Monday, December 21, 2009

Dumb Move

Boy, was dumping Planning Commissioner Sarah Christie a really, really dumb move, or what? What was County Supervisor Patterson thinking?? Doesn’t he understand that really smart, tough, competent Planning Commissioners are like wolves? They keep the elk herd fit and strong and healthy by taking out the weak, flawed and foolish ones. Same thing with development and building projects. Dumb commissioners, lazy commissioners, incompetent commissioners, commissioners in the developers’ pockets always result in weak, bad, foolish developments that get slowed down or stopped by an outraged public or a semi-awake regulatory agency further down the line so un-wolfed, crappy projects ultimately end up getting delayed and cost way more than building wolf-smart ones in the first place. Or get built then end up a millstone around the community’s tax-paying neck.

So dumping Sarah was a really dumb move. Apparently Patterson doesn’t understand that Christie is only one vote on a five vote panel. He could have kept her incredible competence, knowledge and wolfish determination to make projects better, thereby soothing his “environmental/green build base,” while at the same time continuing to rake in the campaign dough from his corporate “Oh, sure, build like whatever” sponsors by telling them, sotto voce, “Aw, you know I can’t do a thing with Christie, -- wink-nudge – but don’t worry. You have the other Commissioners, so you’ll have the votes.”

Thank God Los Osos got the benefit of Sarah’s vulpine talents before she was unceremoniously dumped. Single-handedly she turned the Really, REALLY Hideous Sloppy County Version of the Los Osos Sewer Project into something far better by asking tough questions and demanding answers. The results were a project that the county SHOULD have proposed in the first place instead of the poorly thought out, Oh, Whatever mess they dragged before the Commissioners in the first place. Her competence and savvy were on display when, under close, hard questioning, county “staff” finally had to admit that, Uh, no, we hadn’t looked at that option, and uh, yeah, it will work, and yeah, it will return water to the basin better than our crappy, sloppy, poorly thought out project, uh, yeah, uh . . . .

Embarrassing. It was truly embarrassing and truly scary to witness that without Sarah’s big white long pointy teeth carefully tearing at the dead, poorly though-out Tonini project the county had dropped at her feet, I have no doubt that it would have been happily rubber stamped by the remaining Commissioners only to be delayed or denied by the Coastal Commission, which would be another expensive disaster for the community. And had it been approved by some all-too-common lack of oversight, we Los Ososians would have been saddled with a crappy, dysfunctional project, our water “sprayed” out of the basin, still stuck with the add-on costs and problems of getting the water back.

Except for Christie.

And now Patterson’s dumping her? No, No, No. We need MORE Sarah Christies on the Planning Commission. At least two, with sharp pointy teeth to harass and stress and test the elk. That way almost all projects will eventually get passed on 3-2 votes, but they’ll have been seriously vetted, which is a good thing. Even developers should support such sharp, tough wolfish Commissioners because they do developers a great service; If a project can be changed for the better, can survive a savage test of its various elements, then the developer knows that problems have been found early on and corrected before he gets to even tougher teeth on his backside further on down the line, when such tooth marks will be hideously expensive to repair. Or end up in a court of law at the last minute, when it gets really, reeeeellly expensive, being sued over some item that could and should have been spotted by the sharp, yellow-eyed Wolfish Ones on the PC.

Dump Christie? Feh. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

A friend of mine wrote a letter to New Times in which she said of author Colin Rigley’s Dec 17 story, that stated, “But Christies departure would signify much more than just the loss of a mid-level decision maker who is virtually a volunteer (planning commissioners make $150 per meeting): it would be a sign the county’s political infrastructure is vulnerable to pressure from private interests.”

“Is this new news that the county’s political infrastructure is vulnerable to pressure from private interests? Mr. Rigley, WAKE UP, private interests are running county government. it is a rare person, like Sarah Christie, who is able to stand up to the pressure of those private interests and give small voice to the lobbyist-less public, those wanting to judge success on more than short-term corporate profitability.

“Mr. Rigley, you would be shocked to know that in government (including this County) local, state and federal laws go unenforced for the benefit of private interests. County employees get harassed by Board members with the acquiescence of their Department Heads (sitting at the pleasure of the board) for the benefit of private interests.”

My friend should know the game well. She used to work for the county. And so it goes.

I thought Patterson was smarter than that. But I guess not. Clearly, he doesn’t “get it.” So now he doesn't “get” my support. And the county taxpayers will really start “getting it” too. Again.

