can(n)ons, and SewerWatch.; 9:13 AM, October 26, 2007
Realistic1 said...: Ron,

Please. You and Ann have done nothing but vomit mindless rhetoric for two years. You wrote one article for the New Times six years ago, and you still behave as if you won the Pulitzer Prize. Get over yourself.

The property owners of Los Osos have made it clear who's in charge now. Not the CSD, not you, not Ann. Shut the hell up already.; 9:26 AM, October 26, 2007
Shark Inlet said...: Ron,

It seems that you and Ann both missed my excellent, on point, comments a few days ago.

Let me reprint them for you now ...

--------------------

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

I feel like it is you who doesn't get the point here.

I am not asking you to do my homework for me. I gave you a homework assignment ... to research some of the financial implications of stopping the sewer. You neglected to even attempt the assignment. I asked you to research whether there really was a reasonable plan that would cost us only $100/month as the recall candidates promised. You didn't bother.

You complain that people are asleep at the wheel. Ann, you are asleep at the wheel. When I tried to prod you to wake up to some very real aspects of the sewer debate, you sleepily mumbled something about my conclusions being based on speculation and so weren't worth further consideration. Had you simply taken the time to do even a bit of research on the question of cost, you would have realized that I was right, as usual.

Nope, I don't pretend that the Solutions Group didn't screw some things up and that many felt that TriW was a poor choice of locations and that many want various changes including sustainability ... but to have those sorts of discussions without including a discussion of the costs of making changes is where you are pretending the hip bone is not connected to the thigh bone. To tell us that stopping TriW was inevitable is simply silly ... it was only because the recall candidates unwisely and short-sightedly promised us something they could not deliver, a $100/month solution, that the recall passed. Had they told us the truth, that they didn't have any plan at all and that anything they did come up with would cost at least $200-250/month they would have lost overwhelmingly.

Here's my question for you, Ann ... do you consider entirely ignoring costs and blowing off any discussion of costs as being asleep at the wheel?

I would suggest that it is and that when Ron (for example) advocates for a recall while asleep at the wheel, he's contributing to another train wreck.

That being said, do you consider the recall a success? Has the benefit of the likelihood of another location for the WWTF been worth the cost of our loss of the project, increased debts, additional pollution and likely increased costs? Surely by now you've got to have an opinion on whether where we're at now is better or worse than were we were two years ago!

10:48 AM, October 25, 2007

--------------------------

The reason that I am repeating myself is that I've already answered your claim that your blog is helping our community.

Sure, you flesh out the historical details and sure you have a good take from time to time, but once you start talking about what is the best step to take next, you completely ignore the cost component of the discussion ... sloppy thinking often produces poor results.

Nope, there have been at least two big lies in Los Osos sewer history.

One that you and Ann seem to write about a lot ... but the other neither of you have ever even mentioned ... the campaign promises during the recall campaign.

As I've proved in my excellent, on point, crystal clear comments (and you know I'm never wrong) ... the only reason the recall passed was because of the lies told by the recall candidates (and Lisa and Julie and Gail and Joey and Linde and ...) when we were promised that there was a plan, that it would only cost us $100/month, that we would save money, that we wouldn't lose the SRF, that the RWQCB wouldn't fine us.

Why haven't you ever ever ever written about that campaign promise?; 12:17 PM, October 26, 2007
Billy Dunne said...: So what you're saying Santa Margarita Ron, is that by providing the public with an article like, say, "The County is Jeopardizing a Successful Sewer Assessment Vote by Keeping the Illegal and "Divisive" Tri-W project on the Table, Documents Show," you helped pull the "No" vote up to, um, 20%?

Wow...nicely done.

There's sooooo much fun, fun stuff to be said about Ann and Ron today, but instead, I think I'll just say congratulations Los Osos. You've shown that the face of Los Osos at CSD and BOS meetings was just that, a face. And an ugly one at that. The true heart, body and soul of Los Osos came out in the 218 vote. Thank you.; 12:18 PM, October 26, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Interesting how different the vote goes when the property owners are asked to assess themselves and when the renters and non-pz'ers are asked to chime in. When we get to the survey part of the process, it will be interesting to see how that breaks down, too (the results will be published). I truly hope that a campaign of lies won't be spread about one technology over another - there are bad and good to both - the question to ask is what can you live with?

Interesting too how "viability and placement" became the issues when it was clear that the cost of Tri-W was so high due to no competitive bidding. And wasn't that higher cost helped along by threats to contractors and the swirl of lawsuits poisoning the community air?

As to the obstructionist label given to those at the 11th hour in Sacramento, maybe they got that label because where were they in aiding the process back in 2002? Where was the huge portion of the community up in arms following the process and protesting - asleep? - or more likely, OK with the process? Wasn't Julie - at the forefront of this, a well-known "No Sewer" advocate? Just how many really had a strong opinion about Tri-W prior to the lies on cost of a plant out of town? Just how many people led the recall? Not many when you really look. We are all paying for those results in the form of $250+ a year on our property taxes - for what? For a design that won't be used out of town and a property that has been made out to be the mouth of hell should a sewer be placed on it.

Let's hope all of this won't happen again.; 1:17 PM, October 26, 2007
Unknown said...: Ron:

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN.

So why don't you shut the hell up.; 3:22 PM, October 26, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Message to Lisa - and you did ask at the CSD meeting October 4:

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!!!!!!!; 3:35 PM, October 26, 2007
Realistic1 said...: Shark: You asked Ron "Why haven't you ever ever ever written about that campaign promise?"

If Ron has the courage to actually answer you I predict he will say that whatever the post-recall board did (or lied about) was justified, as long as it killed Tri-W. Costs and consequences be damned. Neither he nor Ann have a dog in the hunt, so why should they care how much it costs property owners?

It is, and always has been (for Ron anyway) about blaming Pandora.; 4:39 PM, October 26, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Actually it was discovered on this blog some time ago that Ann at least, does have property in the PZ!; 6:30 PM, October 26, 2007
Conspiracy Boy said...: To All the Dreamers,

Congratulations to you! You won! You pulled it off -- good job! You sold the big hoax. You wanted it so bad and you got it!

Unfortunately, we lost the opportunity for a green, sustainable, affordable project (I'll bet on that one!)

Maybe some will come to learn the real truth, but it doesn't matter now. The big sewer will finally cover up all the illegal actions of the RWQCB and the County.

But the big plan could very well backfire: more tenants in each apartment (with even more cars in the driveway) -- more crime in Los Osos, in order for people to pay the bills, businesses closing, lots of empty house rentals, who knows what will happen. Time will tell.

Pandora realized long,long ago that Los Osos was full of, shall I say, "not too bright" people and knew she could have it all, and she will. Jeff Edwards will too. Many will get rich. Good for them.

It will be interesting to see how the realtors hold up though, or if Jeff gets all his building projects before any lot owners will ever get to build.

SharkInlet says: "... do you consider the recall a success? Has the benefit of the likelihood of another location for the WWTF been worth the cost of our loss of the project, increased debts, additional pollution and likely increased costs?..." and blah blah blah.

This same spin over and over makes me want to puke. Maybe we won't have to hear the same old lines over and over. Now, that's a positive!

No more spin and lies -- very refreshing.

There's no way that the SWRCB would give another dime to ANY CSD because they wanted a 218 at the compromise. End of story. The documents are there and you've seen them.

You know the pollution (nitrates) are not from septics. It was all a big lie. Just like the lie that Sam Blakeslee wrote to start the legislation -- All 5,000 septics were polluting (when no septic or leach field was ever tested.) Just like the lie that the sewer was mandated. Just like the lie Gordon used that we were polluting to get Federal funds. Just like the lie of drawing this line in the sand to only force some out of town. Just like the lie that Iraq had nukes. Fear and lies work so well in a place full of uneducated people. I guess it's the same every place now -- dumbing down America. Maybe it's just plain greed.