San Luis Obispo County has a long record of eating alive and spitting out all the tough, competent, outstanding public game changers. Which is why we too often end up paying dearly for herds of tottering, spavined, sub-standard, very, very costly, crappy elk.

Well, they don’t call it S-L-O-W Town for nothing, I guess. Too bad for us.


Mike said...

...hmmm... Doesn't Sarah Christie have another "job"...??? This has been 3 years in coming and even Sarah knew it... Could there have been a conflict of interest...??? Does every one need to constantly "challenge" the SLO County political system...???

..and Annie... there is a difference between the governments of S-L-0-W Town and SLO County... perhaps you don't understand local politics at all...just like to play gossip reporter...

Frank Drouillard said...

I hope Sarah remains legislative liaison for the Coastal Commission. SLO may not recognize her talents, but those concerned with the health of the California coast certainly do.

Bud43 said...

Anne: To your sage comparisons of the indomitable Ms. Christie's role on the County P.C. to the ecological function of wolves, I can only say, "hear, hear!" It has pained me too much to keep current with SLO County's and Los Osos' travails, but I was always happy to talk to Sarah about, especially, the "sewer" issues, notably in regard to conserving L.O. groundwater, and am exceedingly glad that she held strong in defending the welfare of Los Osos before the uncaring attitudes of county and RWQCB staffs.
I'm also glad that you're still going strong!
All best,

Sewertoons said...

We can all thank her for making sure that the Coastal Commission will rubber stamp a "GO" on this project. We can also thank her for adding tremendously to the cost of the project.

You know - "We delay, we pay - MORE."

Only the COUNTY can rescue us with grants and low-interest loans to get us out of the extra costs she fought to add to the project.

Mike Green said...

Toons, Don't you think, that after the last project that the CCC approved that they might just be a wee bit cautious about what they approve this time?
(no more bait and switchy, no more cheaper, better, faster)
And just maybe a "Rubber Stamp" is less delay and therefore less expensive?
And, that just maybe, Ms. Christie has saved poor LO from another freekin trainwreck?
Los Osos should figure out some way to hire her or elect her Queen!

Mike said...

...or could it be that Ms.Christie represented one extreme viewpoint to counter another extreme viewpoint which allowed a moderate solution...??? At least she was consistant and intelligent... She is appreciated by all costal communities...!!!

Sewertoons said...

The last project was fine if you took the inflammatory politics out of the equation. I support the County getting something done, I support their need to stay away from social controversy, I support this project, BUT I think the old project was better. The water never left the basin, no chance to induce growth, no loss of many acres of farmland, and many millions of gallons of filthy water not making it into the ground had it been built, AND the CSD was in control of the water.

Months were spent, MONTHS, on this latest incarnation of the project, so I can't see what more the CC needs to do. The letter they sent to the County spelled out their concerns and they have already been addressed.

Well, there IS the growth inducing location - room to expand the plant at a future date - when we have a different set of Supes and Coastal Commissioners who are more favorable to growth - THAT is a possibility now that was NOT possible with Tri-W.

FIVE miles of SEALED PIPE is a ECONOMIC trainwreck - which hopefully the County can mitigate in some way. If not, we can thank Ms. Christie for additional cost.

Don't forget, Ms. Christie is fully in favor of STEP, which has several appeals going before the Coastal Commission. That alone may cause a trainwreck if she can push that one over into the realm of consideration. I don't think she fully realizes the ramifications of the loss of property rights contained in the easement issue and what going to STEP could mean to getting ANYTHING built. Unless of course she is No Sewer, which I don't think she is.

Spectator said...

All of you must realize that there are two opposing views as to Sarah Christie's performance on the planning commission.

1. The one praised by Ms. Calhoun with her well written piece. After all, she does write sense for those interested in non-growth, or as little as possible.

2. Another view would be that Christie has been an activist against reasonable growth, a socialist in action restricting private property rights, and a force against individual freedom.

But all is not lost! Both views would agree with Ann Calhoun that Patterson is dumb.

But not my view:

Christie is a political liability for Patterson, and he fears being dumped like Blakely was for her extreme views and actions. So she should be sacrificed for his political expediency. Paterson is sly and smart! He really only works for himself but tries to make people think he works for them. Self serving politician.

FYI Ann: The democrats are looking for more tax money rather than cuts, and wish to alter or remove prop 13 so they can increase property taxes. Looks like we old folks may be sold out and socialism will prevail.(Not so good for poor old folks).

Post Script: With the Health Care Bill over it's first hurdle, why are health insurance stocks their highest ever? And why could not our Senators get us money like Louisiana, Nebraska, and Connecticut? It seems like Boxer and Feinstein are duds.

Maybe Capps will hold out and get us a sewer!

Spectator said...

I do not think there ever will be a sewer, and this may be a good thing for residents, a bad thing for those who would wish to develop their property. (I do not think there are too many wishing to develop their property).

The toll of human suffering will be great and old folks will definitely be displaced. It is far worse now than before with the Tri-W situation.

It is the economy stupid!

If the sewer had gone in without opposition at Tri-W, the costs to each property owner would have been reasonably clear. Financing would have been in place. People would have been able to sell their property and move with a profit.

The sewer would have been done! And we would be fighting about a water plant, which nobody talks about, but will be a necessity.

Now property owners are hard pressed to find any buyer who can get financing at any price. And the costs of the sewer project are certainly unclear. Government funding is really unclear, especially from the bankrupt state. (Nobody wants to buy California bonds.) We are stuck! Anybody want to buy my duplexes? No reasonable offer refused!

Aaron said...

Again, we find ourselves in a sea of false labels: "anti-growth," "no-sewer," "socialist" etc. It really gets in the way of having an intelligent discussion on the subject. It's gridlock. It doesn't get anything done.

Spectator said...

Of course Aaron, when anyone puts up an opposing point of view to yours, you put up the false label distraction for small minds. You would eliminate descriptive adjectives for your own purpose. Is a communist a communist? Is the pope a catholic? Gridlock is only caused by difference in opinion. IF everyone agreed with you there would be no gridlock. Sorry if the descriptions of "anti-growth , no-sewer or socialist" might refer to your nature. If you are hurt by them, there must be truth in them, and you are ashamed.

Mike said...

Excellent comments Spectator... although I disagree with your statement that there will never be a sewer... I do believe at some point a shovel will be driven in the ground and a sewer constructed inspite of the Schickers, Barrows and Tackers...

The World and US Economy will recover or anarcy will take over... I don't believe the fat cats in Banking can afford to let that happen...

GVD said...

with Sarah gone will Anne be next? They are very much like minded,.as like minded as Bruce and Jim.

Aaron said...

Mr. Arcuni,

While I disagree with your belief that the people of Los Osos should "lay back and take it" when they're getting raped by the sewer project, I'm not going to refer to you as a rapist.

The only thing that hurts right now is my head after you posted some rather fallible logic, but let me explain a few things that you're likely to ignore anyway.

The English language allows us to communicate beyond grunts, gestures and labels. The adjectives you provided previously aren't descriptive at all. They're used as a scapegoat to discredit Sarah Christie and Democrats, but because both entities are anti-growth and socialists, we're doomed.

This isn't about me coercing people into agreeing with my point of view. If it was, I would have gone blue in the face from repeating myself so many times and I would be a mime. It's about the premise that everyone gets a fair hearing instead of being shot down by people like you, who toss around blanket statements like confetti as a vain attempt of sounding relatively intelligent.

Happy Holidays

Sewertoons said...

Well, as there is NO CHEAP sewer project, we must move ahead with what we've currently got.

As we have seen, NOT doing so has brought 45 households grief, which will be spread to all of us in the PZ if this project does not get built. As to what happens to all of us remains to be seen, but the agencies in charge are not going to let us continue polluting, that is quite clear.

Short of a nuclear bomb, this project is going ahead in my opinion.

Spectator, lovely to have you back, your insights have been missed. Why do you think the sewer will not be built? Or is it just uncertain financing that you think will cause a problem with timing?

Aaron, you shoot people down all the time on your blog and without a fair hearing. Spectator is incredibly intelligent, but I guess you can't possibly see that as he does not agree with your opinions.

Mike said...

hahahaha... Aaron trying to lecture on the use of language...??? C'mon, Aaron is a joke with no punchline, only empty words... His "blog" is just a waste of cyberspace, but it keeps him off the roads and out of any classroom....

The subject is whether Patterson made a poor decision in wanting to replace Sarah with someone else... not Aaron's normal misdirection into the "rape" of language...