Oh, well, we'll see who can afford to stay when the bills hit at about $600 a month. It's going to be interesting anyway.

...at least it's over!; 10:40 PM, October 26, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Hey cb,

If your dire predictions don't turn out to be true, are you going to be happy for us or bummed that you got it wrong? Or will you just spin something good to look bad to justify your position. Just wondering…

What are you doing right now to help the community? Maybe some positive action on water saving or helping disadvantaged people with some tasks too hard for them - or donating to the fund to help the poor when the bills do come would help you to get the bitter taste out of your mouth.

And no, we don't know the pollution isn't coming from septics. We're just troubled by those nasty leftover chemicals from drugs and body care products that are in our upper aquifer right now. Guess the "magic sand" didn't know what to do with those.; 12:00 AM, October 27, 2007
Churadogs said...: Inlet sez:"To tell us that stopping TriW was inevitable is simply silly ... it was only because the recall candidates unwisely and short-sightedly promised us something they could not deliver, a $100/month solution, that the recall passed. Had they told us the truth, that they didn't have any plan at all and that anything they did come up with would cost at least $200-250/month they would have lost overwhelmingly."

Stopping TriW wasn't inevitable, (had the recalled CSD-Three NOT voted to start pounding homeowners' millions of dollars into the ground and had they set the recall date a few weeks earlier, I am positive the recall and Measure B would have failed); so, no not inevitable, BUT the hip-bone, thigh-bone connections and wrong turns and wrong decisions at so many critical crossroads made the Tri-W wreck both unnecessary and and pointlessly catastrophic.

As for "no plan," uh, could somebody tell me, somebody who was in the room with Darrin Polhemus and Sam Blakeslee, just what those folks were looking at and the numbers they were running when they met to negotiate a compromise that wasn't a compromise, heh-heh? And somebody, please tell me the numbers they were running. Darrin, to my knowledge, is one of the head SWB guys and knows his sewers and knows his numbers. If the CSD had no plan and no numbers, that compromise that wasn't a compromise-heh-heh meeting would have lasted 10 minutes. It didn't, it went on for days. So,please 'splain to me, Inlet, what those folks were discussing, since you think they had no plan and no numbers. The weather?

and, once again, here's what I don't get: Tri W was (incorrectly) pegged at $205 a month. (energy costs would send that amount up in short order and the additional components would have added on, what? another $20 mil or so, so the costs really weren't $205.) Ripley's project was pegged at $194 a month, the Misc county TAC cost guestimates vary from the $197 - $250 ++. What, then, about Tri W makes it "cheaper" than what's now being proposed and what may eventually make it down the pike?

Kari sez:"

Ron:

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN.

So why don't you shut the hell up."

Doncha LOVE people who log onto a comment section of an opinion blog to enjoy exercizing THEIR "free speech" and the first thing out of their mouths is to demand that OTHERS "shut the hell up." Ah, yes, free speech for ME, but NOT for Thee, eh?

Sewertoons sez:"Where was the huge portion of the community up in arms following the process and protesting - asleep? - or more likely, OK with the process? Wasn't Julie - at the forefront of this, a well-known "No Sewer" advocate? Just how many really had a strong opinion about Tri-W prior to the lies on cost of a plant out of town? "

Long before the recall, both Julie and Lisa were elected on a platform that said Tri W was too expensive, badly sited project, etc, that there were better projects. The LOTTF raised many questions about the Tri-W, raised the issue at the Coastal Commission, so all of these concerns were publicly out in the community. Where were the people? Good question. Was there a mechanism for their "vote?" Besides showing up at CSD meetings, which you've seen, rarely happens. Long ago I suggested that the CSD needed to hold even an advisory vote, a Chinese Menu vote, best guestimates of Out of Town, best guestimates of Tri-W, hold a vote or a clean (no push polling) professional survey (like the one the county's supposed to do, ya want a sewer plant in town at Y or a sewer palnt out of town at X cost) then proceed accordingly. Didn't happen. Too bad.