So... did Patterson make a poor decision...??? Why would replacing an extremist with another be a poor decision...??? Is Ms.Christie that important that she can't possibly be replaced as a $150/meeting Planning Commissioner....???? Will her replacement suddenly be the one vote to finally get the shovels in the ground again...??? Just what power does a Planning Commissioner wield....????

Churadogs said...

Spectator sez:"Sorry if the descriptions of "anti-growth , no-sewer or socialist" might refer to your nature. If you are hurt by them, there must be truth in them, and you are ashamed."

You missed Aaron's point. When descriptions are FALSE and are deliberately used to mislead, confuse, lie, then they lead to mental gridlock and all discussion ends. Also, when you MISREAD and MISCHARACTERIZE what I write, for example, then go off on a toot using FALSE descriptions of your mispercieved reading of what I wrote, you get mental gridlock and all discussion ends.

That happens a lot on this blog by certain repeat offenders.!!! ???!!!

Frank sez."I hope Sarah remains legislative liaison for the Coastal Commission. SLO may not recognize her talents, but those concerned with the health of the California coast certainly do."

Amen. The Coastal Commission, like any and all other Commission and Boards needs more wolves on it as well, which was the point of my comment. Wolves cull the herd and keep it healthy.

As you can see, to some commentors on this blog, anyone who dissents, disagrees, questions, demands tough answers is viewed as some sort of commie/socialist/"obstructionist" menace. I view Wolves as doing me a tremendous favor, of actually improving projects by uncovering and fixing blunders early-on. I suspect that there's a strong psychological authoritarian streak going on with the commie/socialist/"obstructionist" bunch. Can't bear that authority be questioned, so it's all one big Yes Daddy, We'll Do What You Say Since You Know Best. History, alas, has shown the fallacy of THAT viewpoint all too often.

Churadogs said...

Oops, forgot to add: Consider this. Suppose Wolf Christie had been on the Coastal Commission way back when Commissioner Potter used the term "bait and switchy" and hearing those words, her vulpine ears pricked up and she turned and said, "What do you mean? Will staff please supply the supporting documentation to the SOC? I want to see the regs concerning tot lots as a required part of SRF funding & etc. and show me the coastal regs regarding mandated mitigation & etc, etc" and then she persued all the documents Ron Crawford has since posted on his blog, for example, then she started asking questions and demanded answers and supporting documentation, instead of turning away and sweeping the whole mess off the table, WOULD THIS TRAIN WRECK HAVE BEEN AVOIDED? Would the SOC have been challenged then? Would the Commission have had to acknowledge that, yes, there WERE non-esha alternatives sitting right there outside of town that needed to be seriously looked at? Would such wolfish sniffing out of those details have avoided this trainwreck? If the answer is, Yes, it would have, then somebody please explain why Wolves are viewed as . . . bad?

Mike said...

Did the Coastal Commission APPROVE of the WWTF being placed at the Tri-W Site...????? Did the Coastal Commision APPROVE of the Tri-W design...?????

Just a plain Yes or No answer is all that is required... anything beyond that is simply personal agendas and opinions... Just answer Yes or No.... or are your personal opinions getting in the way of a legal decision...????

I also see where Measure B is no longer an issue and there were NO OBJECTIONS to the CSD agreeing that Measure B is finally and forever DEAD....!!!!! So please don't try bringing that back into any discussion regarding the legitimacy of the Coastal Commissions full approval of the Tri-W Plan... there were NO other PLAN that has ever made it through the Coastal Commission...!!!!

Sarah is no "wolf"... just an educated person with her own personal views whether you agree or disagree... but there is a reality to politics and extremes tend to cancel each other out as a moderate solution is struck... There are no wolves or lambs...there are only differing points of view and then a decision is made... Apparently there are some in Los Osos who will disagree with any decision...

FOGSWAMP said...

Sewertoons - your saber-rattelling, ill-timed ranting "we delay, we pay - MORE" doesn't hold water any longer.

According to John Diodati from Public Works construction bids throughout California and in our region have been below engineers estimates by as much as 30%, which means that we are in an unprecedented bidding environment that could significantly benefit Los Osos.

The assumed 25% plant construction cost inflation since 2005 did not occur.

In 2009 alone construction costs in general have dropped 10 to 18% nationally and even worldwide.

Even land costs are in fire-sale mode and have dropped 50 to 70%.

Ron said...

Ann wrote:

"Oops, forgot to add: Consider this. Suppose Wolf Christie had been on the Coastal Commission way back when Commissioner Potter used the term "bait and switchy" and hearing those words, her vulpine ears pricked up and she turned and said, "What do you mean? Will staff please supply the supporting documentation to the SOC?"

Ya know, for years, I've been all over the CCC for approving the Tri-W embarrassment AFTER they called it "bait and switchy," but I rarely call out the County for approving the Tri-W embarrassment in 2003 (waaaay before it was appealed to the CCC) due solely to an illegal Statement of Overriding Considerations.

I get the feeling that if Christie had been on the PC in 2003, she would have caught that -- in 2003 -- that the Tri-W SOC didn't hold a drop of water.

I first exposed that at this link:

and this link:

(Wow, those stories kick-ass these days. Look how right I was... as usual.)

So, now-a-days, I'm contacting County officials and asking them what "substantial evidence in the record" they used in 2003 to "support" that made-up SOC.

(A little secret -- there isn't any, which makes that story in 2009... errrr... 2010, excellent!)

In other words, the County has got A LOT of splainin' to do. Why did they approve an "infeasible" project in 2003 based solely on an illegal SOC?

Helluva question.

'toons wrote:

"We can all thank her for making sure that the Coastal Commission will rubber stamp a "GO" on this project. We can also thank her for adding tremendously to the cost of the project.

You know - 'We delay, we pay - MORE.'



"We delay, we pay - MORE.


"The current estimate of $200/month is based on several conservative assumptions regarding financing and a 25% construction cost inflation since the LOCSD Project in 2005. The inflation that was included in the estimate has not occurred. In fact, construction bids throughout California and in our region have been below engineers estimates by as much as 30%, which means that we are in an unprecedented bidding environment that could significantly benefit Los Osos. If the project can proceed under the County’s Plan and does not have major delays, we can solicit bids during this great bidding climate, and we fully expect that there will be some significant savings off the $200/month estimate."
-- SLO County officials, 12/15/09


Mike said...

Ron... Again, since you don't seem to read what you don't want to see:

Did the Coastal Commission APPROVE of the WWTF being placed at the Tri-W Site...????? Did the Coastal Commision APPROVE of the Tri-W design...?????

Just a plain Yes or No answer is all that is required... anything beyond that is simply personal agendas and opinions... Just answer Yes or No.... or are your personal opinions getting in the way of a legal decision...????

I should add... was there ANY mention of "bait and switchy" in that APPROVAL....????? None! Just your over use of a comment, not an approval or even a vote.... In plain words Ron, you are full of crap everytime YOU try to foreward your OPINION...!!!! Bottom Line was that the CC APPROVED THE TRI-W DESIGN...!!!!

Aaron said...

I've done some research on Sarah Christie (part of that research will be a factor in the next article) and I found that she was very knowledgeable of County policies. Patterson told friends that she was "too militant," but in reality, she was militant when it came to leaving no stone unturned.

Taxpayers Watch members have accused her of having a "conflict of interest," which -- ironically -- the accusation has the same pedigree as "inadmissible hearsay." It's cute, actually: trying to discredit someone who actually reviewed the project diligently in public view and proposed a set of changes that help the environment. If only the BOS did that instead of ignoring public input, cutting off their microphone and voting in lockstep with staff recommendations.

In my eyes, Christie was an exceptional leader even before she took on the Los Osos wastewater project. Developers didn't like her very much because she didn't rubber stamp her way through her tenure as chair. Does that mean she's "anti-growth"? No, she was proceeding on the side of caution -- and COLAB didn't like that.

If only there was someone like Sarah Christie in Los Osos...

M said...

Mike, was there a project that was in the midst of final permitting from the Coastal Commission before a group inexplicably canceled that project to pursue a project that to this day is not built?
Sincerely, M
Oh, and the previous project at way less money.

Alon Perlman said...

Oh , here we go again
Start with a well written blog post about something that actually matters that has changed.
(In the old days we thought to call it News), get some good discussion on the dynamic between Supervisor and Commissioner appointee, going. Spectator praising Anne’s piece, Mike Greene and “Mike” virtually on the same virtual page?

And end with comments about comments about comments about comments about opinions about comments about an article yet to be written.

Typical Osos centric view point.
If there was only Someone who was a legislative analyst on the California Coastal Commission living in Los Osos.