Inlet sez:"Nope, there have been at least two big lies in Los Osos sewer history."

Oh, dear me, Two? Oh, gosh, not even close.

Inlet also sez:"I am not asking you to do my homework for me. I gave you a homework assignment ... to research some of the financial implications of stopping the sewer. You neglected to even attempt the assignment. I asked you to research whether there really was a reasonable plan that would cost us only $100/month as the recall candidates promised. You didn't bother."

Sorry, Inlet, not my job. That's YOUR job. That's the Community's job. What I have repeatedly written about over the years are Questions that the community needs to answer. That and to PAY ATTENTION! And make THEIR -- not my -- voice heard. After all, the decisions all rest with the community, not me. That's something a whole lot of you guys keep forgetting.; 7:09 AM, October 27, 2007
Unknown said...: Ann, so much of your "Opinions" are based on conjecture with no knowledge of what was actually discussed. Further you formed your "Opinions" with no technical knowledge of integrated infrastructure from laws and regulations to design and site selection to financing and permitting to the final stage of construction. The CSD was never capable of any of these steps. They may have been suited to overseeing operations, but never the development of the infrastructure. The prior Boards did an admiral job of pulling what they eventually did. They were no less passionate than the current Board. In reality, the County should have been responsible 30 years ago, but it seemed to be dragging out longer than some in our community wanted. They made many mistakes and resulting compromises to get an acceptible waste water treatment system to where it was 2 years ago.

As this sewer issue grew, it took on another life and attracted another group of citizens with yet another idea, however they turned their passion into an uncompromising agenda and boxed in their thinking to the point that they bankrupted the District. As this saga continued to drag out, the State grew wary that any progress would ever be made to install the infrastructure to protect the water. None of us like being stopped by the cop hired to enforce laws designed to protect us from ourselves. The Los Osos waste water treatment was at a virtual standstill.

It took the State Legistlature stepping in and reinforcing the need to move off deadcenter, hence the County and the 218 Process. The responsibility of the local CSD has now been redefined to exclude involvement in the selection and design of the sewer. The property owners have voted to finance the project. The CSD is to eventually take on the daily operation once the County demonstrates the completion. The makeup of the CSD will have to change if it is to survive. The faces on the Board will change over time, but the direction should be toward financial management of a services operation, not a particularly attractive job, but an important one.

The County will produce the infrastructure and really does not need any direction from the CSD. Like it or not, the CSD has lost credibility as being capable of completing any plan. They were too much into exploring all the "holistic" systems being hawked across the country, but they never could unify behind any one plan. The previous Boards did at least, until the recall, produce a single plan and were well underway. If that cycle of determining a single plan and then being overturned to run another direction and that inturn being tossed out in favor of another plan, were to continue, Los Osos would never halt the underground pollution.

Los Osos failed in so many ways, certainly not from lack of passion, but probably because of that disjointed passion... Now it's time to leave the County with it's engineering and financial expertise to run and complete the task. It's time that the CSD started resolving the financial disaster they are in.

Let's hope they will turn their passion into recognizing that they were elected to be the financial managers of the daily operations of community services; fire, water and waste. If they have an overwelming need to be evironmental activists, they should step aside and pursue those activities, but the present CSD needs to put their noses to the accounting grinding stone to resolve a major bankruptcy, it's not going to go away without a serious effort....; 8:40 AM, October 27, 2007
Shark Inlet said...: Ann,

Three things.

You, me and Mike Green all agree that had the recall election been scheduled for before groundbreaking on TriW, the recall would likely have failed. I think that Richard has even hinted as much. Let's call that a fact.