I didn't have to do research on Sarah Christie, I was attending the Planning commission meetings, including many that had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH LOS OSOS, and on occasion interacted directly with her (like Bud 43). Sarah was successful and that, In-Spite of a sometimes not suppressed talent to rub people the wrong way. The stories have broken, two Tribune blog strings on the same article
Here- Aaron you can recycle this material, I don’t need it anymore
• Alon_Perlman wrote on 12/17/2009 10:12:41 PM:
Say what you will, Sarah Christie put a tremendous amount of careful work into the guiding documents of this county. I don’t rightly know if I agreed with her 100% on every issue, but she has a body of work that will not soon be matched. I first saw her work about 4 years ago when the constitution of the planning commission badly needed her balance. There is always a danger in having a strong knowledgeable chair interacting with newly appointed commissioners, but the new group showed that they can handle that challenge. I was looking forward to seeing them continue to coalesce into a strong working group, perhaps a team, with individual minded members. Sarah, you walked the walk and you will continue to do so. (maybe a little horse riding in between?)

Two environmentals fighting. Who gets to be the bigger WOLF this time?
Well, The Older wolf gets to Alpha this time...

It's whoos’e house?
uh huh

Whoose house?
uh huh uh

Supervisors Patterson’s house,
That’s whoo

Dats ra-aah-it
Jim's House,
uh huh!

With apologies to Run DMC

A group going to the Coastal Commission? That sounds like fun! I'll go grab my little sand pail.
When does the bus leave from Baywood Pier?

Second Word verification: goingeng

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

(Sorry for the deletion, I found a typo.)

FOGSWAMP, we are not out of the woods yet. If the Coastal Commission finds something that opens this up to a De Novo hearing, we may be stuck in stasis for a long, long time. For now, yes, luckily -- due to this economic mess -- we are in a good bidding environment. That will save us as well as the USDA waiver - well, as you have blogged over there, you know about this, but if others have not, go to:

I wouldn't say the land fire-sale mode would apply to the Giacomazzi property. No contract has been signed and the County has not yet accepted the project.

Aaron, can you cite where,
"Taxpayers Watch members have accused her of having a 'conflict of interest,"'" regarding Sarah Christie?

Pushing an agenda, yes, I believe she did that with her allowing Ripley to testify repeatedly at the hearings. To be fair, gravity contractors should have had equal time to explain why their technology WILL work.

Ron still doesn't "get" that his darling Julie was the ringleader to get the park amenities BACK INTO the proposal at Tri-W.

M you are correct - this is where "We Delay, We Pay" should have started. I'll bet a lot of people regret that move as well.

NOW on to Measure B - which inexplicably has not been lamented here in this blog. This was announced at the last CSD meeting, December 17, by Jon Seitz. It is dead, dead, dead. The illegal measure, crafted by overpaid attorneys to give a so-called "legal" basis to the stopping of the project, is now and forever --ILLEGAL. I picked up a copy of the agreement between the CSD and TW. I noticed that in this agreement Taxpayers' Watch has reduced their claim in the CSD bankruptcy, from $31,050 to $100, thereby saving the District $30,950.

Mike said...

...and just how much has PZLDF saved the CSD...????

Alon Perlman said...

Not to distract from the excellent comments above starting with alons summation of Sarah Christie, an alpha wolf on the loose (Staying on topic, alon -Way to go!)
Toons-slipery slope to measure "B"
It had a pulse for a few months before it died.
And mike
At one time PZLDF could had represented all of the PZ,
because more CDO's were threatened.
I Saw CDO's abandon Gail's folly
The pizzled out PZ Lawsuit
"SAVED" the CSD a "Mere" -1,500$ a month, (Accountants -this is a Negative savings, mark it in red)
Barely half an employee’s yearly salary
Of “course” Gail paid her three times share, She was rich with organizations.
She was flaunting money throwing it into the ’08 CSD Elections.

Off--topic Breaking news
Posted first to
I think this is Breaking news
Jonny Appleseed here. You are the first stop, then off to mama calhoun's

FROM California Coastal Commission
January 14, 15 Agenda
Huntington Beach

b. Appeal No. A-3-SLO-09-69 (Los Osos Wastewater Project, San Luis Obispo Co.). Appeal by Don Bearden, Sierra Club - Santa Lucia Chapter, Barry and Vivian Branin, Surfrider Foundation San Luis Bay Chapter, Linda Ward, Citizens for Affordable and Safe Environment, Coalition for Low Income Housing, Los Osos Legal Defense Fund, Martha Goldin, Keith Wimer, Julie Tacker, J.H. Edwards Company, Chuck Cesena, Steven Paige, Linde Owen, Piper Reilly, Elaine Watson, Alon Perlman of San Luis Obispo County decision amending their action on CDP DRC2008-00103 granting a permit with conditions to the County Public Works Department for the Los Osos Wastewater Project (including treatment plant, collection and disposal system, and related infrastructure and development) in the community of Los Osos (Estero Planning Area) in San Luis Obispo County. (JB-SC)"

**** * The last shall be the last

----YOU MAY RESUME REGULAR BLOGGING----###---###---###---#

Word verif= sparrott,
Oh, we are going to have fun with that one!

Sewertoons said...

Alon, what is your appeal? Where can we view it?

Mike said...

Very "Appeal"ing Alon.... but please, don't ask the CSD for any funding or legal counsel, we can't afford any more of the PizzleDrip type campaigns... Maybe the Rock will fund the appeals since they didn't file their own...???

Alon Perlman said...

The CSD is being directed away from bankruptcy the best it can.
The information will follow the public process as managed by the CCC staff, and the county may release it.

I hope.
I am free to release more,
at a time and a place of my choosing.
Those who walk will walk
and those who talk will talk
Those who deal in derivative information are free
to post
and deal out
whatever drivel
they have no idea of.

#### ###---THIS HAS BEEN A COASTAL ACTION ALERT----### ##----YOU MAY RESUME REGULAR BLOGGING----### ---###---###---#

Sewertoons said...

Well, I wasn't going to post, but since the word verification is "crying" I couldn't resist.

Alon, I will look for your appeal on the County site, I hope that they post it, as they did post everyone else's initial appeals.

Both the initial appeals and the second amended appeals fall under this (off the CCC site):

"NEW APPEALS. (Note: This agenda item requires an initial determination of whether the appeal raises a “substantial issue” and may not include a de novo public hearing on the merits of the project.)"

Commissioner appeals from Wan and Mark Stone do not appear in the second batch of appeals, although many others did amendments to theirs.

I don't see any "substantial issues." If there are any, it would have to be regarding vacant lot owners, as there is nothing else that hasn't been chewed to death with Ms. Christie at the helm.

Aaron said...

I give credit to Joe Sparks for directing the district away from bankruptcy, not Maria and Marshall.

Sewertoons said...

I'm sure Joe is THRILLED with that pronouncement.

Directing the District away from bankruptcy? What SPECIFICALLY do you refer to? What policy changes?

Alon Perlman said...

It usually takes at least three directors to pass an action item,
four for certain types of financial decisions.
At this time the appeals as a whole are not known.

Word verification is; zinglo
What do we make of that?

Mike said...

Aaron's ignorance continues in his opinion that somehow the CSD is moving away from the bankruptcy without Maria and Marshall... but it's nearly Christmas so we can all chalk it up to charity by patting little Aaron on the head and moving on to the reality of a coming sewer and changing of the Planning Commission...

Aaron said...

Alon, it takes three directors to pass an action item, but it takes one to set the initiative. The solutions and compromises he's created are very sound -- and quite frankly, he's changed my mind about him. Kudos to Mr. Sparks.

Also, Alon, for the record, simply attending meetings doesn't necessarily give you a greater perspective than someone doing research.

I was talking about how Los Osos needs someone like Sarah Christie because she has leadership traits that are desirable -- but not found in our current leaders.

For one, when she was investigated or was confronted on her prejudices and biases, she addressed them as soon as she was legally able to do so. She's also studious of board procedures and will sacrifice days and weeks at a time to listen to people at the podium and additional correspondence without having to ever issue the "chairman prerogative" rebuke.

She never complained, never turned anyone away, never turned off their microphone, never called anyone "obstructionists," "blockers" or laughed at people mockingly. And most importantly, she understood the heavy weight; the controversy of the wastewater project and yet she treated it like an item on the agenda that simply merited a full hearing.

Also, Ann, Patterson knew exactly what he was doing. Dumb move? Not to him. He wants to clear the way for development without the red tape.

Sewertoons said...