Second, the stuff discussed during the "negotiations" was not a plan. A plan to get the community to a $100/month sewer was something that was never provided. Hell, the recall candidates didn't even have a plan for how they were going to legally obtain the funding necessary to study their sewer plan. Even so, let's look more carefully at the numbers Polhemus and Rob Miller were talking about. The Trib reported the results of the "compromise" as did Lisa during a LOCSD board meeting. The results? They could not save any money by switching to STEP over gravity, so no savings there. Furthermore, the additional delay would render any savings on the plant moot due to inflation. The financial upshot from the Trib (and I verified their calculations) was that if everything went as the negotiations suggested was the most optimistic path, we would save about $10/month on O&M but we would be spending some $40-$70 extra per month to get that $10/month savings.

Nope, there was never a well thought out and vetted plan that would save us $100/month. That promise was an untruth, no matter how you might try to spin it.

Third, on the question of who had the homework assignment. I did my calculations and presented the results to you. I did my work. If you were really interested in discussing all aspects of these issues, you would have taken seriously what I was saying. Instead you blew me off. That is your choice. However, please don't tell us that you weren't asleep at the wheel in that regard. You were warned time and time again that it would be costly to attempt to moved the sewer out of town yet you dismissed those warnings as speculation not worthy to discuss.

Nope, you've paid attention to only some of the Questions that the community needs to answer. You've made choices to completely ignore others. As you noted in your discussion of Patel's Trib article after the 218 vote was released, a selective choice to present only some of the facts may very well be an attempt to bias the discussion.

On that last tangent, what the hell was Julie thinking with her quote in the Trib today? It sounded more like a threat than a statement of reality. She sounded like a poor loser and as if she's personally willing to press for her point of view with all available force even if the community has clearly indicated that they're behind the County at this stage. She could probably use a good press secretary to smooth over such statements.; 9:15 AM, October 27, 2007
Mike Green said...: Do de do de do. just reading the local papers hmnnn.. WHAT THE !

A certain Cinthea T Coleman in the letters to the Sun Bulleitin advocates Selling TriW to the Chumash!!!

Now, that's MY idea and you all know it.
Of course she could just be really smart too.

I am going to miss my wine bar, oh well.; 10:06 AM, October 27, 2007
Hmmmm said...: Shark, don't feed into Los Osos speculation!!!!!

'You, me and Mike Green all agree that had the recall election been scheduled for before groundbreaking on TriW, the recall would likely have failed. I think that Richard has even hinted as much. Let's call that a fact.'

Nope, let's not call that a fact. wild speculation. look at real facts.

Fact: Ron Crawford stated the County was jeopardizing the 218 vote.

Fact: The 218 vote passed overwhelmingly.

Fact: Ann rags on the Tribune for bias, spin, and content.

Fact: Ann has written biased columns (by her own definition) on the subject for years, and the Bay News biased reports with misstated facts..; 10:39 AM, October 27, 2007
Unknown said...: ...a Chumash Casino...????
...just got my vote...!!!!; 10:41 AM, October 27, 2007
Billy Dunne said...: A day after Ann Calhoun writes this:

"For years, the Big Lie has portrayed Los Osos as a community of Anti-Sewer Obstructionists, urine-swilling Moonbeam McSwines opposed to doing anything to protect their groundwater, willfully cocking a snook at regulators, stupidly recalcitrant and thus worthy of the harshest kind of judgment and punishment."

Her girl Julie Tacker says this:

“We know how to derail a project, and we will derail it again” if needed.""

My oh my. Does anybody wonder why 8 out of 10 Los Osos PZ homeowners voted to put an end to this crap.

Thank you for your poisonous swill, Julie. And thank you, Ann, for drinking it each and every day. I think you've both done more to unite this community than you will ever know.

Eight out of 10 homeowners.; 11:44 AM, October 27, 2007
Ron said...: Realistic1 wrote:

"Ron... Shut the hell up already."

and Kari wrote:

"Ron... why don't you shut the hell up."

I've said this before, I don't get the hate. It makes no sense to me.