Aaron, what research do you refer to, watching meetings on cable or DVD? What specific initiatives do you speak about? You don't attend closed session, where do you get your information? You don't attend Finance committee meetings do you? You may have an opinion, but that is all that it is without citing something specific.

Since Joe has been on the Board since 2007, what is different? Hmmm. No Lisa, no Julie - but the same Chuck and Steve. So according to your opinion, Joe was not able to get anything done until Maria and Marshall have come on board. In saying that, you have just dissed Lisa, Julie, Chuck and Steve. Was that your intent?

Maybe you will comment on the recent settlement with Taxpayers' Watch? Or how about the recent settlement with Montgomery Watson Harza - which have laid to rest Lisa's wild allegations -- from the CSD's perspective (already laid to rest from the County's perspective).

Alon Perlman said...

You don't know what you don't know, but oh, how you talk.

I didn't SIMPLY attend meetings, I'm a contributing MEMBER to CSD committees, LOCAC, LOCAC Committees. I've commented on more Planning Commission meetings and BOS meetings than Your total lifetime attendance at all meetings. I have a lot more than "A greater perspective", especially then that of someone who doesn't even do research, doesn't know what research IS, but claims to. But attending, that IS something you could had done and simply didn't do, the minimum requirement for a "JOURNALIST", Aaron.
And you haven’t really looked at the tapes either, Just the ones when YOU were speaking. You admitted, you hadn't looked at, or researched any of Lisa's Ill-fated complaint, nor the EIR for that matter. Didn't stop you from, Blah, Blah, Yada, Yada.
And no Toons, Aaron doesn't have Just "Opinions", He has "Truths" derived by RESEARCH and ANALYSIS of comments about comments about opinions about comments. A real Master-Blogger.
Word verification: hertsi
Oh, I hope we didn't hertsi, someone's feelings. Now, run back to your Blog, and tell your mother, and she will comment on your Blog and kiss it better.

Mike said...

haahhhahahahahaha... ROTFLMAO...!!!!

...the word around town is a petrified lump from a LO septic tank (or was it a Wrecklamator?) is Santa's gift to a certain little boy tomorrow eve...

You have made my day Alon... best wishes this hoiday season... Mike

Aaron said...


Am I suppose to be insulted? I'm laughing at how funny your statements are mostly because your understanding (or lack thereof) of the English language prohibits me from even raising an eyebrow about your so-called definition of a "journalist."

Actually, I stand corrected. You do contribute... except by "contributing," I mean you tell people that you contribute, but no, you really don't. You *do* go up to the podium and tell people -- who made a choice long ago to not listen to your Yoda-speak -- that you're a member of LOCAC as if it's actually relevant to the agenda item, which it's not.

I will thank you for keeping the liquor stores open in Los Osos.

Well I have places to go, articles to write, checkmates to make, villages to conquer. Bishops to move diagonally on the chessboard.
Its been nice knowing you Alon.
Thanks for being the first to identify me as having "potential," though, reading the above, I’m not sure if that means the same thing in both our Houses. I’m afraid your representation of facts is now false in my eyes.

Yours is not exactly the most "objective."

Alon, feel free to call me.

Alon Perlman said...

Typical, can't even front a come-back without plagiarizing my material.

Mike said...

hahahahhaha... a really BIG lump of stuff for the little boy...!!!!

Aaron said...

English Made Easy Volume One: Learning English through Pictures

Alon Perlman said...

Typical, can't even front a come-back without plagurizing my material.

Must have hit a nerve though;
The Razor on Twitter.

"It's the season of giving. Call Alon Perlman and wish him a Merry Christmas or buy him a dictionary (805) 528-XXXX
21 mins ago"

People, I do have several dictionaries.
But I also do have quite a collection of FruitCakes, so one more won't make a difference.

Mike said...

...does that mean Aaron is preping for college...??? Naw, he just like to look at the pictures and form absolute "Truths"...

Churadogs said...

Aaron sez::Also, Ann, Patterson knew exactly what he was doing. Dumb move? Not to him. He wants to clear the way for development without the red tape."

It was a dumb move because he caused himself unneeded grief and seriously (and publicly) humiliated Christie and pissed off his enviro/base (publically and) unnecessarily.

See my Sage Advice For The Clueless in a later posting. There's smart ways to do this sort of Political Public Killing, and Patterson's way was. . . dumb.

franc4 said...

Hey Mike,
I see you are still stuck on STUPID! since I've been gone. Keep up giving fuel for the intelligent.