I like to think that I was instrumental in stopping the embarrassing, unviable Tri-W project, and, by doing so, I helped save people like Kari and Realistic, assuming they live in the PZ, thousands upon thousands of dollars, AND you won't have an industrial sewer plant in the middle of your beautiful coastal town for no other reason than the initial CSD wanted to cover up the fact that the project that got them elected and the CSD formed in the first place, had failed.

So, like I said, I don't get the hate. Instead of telling me to "shut up," you guys should be buying me beer... good beer.

So... ummmmm... you're welcome??? I guess??

I read a comment under a Trib story on 218 vote where the commentor wrote something like, "I'd venture to say that if Tri-W had been killed before the 218 vote, the "yes" vote would have been 100%."

That's an excellent observation, and I agree.; 12:27 PM, October 27, 2007
Hmmmm said...: Ron, it is not an observation, it is speculation. You cannot observe something which did not occur. You don't seem to know the difference, which is not surprising, since you have speculated quite a bit about the law and pawned off many of your speculations as observations, and where you have yet to demonstrate any real knowledge about law (environmental or otherwise) as well. You purport to be a journalist, but where a journalist would accurately report "I observed in my morning Tribune today a comment that was speculation", or "I observed in the Bay News that although Ann Calhoun has no training in science, however she speculated quite a bit about it", or "I observed a quote from Tacker in the paper that she knows how to derail projects", or "I observed that I don't work for any of the local newspapers anymore for quite sometime", or "I observed that I have written five hundred and forty-eight blogs that say the same thing and I have had nothing original to contribute since about 2002 even though I need to make New Year's arrangements soon for 2008, so I am concerned that my resolution for 2008 will be to write about eighty-nine more blogs on the same subject again."

If you haven't noticed Ron, homeowners of Los Osos took care of some important business by looking ahead and by knowing but not dwelling on what was in their rear-view mirror that of which they sped past, and hopefully waving good-bye and leaving in the dust a motley cast of dysfunction players and decisions. The ink on the vote isn't even dry and we've already heard of the veiled hints from a few, and hopefully they will be squinting at that mirror, thumbing it along a road where no one will bother to give them a lift because there are more deserving people in the community that are going to need a ride.; 3:06 PM, October 27, 2007
Realistic1 said...: Ron,

You and Julie should really hook up. Your respective egos are a match made in heaven.

YOU did nothing to derail the Tri-W project. The CSD did that without any help from you. Whether or not that saves this community any money remains to be seen, although anyone with a brain knows that five additional years of delay is gonna cost more, not less. Regardless, I know you'll keep pattin' yourself on the back for "saving" Los Osos.

BTW, last time I checked, Tri-W isn't dead. It's still on the table, now isn't it? And (OMG!) the property owners STILL overwhelmingly approved the 218. It may not be the best choice, but (good, bad or indifferent)it's a choice the County will make. Not you, not Julie, not Gail.

You are a one-note Samba, Ron. And a flat note at that. Find something else to write about, because your song is totally tired and the property owners of Los Osos are no longer listening. Not that they EVER were. Julie's 15 minutes of fame are up, too. Maybe she can hitch a ride to Santa Margarita and the two of you can re-live your glory days while the band plays "The Party's Over".

Cheers,

Real 1; 6:09 PM, October 27, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Many people made a choice for the good of the community - to get a sewer - that may not have been in their personal best interest. That was very brave and I commend them. ( I spoke to a very calm woman today who was in this situation - she just wanted it to be over and was accepting that she might need to move.)

If we wish to be a community, it is up to us to act like one and encourage those with financial know-how to get information out there as to what some possible steps might be to pay for this project.

My personal story might be one idea. Some years back I changed jobs and took a yearly hit in the thousands (I lived in the San Fernando Valley). I soon saw that even with budgeting, I wasn't going to make it. I did have some equity in my house, I had lived there eight years. So I looked to refinance. Shopping around gave me a not only a chunk of cash but a lower house payment, too. I eventually refinanced again as property values rose in my neighborhood and eventually I sold my house for more than three times what I paid for it.

I am far from a financial expert, but I'll be there are others out there who got themselves out of a jam and who have information that might be of use to someone else here.; 7:58 PM, October 27, 2007
Conspiracy Boy said...: Sewertoons:

You said: "And no, we don't know the pollution isn't coming from septics. We're just troubled by those nasty leftover chemicals from drugs and body care products that are in our upper aquifer right now. Guess the "magic sand" didn't know what to do with those."

So, in other words, you are telling us that the County will put in a sewer for close to $100,000.00 for each home to get rid of hair products, etc. WOW! You're just beautiful!

If I were you "Sewertoons" I'd be more worried about what chemicals they put in our water (watch out while brushing your teeth) that's where all the cancer comes from in humans and pets -- and you should worry about the mercury that comes with the imported water we're about to get from the County!

Wow, you just don't get it. I guess they don't sell "smart pills" in Los Osos.; 8:29 PM, October 27, 2007
Unknown said...: Guess not CB... where did you get yours...???; 8:54 PM, October 27, 2007
Conspiracy Boy said...: Mike,

Got mine living in the big city! People are smarter there. Much smarter.

That's why I know that Pandora summed up this town as being stupid years ago and decided it would be easy to take over!; 8:59 PM, October 27, 2007
Conspiracy Boy said...: Realistic1:

Richard LeGros, it's you! I wondered where you were...; 9:04 PM, October 27, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: "cb,"

If the chemicals we use in shampoos, conditioners and the un-metabolized drugs that we eliminate are getting into our aquifer - well, duh, the nitrates that are coming out of our septics are going there too.

(FYI - in Europe where they are smarter than here, they actually have determined unsafe levels of these chemicals in water.)

I have a water filter on the water I drink. I don't worry about it on my teeth. What do you do?

Who says we need Nacimiento water? If we take care of what we have, by recharging the cleaned up sewage at Broderson for instance, we don't need it.

Maybe you could explain the $100,000 figure you put out there, although I know it is not your strong suit.; 10:04 PM, October 27, 2007
Realistic1 said...: Nice try, CB - but no cigar.

Many on the Tribune blog know who I am, and I am most certainly NOT Richard LeGros.

Cheers,

Real 1; 10:39 PM, October 27, 2007
Conspiracy Boy said...: Sewertoons:

You say: "(FYI - in Europe where they are smarter than here, they actually have determined unsafe levels of these chemicals in water.)"

Well, Sewertoons, in Europe, nitrates are no big deal!!

And to Real:

If they know who you are on the Tribune blog, why don't you share who you are on Ann's? Afraid?; 11:16 PM, October 27, 2007
Realistic1 said...: CB -

Nope - not the least bit afraid. Just choose not to. That's half the fun of blogging.

Some posters on the Tribune Board know who I am because I have chosen to reveal my identity to them by one means or another. Wonky knows who I am. Together knows who I am. So does ReAppraiser. So does Richard LeGros. I'm sure there are others. Anybody who really wants to know could figure it out from my postings. You keep guessing though. I'll let you know if you get it right.

Cheers,

Real 1; 11:44 PM, October 27, 2007
Ron said...: hmmmm wrote:

"You don't seem to know the difference, which is not surprising, since you have speculated quite a bit about the law and pawned off many of your speculations as observations, and where you have yet to demonstrate any real knowledge about law (environmental or otherwise) as well."

Realistic1 wrote:

"You are a one-note Samba, Ron. And a flat note at that. Find something else to write about, because your song is totally tired and the property owners of Los Osos are no longer listening. "

Again, with the hate. No comprendo.

Outside of the handful of people responsible for developing the Tri-W project -- and the only thing they have against me is that they're bitter because if it wasn't for this reporter's reporting, their little (read: ma$$ive) "bait and switchy" scam would have worked -- I honestly don't see one reason for the hate.

You know, awhile back, when the TAC was first getting started, I knew the entire process was going to be a compete waste of time (and it was... hey, News flash: Los Osos wants a sewer, just not in the middle of their beautiful coastal town... stop the f-ing presses!), but I ended up supporting the entire process because I also knew that it was going to officially validate all my previous reporting. And, it did. Totally.

Tri-W was completely unnecessary, waaaaay more expensive than ALL other options, and that the silly park in the project was dictating the plant's mid-town location, and, therefore adding $30 - $50 million to the project, and there NEVER was a "strongly held community value" for an accessible park in an industrial sewer plant, obviously, and that the entire project was a grossly expensive, "bait and switchy" mess, with no rationale whatsoever behind its siting, other than initial CSD's desire to cover up the Solution Group's failures.

And, now, thanks to massive backing from official county analysis, all my prior reporting has been shown to be air-freaking-tight.

So why the hate? It doesn't make any sense. Same with Ann, too.

Because Tri-W has been exposed -- officially now (three years after Three Blocks) -- and is in a pile of a$hes -- it may still be "on the table," but, to be sure, it's a pile of a$hes on said table -- property owners will be saving a helluva lot of money, and you won't have a sewer plant downtown.

So what's the problem?

hmmm wrote:

"I observed that I have written five hundred and forty-eight blogs that say the same thing..."

Yet, you read every single word. Now that's an observation.

Anchor Steam makes a great winter ale. I'll take a case when it's released.; 10:22 AM, October 28, 2007
Hmmmm said...: Ron,

it's not hate, just an observation. that you feel hated says quite a bit about you - don't be confused, you can still glorify yourself as much as you want, and you will not be hated for it... you have pointed out one fact, the dependance on siting on amenities, which has been known for half a decade anyway..... all the other speculation beyond that is simply, well..., speculation; 12:05 PM, October 28, 2007
Shark Inlet said...: Ron,

I note with interest that since I asked you a direct question here you've posted two comments here to others, folks with far less substance to their comments. You took the easy way out, as it were.

You're a pussy. You seem to be quite willing to toss flaming barbs out there when you feel you'll "win" but when someone attempts to engage you in actual dialog, you run home with your tail between your legs.

If you want to participate in the Los Osos discussion in a way where folks will be listening to your words, grow the hell up and be willing to actually dialog. If you avoid taking responsibility for your actions or non-actions, by trying to divert attention towards folks who are being mean towards you, you are clearly a pussy.

What's your choice? Are you going to debate the actual issues like real citizens do or are you going to wuss out yet again?

Now, on the important issues, yes Anchor Brewing Company does make a great holiday offering. If we're signing up for cases, I'll take one. Ron, I believe that as the official "loser" in our debate, you should be paying for my case. E-mail me when you're ready to deliver.; 12:39 PM, October 28, 2007
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Wrong cb, regarding nitrates in Europe - they are indeed a big deal:

http://bc.edu/schools/law/lawreviews/meta-elements/journals/bcealr/27_4/01_TXT.htm

http://www.sehb.ie/search/publications/health/water.html

http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/en/nitratesfull.pdf

Read these, then try to justify that opinion of yours.; 9:00 PM, October 28, 2007
Churadogs said...: hmmmmm sez:"Fact: Ann has written biased columns (by her own definition) on the subject for years, and the Bay News biased reports with misstated facts.."

It's no "my own" definition. An opinion column IS "biased." Bias IS having a particular take on something. Bias is choosing one thing over another. That's what Opinion Columns are SUPPOSED TO DO AND BE and that's why they're located on the OPINION PAGE of a newspaper and not on the front page.

It's amazing to me how many people confuse "reporting" with "opinion." An opinion column that does nothing but report "facts" isn't an opinion column. Hello?; 7:38 AM, October 29, 2007

Pages

Friday, October 26, 2007

35 comments: