Pages

Friday, December 10, 2010

Why Los Osos Gets Crazy & Confused

The following Op-Edish email by Gail McPherson includes an Op-Edish email by Bill Garfinkle. These Op-Edishes are a perfect example of why the Hideous Los Osos Sewer Project always remained so difficult to accurately ‘splain or describe.  The first is the use of the often false and always negative generalized and misleading description of anyone who disagrees with the writer.  The perfect example is the Phamous Phrase, “anti-sewer obstructionist.”  This tar-brush branded anyone who raised a critical question, even a critical technical question, as some Moonbeam McSwine urine-drinking blockhead who was mindlessly blocking any progress just for the sake of doing it.  In this case, Bill Garfinkle describes people who disagree with him (i.e. people who want others to file a protest) as people who are trying to derail this project, or people who “inflicted hardship on the community.” (The Sustainability Group “inflicted hardship on the community?” Really? That’s a perfect example of false broad-brushing. )  All of which misses the point, which as McPherson points out, is this: The protest vote is a legally required process that’s asking a very simple question: Do you want these charges added to your yearly tax bill (or, if the county figures out a way to send the bills out monthly) or not – Yes, No.

(Perhaps it’s the name – “protest” vote.  Sounds very negative, doesn’t it? Like something an evil “anti-sewer obstructionist” would be in favor of.  Or someone who’s “inflicting hardship on the community.”  Evil. Bad.  Oooo, “protest” vote.  Had it been labeled “Sewer Affirmation Vote,” would people be bringing out their tar-brushes?)  

But the second, really serious problem has to do (as always) with numbers and costs and how slippery they have always been, depending on who’s doing the figuring.  People wanting to put the largest smiley-face on this project’s cost will move certain figures off the page.  For example, when giving monthly guestimates, Bill apparently thinks that  the hook up costs shouldn’t be in the total monthly costs since some people will pay for that in cash which apparently, in Bill’s world, somehow takes that amount off the table?  Ditto for the $18 a month for the previous assessment.  So it appears that he views adding in those numbers is somehow a “scare tactic?”

In the real world, however, the real world of real money, real monthly expenses, those numbers aren’t “scare tactics;” they’re .  . well, real.  It doesn’t matter what box you put them in (previous assessment, hook up fees, sewer/water charges, regular water charges) their total divided by 12 will be what a homeowner will really be paying each month. So you can end up with individual lows and highs, but pretending somehow the high numbers aren’t correct because you’ve put them in a different box is just dishonest and misleading. Yet that tactic has been consistently used by all sides, which just adds to the distrust and confusion.

So, please.  The Protest paperwork is a legal process, your response is entirely up to you.  As Gail points out, if you can’t afford what’s being proposed, you say No.  If you can afford it and want it, you don’t do anything since  doing nothing counts as a Yes vote.  Simple.  And the sewer cost numbers really need to be dealt with honestly without parsing them into pretend categories.  Take ALL your total guestimate costs and divide it by 12. Simple.  Then pray the contractors are hungry in these lean times and the bids for the project will come in much cheaper and the undeveloped property owners vote to cough up a chunk of money early on to start paying for the project well before they can develop. Then start thinking up ways (and start saving and budgeting for major low-flow product purchases) to cut your indoor water-use. And wait to see if the county uses the 2010 census numbers rather than the old 2000 census numbers they’re presently using and then hope that some alarm bells will ring in Washington so that someone will do an affordability study so we’ll know what percentage of our community will be forced to leave their homes, then pray for those people.    

But, for Chrissakes, retire the “anti-sewer obstructionist” mantra.  That phrase and others like it were a deliberately designed marketing/branding device to spread the Big Lie about a lot of people in order to quash any and all criticism and/or input from anyone who opposed Tri-W and/or disagreed in any way with the person using the phrase. It was and remains dishonest to the core and has caused untold damage to this community. Enough, already.

Bill’s Op/Ed-ish

Déjà vu in Los Osos
Once again the same group of people -- who forced the 2005 waste water project to be canceled, wasted the monies secured in the 2001 Prop 18 assessment (which we are still paying), caused the LOCSD to enter into bankruptcy, and opened the door for the Regional Water Quality Control Board to issue cease and desist orders -– have launched a campaign to derail the County waste water project for Los Osos.
This vocal minority of residents has put together a mass mailing to the property owners in the Los Osos prohibition zone to persuade them to send in formal protests to the current Prop 18 Rates and Charges Ordinance that will be heard by the Board of Supervisors next Tuesday, December 14th.
The document that was sent out is rife with unfounded assumptions, half truths, misleading statements and scare tactics.
To arrive at their estimate of monthly charges at $243 to $363 they add in the $18 from the failed 2005 project which they stopped but still must be paid regardless of the outcome of the protest vote. Also included in their figure is an ongoing charge of $50 to $100 for sewer hook up which is not a component of the projects monthly cost. Each homeowner will approach the one time cost to hook to the system differently. As a result the actual projected costs on a monthly basis would range from $169 for a single person residence to $244 for a family of 6 based on estimated water usage.
If the undeveloped properties are brought into the project, which is highly likely, then the range of costs drop down to $137 to $213.
The writers of the document state that if the protest vote fails (i.e. the project moves forward) then the County will have no incentive to complete the HCP (Habitat Conservation Plan), LCP (Local Coastal Plan) Update, amend the Estero Area Plan and have a ground water master plan. This is all untrue. The Coastal Commission requires this in order for the project to be completed.
It is also important to note that all of the costs for the project are based on calculations made in 2007 with built in inflation based on the economy at that time. Since then we have entered into a recessionary period and all signs suggest that the project could come in well under those numbers. This would further reduce individual Rates and Charges.
 The county is currently working diligently to access additional funding through grants and special financing that could reduce the costs and also provide assistance to disadvantaged property owners. Hopefully by the time that the Rates and Charges begin in 2014, options will be available.
The bottom line is, however, that the costs will never go down. And additionally if the project is once again delayed it is likely that the RWQCB will begin enforcement of Basin Plan prohibition through fines to individual property owners.
This group of people who dominate all public meetings and hold out false hope must not be allowed to inflict more hardship on the community. I urge all property owners in Los Osos to ignore their petition and allow the process to continue. Do not send in your protest.
Bill Garfinkel
Chair of the former Technical Advisory Committee on the LOWWP

Gail’s Op-Ed-ish Response


 . . . .   UNDER THE CA STATE CONSTITUTION Before YOUR personal property can leined (and thereby taken if you can't pay)  you are asked "Can you afford it?" (reasonable question) Yes or No?

This is a legally required question to the people putting their property at risk and paying the bill.

 . . . . .  

The issue is IF you can personally afford to foot this ordinance for an "open ended" sewer charge filled with uncertainty and millions is added misc. costs. The rates as presented by the County right now will force you to pay $250 to $350 per month on top of your current household budget. (Your on-lot construction/connection is NOT included) 

Personally affordible? THAT is the question. The decision IS YOURS ALONE.

If yes, no problem ---do nothing.
If NO send in the protest letter, it protects you now and in the future. It is your say. If enough say NO- the sewer costs must be reviewed for affordability standards, charges reviewed and refined. The Co will be armed with YOUR "NO " and  can press harder for grants with the 218 protest in hand. Interest rates can be lowered, past $6.5 mil forgiven, and a NO helps establish the disadvantaged community status, so low income programs promised by Gibson are made available. 

Review the power point presentation with the County costs included. A huge concern is approving the  "minimum rate structure" The assessment + an open rates/charges= $250-$350 a mo.

A NO forces A CAP on costs. Contracts with a guaranteed maximum cost were developed, then tossed, and these need to be enforced to control costs.  
 
If you can't afford this, there is no down side to sending in a letter.  

A NO letter simply says you can't put your property and family at risk without some assurance of a maximum you can pay. Your home is the loan collateral for the nearly $183 mil in borrowing required to date. 
I did not address the unfairness in allowing the vacant lot owners to shift the balance, although they do not have an assessment stake or water to develop their properties. 

I hope this helps. Feel free to pass it around.

Best

Gail

79 comments:

Sewertoons said...

Gail's misstatements need to be pointed out. Who is she to speak for the County anyway? She has been accusing and condemning them all along!

"The issue is IF you can personally afford to foot this ordinance for an "open ended" sewer charge filled with uncertainty and millions is added misc. costs."

It is not "open-ended," as Margetson pointed out. If rates need to be raised, there will be another 218.

AND

"The Co will be armed with YOUR "NO " and can press harder for grants with the 218 protest in hand. Interest rates can be lowered, past $6.5 mil forgiven, and a NO helps establish the disadvantaged community status, so low income programs promised by Gibson are made available."

How will the County armed with your NO will be more likely to help? Gee, I think exasperation or dislike might be the reaction! The CENSUS will prove us to be disadvantaged, not a no vote. The SRF moneys will not be forgiven as that is money that belongs to the SRF program and we spent it and we need more of it, NOW, for this project! No court has said we don't need to pay it back! Does refusing to pay back money owed seem a likely tactic to get more from the same place?

No matter how you slice and dice it, the money we need for this remains the same - we will NOT go back to Step/Steg - and to promote this protest to achieve that unrealistic aim is one, sick effort to con the community.

"A NO forces A CAP on costs."

And how would that be achieved? That doesn't even make any sense!

She acts like this second 218 is a lien! "UNDER THE CA STATE CONSTITUTION Before YOUR personal property can leined (and thereby taken if you can't pay) you are asked "Can you afford it?" (reasonable question) Yes or No?" We did that already with the vote YES for the $25,000!

Ask yourself - where did Gail's guidance get you last time?

Sewertoons said...

The worst statement in Gail's letter:

"If you can't afford this, there is no down side to sending in a letter."

Really? Please explain how re-slicing the rates and charges is going to change the cost. And that is all they would be doing - well, besides losing us time!

AT RISK - getting the bridge loan in a timely fashion, the County supporting the CSD in continuing (because without the County, there will be no CSD), and getting CDOs and NOVs if the County walks away. OK, maybe the County won't walk away, but could this get more expensive for us if we delay, say to lose the good bidding climate? How's delay worked out over the years?

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

GetRealOsos said...

Well it sure didn't take Lynette very long to be the first one to chime in with her repeated spin.

It was/is the County's duty to pursue the most cost effective project. They did not. This is the perfect example of public waste (some thought the City of Bell was bad.)

I thought Los Osos was already declared a disadvantaged community and should be able to get a zero percent loan from the State Water Board.

Gail is correct referring this to a blank check, it is my understanding by reading Proposition 218 that sewers are exempt (notice how Morro Bay doesn't get a vote on their project) so when our sewer is in place they will be able to add any costs they want to our bill

And, Lynette, I'd like to point out that if your beloved recalled board had not started the project before the vote, and the State Water Board had not given out the SRF money before the vote, we wouldn't be in the position we're in. The new board could have moved the site, chosen a better alternative project that we could afford. But, no, Pandora had to pressure the RWQCB to put fines out there and get the County to take the project ASAP.

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette states:

"The SRF moneys will not be forgiven as that is money that belongs to the SRF program and we spent it and we need more of it..."

Lynette, "we" spent it?

Huh?!

It was Stan, Gordon, Richard and Pandora who spent it! Not "we"!!!

TCG said...

Ann says "but the second, really serious problem has to do (as always) with numbers and costs and how slippery they have always been, depending on who is doing the figuring."

I agree. In my opinion, the best cost estimates have always been those made by the County when they have worked on the project. The worst estimates, the rediculously low estimates that have seriously misled the people in Los Osos, have been the estimates made by local Los Osos folks. These incluse the estimates by the first CSD group, and later by the Schicker/Cesena/Tacker group who told the voters in Los Osos that if they rejected the project that was in progress and supported a new one out of town, they would be looking at approximately $100 per month.

Those numbers were never realistic and have no relevance to the project that has been approved by the Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors and the Coastal Commission.

That is the project theat Los Osos will have, and I believe that the County estimates are reasonable for this project. Their numbers are intended to be conservative and, hopefully, the final cost will be less.

Los Osoans have known about this project for decades. I refinanced my house many years ago and set aside $25,000 in a CD for this purpose. I know others who also did this (they gave me the idea).

A while ago, the contentious atmosphere in Los Osos finally got to me, and I moved elsewhere in the county. Refinancing and moving are two of several options that people have had for years to deal with this. I have relatives in Indiana who have to spend twice as much as their monthly mortgage for utilities at certain times of the year, and they plan their family budget accordingly.

In summary, yes--past cost estimates have been a big problem, but not those made by the County; and people have had many options, for many years, to deal with the high cost of the sewer.

Ron said...

“anti-sewer obstructionist”

You know what's always cracked me up about that?

The person that invented that phrase, as part of one of her silly "strategies" -- P. Na-K -- is the ULTIMATE “anti-sewer obstructionist."

When I see that kind of crap that B. Garf just popped out, I'm always reminded of my great post from June of 2005 (2005!), at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2005/06/you-cant-teach-sneetch.html

That 5-year-old-post is SO true today: I STILL can't tell the star-bellied “anti-sewer obstructionists” from the plain bellied “anti-sewer obstructionists."

If Julie Tacker and Lisa Schicker are “anti-sewer obstructionists," then what the f are Gary Karner, Pandora Nash-Karner, Gordon Hensley, Stan Gustafson, Bob Semonsen, etc, etc., etc.?

They all killed the County's "ready to go" project in 1999, to futilely chase their dead-on-arrival Ponds of Disaster.

I guarantee it: Had Gary Karner, Pandora Nash-Karner, Gordon Hensley, Stan Gustafson, Bob Semonsen, etc, etc., etc. NOT killed the County's "ready to go" project in 1999, we wouldn't know Julie Tacker and Lisa Schicker today.

Bill writes:

"Once again the same group of people -- who forced the 2005 waste water project to be canceled, wasted the monies secured in the 2001 Prop 18 assessment (which we are still paying), caused the LOCSD to enter into bankruptcy, and opened the door for the Regional Water Quality Control Board to issue cease and desist orders -– have launched a campaign to derail the County waste water project for Los Osos."

Uh, Bill? You DO realize that YOUR OWN TAC showed the "2005 waste water project" to be a complete, "infeasible" disaster, right?

If not, you can refresh your memory at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2010/12/if-supervisor-gibson-really-wants-to.html

... along with your friend's "strategy" to have your entire town "fined out of existence," simply because voters didn't want to build her disaster in the middle of town.

Good god, how friggin' stupid is that guy? Absolutely soaked in "behavior based marketing."

Poor dude.

alabamasue said...

Ron- Nash-Karner never said "fine the community out of existance". What she DID say is "fine the LOCSD out of existance", a sentiment I somewhat agree with. You know this, yet you continue to spread this lie!

GetRealOsos said...

Alabamasue,

You can defend what Pandora said all you want, but it was her who formed the CSD to pay for the sewer, it was her who lied to the community about ponds (when the RWQCB had already said no about that), it was her who wrote herself and her husband in for almost $1 million dollars on the Tri-W plan, it was her who said she wanted the riff-raff out of town, it was her who claims to make Los Osos beautiful and plants trees -- yet supports a gravity system that will destroy many, many mature trees (and Chumash remains too), it was her who dotted Los Osos with out houses (now that's beautiful), it was her that tells the RWQCB what to do. Sailing buddies with Roger Briggs I suppose. It was her who promised when forming the CSD to have a Prop. 218 vote. Ha. etc. etc. etc.

Nothing but lies and harm to the community. No wonder she hides from the people whenever possible.

She's so guilty and acts like it.

Ron said...

A. Sue writes:

"Ron- Nash-Karner never said "fine the community out of existance". What she DID say is "fine the LOCSD out of existance", a sentiment I somewhat agree with. You know this, yet you continue to spread this lie!

Right, so after she "got off the phone" with Briggs to discuss her "strategy," just two days after the recall election, and then Briggs' e-mail box immediately began to fill up with:

""I asked you to fine the Community of Los Osos if the Recall is successful. Well, I am asking you again."
-- Jerry Gregory

and;

"I am asking you to... move swiftly to enforce the sanctions against the LOCSD and the individual dischargers as well"
-- Gail Smith-Deegan

and;

"As much as I hate to say it (being a property owner), I think (the enforcement action) should include action against individual property owners."
-- Martha Neder

and;

"I think each and every septic system in the community should be condemned outright. That would do the trick over night. Make it personally urgent and they will come around... or leave."
-- Michael Reddell

and;

"Please carry out your warning of fines. Los Osos residents need to face reality."
-- Richard S. Sargent

and;

""I am encouraging the Regional Water Quality Control Board to pursue fining the Los Osos CSD and who ever else need be. I personally think the threats of fining our community must come to a halt and action by the RWQCB is the only solution"
-- James F. Godfrey

and;

"I hope you'll start out by fining the CSD and only move to fine the individual property owners if you encounter further resistance and are still unable to get the project back on track."
-- Lisa K. Miller

and;

"In order to expedite the situation and lesson the damage, can the enforcement issue be placed on the October RWQCB agenda?"
-- Pandora Nash-Karner, September, 2005

... was just a coincidence, eh, Sue? All of her followers just, all of a sudden, out of the blue, said to themselves, "Hey, I have a great idea! I'm going to e-mail Roger Briggs asking him to fine my neighbors out of existence," all on the same day?

Before you answer, don't forget this sweet little nugget, that I uncovered:

"Please do NOT copy the concepts in your letter, otherwise, the media will recognize our efforts as a group effort and we lose our credibility."
-- Pandora Nash-Karner

Well, there ya go, A. Sue. If you think her "strategy" was nothing more than a coincidence, and her actions there are defensible, then what can I say?

Mike said...

...bottom line remains... Los Osos is getting a sewer...!!!!

...and it sure didn't have to be as expensive as we as a community have allowed through our collective poor choices...

...as far as can be determined, no individual is speaking for all of this community, not Pandora, not Gail, not Ann, Richard, Gordon, Lisa, Julie, Chuck, Al and certainly not GRO, ron, or aaron...!!!! There are a lot of property owners who are tired of the bullshit and just want a sewer... None wanted the current projected costs, but it is now what it is....

alabamasue said...

GRO- Where did you get the idea I was defendingt Nash-Karner? I was merely pointing out how words can morph into outright lies. Nothing Ron has quoted here refutes my
assertion of lies being told.

Amen, Mike. Let's hope it finally happens.

Sewertoons said...

Yes GRO, the people elected representatives to build a sewer. They did a huge amount of work to get plans, land, funding and the bond passed to do it. Then they took money the state gave FOR THAT PROJECT, and started building. They spent SRF money. The Lisa Board told the community they wouldn't lose the funding, so apparently they thought they had a right to that money too. So when I say, "we" spent it, as a community, yes, we spent it.

Sewertoons said...

ron, the code is all messed up in your 2005 post. Text is on top of an image.

GetRealOsos said...

alabamasue says,

"I was merely pointing out how words can morph into outright lies."

You mean like how Ann wrote,
"The first is the use of the often false and always negative generalized and misleading description of anyone who disagrees with the writer. The perfect example is the Phamous Phrase, “anti-sewer obstructionist.”

You mean like that?!?

Churadogs said...

To give the devil his due, that phrase actually is brilliant. Dishonest, destructive, but brilliant. It immediately frames whatever discussion (and the person doing the discussion)in a negative light. Clearly, an "anti-sewer" person must be irrational/evil/stupid. I mean, who opposes sewers? Some dirty, ignorant, antisocial, negative person. And if you disagree with point A you're . . . "anti," as if A was the ONLY thing on the table. As if there were ONLY one type of wastewater system, for example, and if you oppose that, well, you're clearly "anti." Or if you suggest that point B should be changed, you're now an "obstructionist" because you're opposing point B. And by the time you've 'splained that while you're opposing point B, you're SUPPORTING point A, it's too late. Suddenly, you're an obstructionist. As if there were no nuance, no options, no distinctions. The real meaning of "anti-sewer obstructionist" is "Anyone who opposes Tri W." Which is what makes the phrase so dishonest.

Imagine what the conversation would have been like if the people who used the phrase instead said, "you're opposed to TriW." To which people could say some version of, "yes," or "No, I support the sewer, I just don't like the placement of the treatment plant," or "Sort of,I prefer a STEP system," or some other response that would actually illuminate and enable the conversation to move forward.

But that was never the intent of A-S.O. The intent was to mislead and cut off, cut down, shut up, dismiss and negatively brand anyone who didn't wholeheartedly support Tri-W.

Plus, it's easier to punish people who have wrongly been branded as anti-sewer obstructionists. I mean, imagine how tricky it would be to punish a town that said, "We support a sewer, we just want the treatment plant located outside of the center of town." Hard to paint those people as evil scofflaws in need of punishing, isn't it?

GetRealOsos said...

Ann,

You are exactly right here when you say,

"The real meaning of "anti-sewer obstructionist" is "Anyone who opposes Tri W." Which is what makes the phrase so dishonest.

I can count on one hand the people who didn't want a sewer. That's it.

Everyone else wanted a better location, a better system, and one everyone could afford. But that wouldn't rid the town of so many people, now would it?

GetRealOsos said...

...and one more thing...

If Stan and Gordon were saying the same thing many years back -- that people would be forced to move because of the extreme cost and that a sewer wouldn't correct nitrate problems etc. -- WHAT changed their minds so when Montgomery Watson Harza and the Tri-W came into the picture?

Could it be that MWH is known for it's pay-offs -- like when Pandora was ready to get almost $1 million out of the deal -- what did Richard, Gordon and Stan get?

Why would Stan and Gordon do a complete turn around from the time they wrote to then Pete Wilson about the cost and technology.

Sure makes one wonder!

Oh, and the MWH's break-in of all their computers and records (Johnson/Starlings computers stolen the same night) adds to the question. On top of that, Blakeslee said there would be an audit of the $3 plus million that was missing after the recall. Never happened.

Ron said...

Ann writes:

"To give the devil his due, that phrase actually is brilliant."

His due?

I've always said it -- I marvel at her little "strategies."

She's brilliant at "behavior based marketing!"

How good? In 1998, she got 87-percent of Los Osos to vote for her "better, cheaper, faster" disaster, when her "better, cheaper, faster" disaster included "entirely visible" "floatables," smack-dab in the middle of town.

THAT's how good she is.

She's so good, that, I expose (using nothing but primary sources) how she put Los Osos through 12-years-and-counting of absolute Hell, just so she and her husband could make money, and this January, the SLO County Board of Supervisors are going to CELEBRATE her for 20 years on the Parks Commission. (At least they better! I need that ending for my book. That is a MUST HAVE.)

THAT's how good she is.

Wanna see another great example of how excellent she is at her "behavior based marketing?"

Look at those "fine out of existence" quotes I supplied above.

Notice how SHE didn't e-mail Briggs asking him to fine her elderly neighbors out of existence.

NOPE!

What she did was convince her followers to send Briggs HIGHLY ill-advised e-mails, asking him to fine THEIR elderly neighbors out of existence.

I wonder if Martha, and Jerry, and Lisa, and Richard, and Gail, etc. are pissed at Pandora for doing that?

I mean, look what happened there, it's flat-out excellent: Pandora, as part of another one of her little "strategies," tells her followers to e-mail Briggs asking him to fine their elderly neighbors out of existence, and they do it.

But she doesn't! And because SewerWatch is, well, SewerWatch, Martha, and Jerry, and Lisa, and Richard, and Gail, etc. are now twisting in the "fine my neighbors out of existence" wind, and P.'s all like, "Hey, I never sent one of those e-mails."

She set those people up.

Good thing SewerWatch is around to point out that she "just got off the phone" with Briggs, and THEN the "fine my neighbors out of existence" started to jam up Briggs' e-mail box, eh?

Like I exposed (using nothing but excellent, primary sources, as usual) The Girl is SOOOOOO sneaky.

Trust me, she's great! I LOVE to watch her work. It's so fun to report on, and she makes for an amazing book.

Sewertoons said...

Back to the topic at hand, I see wiser heads prevailed and the protest 218ers did NOT get a table at the Maxine Lewis event.

I got an e-mail with a calmer, less confusing argument than Gail's to protest this 218, but with the same lie in big print at the bottom, "There is simply no downside to sending in your letter." NOT TRUE. I hear the echoes of "We won't be fined, we won't lose the loan" in that statement.

Tuesday at the BOS will be interesting. I don't intend to miss it.

And Gail, "leined" is an invented word, but it should be spelled "liened."

FOGSWAMP said...

Sounds like old Garfinkel is feeling groovy & singing the same old unaffordable tune.

Alon Perlman said...

Gail will not experience a downside from a vote or non-vote by PZ home and land owners. Incidentally RON only two of the five people you listed live in the PZ.
Any future action has a downside.
It may not be a predicted downside or a known downside, but the potential always is there.
I'm talking about simple actions such as breathing.
More complex actions, such as voting based on a belief that another person is sincere, or has correct information, are less predictable, because they based on the affectiveness of marketing.
Marketing to people who have remained compleatly out of the loop can be very affective.
I would have to consider a "No possible consequences" slogan as socially irresponsible.
We will have to wait till after the parade to know. Wouldn't miss it for the world.

Sewertoons said...

FOG, I think we all hope that the County can find more grant money to help those with fixed or low incomes or ways to lower the project costs. Delay is what has caused each project to cost more. The most assured way to lower the project cost is by a good bidding climate. If we lose that due to delays caused by a "successful" protest, I think we are in trouble.

Sewertoons said...

Alon,

Thank you for pointing out how non-PZ people have inserted themselves into this.

Apparently 4 out of 5 directors thought that the downside of protesting was too great a gamble for the CSD to make - and they know a lot more about what is going on with the bankruptcy than we do or can.

Sewertoons said...

I just saw this again - "A NO forces A CAP on costs."

An outright LIE.

Mike said...

Dear GRO... YOU said "Everyone else wanted a better location, a better system, and one everyone could afford."

Well GRO, I'm here, with a few more community members, take exception...!!!

YOU apparently wanted the sewer out of town, but YOU didn't and don't speak for the community... Most of us were pleased that OUR elected CSD put a real and HONEST PLAN out there... Please don't make a bigger ass of yourself by saying that "everyone" wanted the sewer out of town... YOU really don't know what you speak... YOU really are one of the obstructionists... and YOU are one of the biggest whinners that your non-plan failed and now YOU don't like the cost of the County's Plan.... Go tar and feather Lisa, Julie and Gail if you want the real reason for this fiasco.... and ask Jeff/Julie HOW MUCH they were planning to make off selling the Tri-W site....!!!!!!

GetRealOsos said...

Mike (Richard):

Why don't you take a crack at this one:

If Stan and Gordon were saying the same thing many years back -- that people would be forced to move because of the extreme cost and that a sewer wouldn't correct nitrate problems etc. -- WHAT changed their minds so when Montgomery Watson Harza and the Tri-W came into the picture?

Could it be that MWH is known for it's pay-offs -- like when Pandora was ready to get almost $1 million out of the deal -- what did Richard, Gordon and Stan get?

M said...

"Most of us were pleased that OUR elected CSD put a real and HONEST PLAN out there..." Really? How is it then that we recalled them? What about the picture in the park that showed more than a handful of people supporting the "MOVE THE SEWER" sign? How about all the people that spoke at the first CSD meetings after the Recall that stated "they were not fond of the Tri-W site, but felt we had no other choice"? No, you handful of people were the ones that brought this town down by locking in on Tri-W which we now know was not our only option. The day you acknowledge this is the day I might possibly say we probably should have settled for it. Then again, you people that had the gall to email Roger Briggs and the Water Board pleading with them to punish us lets me know that I came down on the right side of this.
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

Welll... I would say that both YOU, M and GRO qualify as "obstructionists".... The rest of the community is going to have pay the high cost of YOUR PERSONAL "feelings" that YOU didn't want a sewer in Los Osos, not anywhere, and for the HIGHEST COST POSSIBLE...!!! I'm sure YOU are proud of your active and totally dishonest, batshit crazy obstructionism...!!!!! Now quit complaining, YOU won...!!! The F**King sewer is out of town....!!!

The Razor said...

!!!!

Ann,

You had a really nice column. It inspired a column that really puts this issue in a different perspective.

Take a look!

Alon Perlman said...

OMG the compulsive masterblogger has written a column about comments ...
Comments on other people’s blogs.
Some may then write comments about comments about comments. Where does it stop? How derivative and distant from the REAL World® can you get?
Welcome to virtual-virtual reality© Pozer™ style.

Sewertoons said...

When quantities of voters/questionnaire respondent numbers returned are brought up, my favorite un-favorite numbers are the votes cast for Measure B. 67.95% of the 9788 voters spoke that day in September 2005. 20 votes separated Keep Tr-W from dump Tri-W. So there was no huge majority hating Tri-W.

Unless GRO can point to a verifiable document to what Stan or Gordon said - and as there have been so many misstatements and inaccuracies in the past from GRO - I see nothing to bother answering in GRO's statement.

I thinlk pozer has run out of relevant topics.

Churadogs said...

Toonces sez:"Unless GRO can point to a verifiable document to what Stan or Gordon said - and as there have been so many misstatements and inaccuracies in the past from GRO - I see nothing to bother answering in GRO's statement."

Uh, Ron, you wanna look that up, a letter sent to various state entities, SWB or RWQB or congresspeople stating that 30% would be displaced & etc. and pleading for help. Signed by the CSD board, if memory serves. Stan and Gordo were using the 30+% number way back when. Wouild be ca 2000 or so, I think. I remember them using that # and a letter to that effect. Presume Ron has it in his files.

FOGSWAMP said...

Toons

Your crystal ball is spinning out of control when you play that outdated, worn-out "delay" card again and again.

Delay is what caused this project to be located in a more intelligent location, just as Roger Briggs advised the Pollutions Group long before they were thrown out of office and wasted millions of $$$$$$$$$$$$$ with their blinders on.

Unless your crystal ball has a future cost of this current project mode, one can only assume that the costs will be less, given our current economic environment.

Alon Perlman said...

Remember Toons; in ’05 the fall back position was a healthy CSD, No CDO’s Issued, Sea water intrusion distant. And it made sense that a cheaper Sewer could be proposed (AND Executed) by a newly elected CSD composed of members who knew what they were doing. The “Wisdom” of the lessons of the 30 years previous, were not available to you and I, since we were still fresh off our respective Boats. And those lessons were not directly relevant, only cautionary. The lesson of the last 5 years IS directly relevant to the current 218, and the swirling fog of Commentary. To a new set of eyes, however; the arguments are face value.
Is there anyone rich enough that even a 5$ sewer bill is not too much, when all you have to do is send in a letter and the monthly bill goes away? “No downside”.
Genius in marketing.
The majority of TRI W “supporters” voted away from TRI W on the Survey because visions of Activists lying down in front of bulldozers were dancing in their heads.
No evidence given for the above. Labeling into “Groups” disguises the number of “Just build it already- Any where but-It’s not getting cheaper”
As for “ran out of material”, of course that happened long ago; at the core there were ever only two themes;
“I’m O.K, You’re not O.K.”
“I’m not O.K, You’re not O.K.”
(I know you know this one, others can look these phrases up under “Psychology”)
Just read your's Fog. I think unfortunately the unaffordable sewer has found it's permenant and final resting place. So no cost reductions are possible, other then what the county can find.

GetRealOsos said...

Of course Lynette says:

"Unless GRO can point to a verifiable document to what Stan or Gordon said - and as there have been so many misstatements and inaccuracies in the past from GRO - I see nothing to bother answering in GRO's statement."

The document does exist. Many people have seen it. Why don't you ask your buddy Gordon about it. He can't deny it. Go ahead.

Of course you don't want to bother answering. If you saw the document, you still wouldn't want to address it.

And talk about inaccuracies -- you are the queen of inaccuracies!

Tell me what I have written that isn't true. I'll go point by point with you. Let's see who's telling the truth here.

FOGSWAMP said...

Alon ...... Oh yes, "Genius in marketing".

Exactly what got the community on board the train when we formed a CSD. That is of course along with the unaffordable $87.00 or so, projected by the County and the $37.00 or so, colorfully marketed by the Genius experts in the field at the time.

Fortunately, the project has found a permanent home in more sensible location, downwind of our homes and businesses.

Unfortunately, the water-boarders did not fine the County out of existence for their long delay, and giving them the finger by issuing more permits.

However you want to spin it, hard hat construction costs are in fact down since the train wreck, which is in a way a stroke of luck, but still unaffordable like you say.

What the poor folk of Los Osos need at this point in time is about another 5 year delay until the economy picks up and the Fed and State governments can afford to fully fund the unfunded mandate eh?

Ron said...

Ann writes:

"Uh, Ron, you wanna look that up, a letter sent to various state entities, SWB or RWQB or congresspeople stating that 30% would be displaced"

HA!

I mean, have you ever tried to pry a document out of the Los Osos CSD that shows that it was a complete disaster to form the CSD in the first place?

To be clear, if the Karner's didn't trick Los Osos into supporting their "better, cheaper, faster" disaster in 1998, EVERYONE that is now employed at the Los Osos CSD would NOT have their current jobs to begin with.

Again, to be clear, EVERYONE that pulls, or pulled, a check from the LOCSD, owes that check SOLEY to the Karner's "better, cheaper, faster" disaster.

So, again, trust me, trying to get a document out of the LOCSD that goes against the Karners, and/or their co-conspirators, in any way, IS LIKE PULLING TEETH!

The scenario is actually kinda funny: "Yes, we have the document you are requesting, but if we give it to you, it will show that the only reason we have our jobs in the first place, is due to an elaborate, taxpayer-bilking scam that was cooked up in 1997-98 by the Karners, just so a few people, but mostly them, could make money, so we're not going to give you that document. Got a problem with that? Then get a lawyer, and take us to court."

Welcome to the LOCSD's take on the California Public Records Act.

However, with that said...

GRO writes:

"If Stan and Gordon were saying the same thing many years back -- that people would be forced to move because of the extreme cost and that a sewer wouldn't correct nitrate problems etc. -- WHAT changed their minds...

I DO know where there's a primary source that backs THAT up.

This is great, and I don't remember ever bringing this up before.

Somewhere around 2000 (maybe 2001), shortly after my 2000, New Times cover story was published, I was watching the tube one night, and, right there, on good ol' public access, was a small panel of people, discussing how, that, now that the "better, cheaper, faster" disaster had crashed and burned, for the exact reasons I showed in my cover story, the SECOND CSD project -- the MWH Tri-W disaster should be moved out of town.

One of those people? Gordon friggin' Hensley!

True story!

Which means that, right now, buried deeeeeep in the archives of local public access televison, is 2000(1?) footage of Gordon Hensley arguing that the sewer plant should be moved out of town.

And to top this beautiful little story off? That show was live, and allowed call-ins from viewers, and I called in!

I asked Gordon, on air, something like, "Well, considering you were part of the Solution Group, and your "better, cheaper, faster" "project" was supposed to be built in the middle of town, why the change of heart?"

Aahahahahaha!

Now, if someone can find THAT footage, OH, please do drop me a line.

I'd be very interested in learning who the other people were on that show.

Mike said...

...ah yess, the braying blame of someone stuck in the past... Say ron, did you ever own a home in Los Osos or just like to think you have some connection with Los Osos...??? Just when was it you were FIRED from the local news...???

GetRealOsos said...

Mike (Richard),

Had to have Lynette answer my post to you? Are you being a coward?

Didn't want to touch the Gordon/Stan letter to then governor Pete Wilson?

How come they fought for affordability and technology THEN and made a complete turn around with MWH's Tri-W plan? Especially when MWH has been busted for kick backs and when Pandora had the nerve to ask for almost a million dollars...perhaps MWH lined the recalled board's pockets and that's why they changed their mind!

Hey, and where is the promised Blakeslee audit of the $3 plus million that was already gone days after the recall election?

Ron:

If Pandora gets "honored" for her many years of service by the County, then we should arrange for a bus to put as many residents at the meeting to tell the viewers at home how her greed and manipulation has destroyed Los Osos.

Pandora is the real riff raff, she just doesn't see it!

Sewertoons said...

FOG, I'm so glad that you are not believing the lies of "The Citizen's Protest" people. Their estimates are $243-363/mo.. That is considerably more than Tri-Ws $200/mo. The County estimate is $194/base rate/average house. But of course if you add in the bankruptcy and the damage to the lower aquifer due to almost no conservation over the past 5 years and the personal damage some of the CDOers felt...

Hey, if you are happy with it out of town, great. Urge your friends to NOT write a protest letter, OK?

Sewertoons said...

GRO says,
"The document does exist. Many people have seen it"

So YOU have NOT seen it? YOU can't give me the title to it?

Show me the document, I will answer it.

Sewertoons said...

Alon, thanks for your post, you are someone that has a unique perspective on this.

ron, better get over to Los Osos and make that public records request. The bankruptcy, sadly, may very well lower staffing levels at the office.

Alon Perlman said...

Hi Fog.
I’m afraid that I don’t see the recession as providing continual reduction in the costs.
It is a one time deal.

And the fact that I drove back and forth between gas stations today to price hunt reminds me that Diesel 2, 4 and six years away will go up, not down.
I’m sure the big contracting companies have people who forecast the price of materials several years into a project before a bid is entered. The big government coffers will take a long long time to re- fill (If ever). I voted for Brown, but I doubt that there is a significant future relief available from Uncle Cal.
Toons did make a point earlier- As long as the Sewer is in limbo –so is the status of the water supply. As for the “Past” – The cost-reduction window of opportunity created by the recall was only potential for a brief period. It did take a lot of hard work to get to the T-W plan, and approvals. The post recall CSD did/could not deliver. It would had taken a real heroic effort and some magical negotiating skills. Can't say I would had done better at the outset, but I can and did say that "I learned from their mistakes". At some point it was easier fo some of that board and supporters to continue to blame others. I attended almost all the meetings of that board and listened to individual board member's perspectives, but I never saw Jeffry Young voting on CSD actions. Fast foward to today and you see Al and Gail prominant.
But I’m not telling people how they should vote- several of my friends are turning in “NO’s”, haven’t tried to change anyone’s mind. Just commenting on the Information out there, and my predictions on what is more likely to happen. Take it as spin or take it as an individual learned and qualified opinion, but for God’s sake don’t take it as gospel.

P>S>
RON
The CSD will at some point re-consider and destroy old records. It came up as a routine suggestion several months ago.

GetRealOsos said...

Sewertoons,

Of course I've seen the correspondence.

I don't personally have a copy.

Ask Gordon and Stan. They'll tell you about it, and I'm sure Gordon has a copy of his letter!

I'll repeat,

Tell me what I have written that isn't true. I'll go point by point with you. Let's see who's telling the truth here.

M said...

I have seen the text of that letter, but I don't remember where. I have done a little searching and discovered a tidbit of it. Also revisited some information that always blows my mind when I read it. Hopefully someone will find the actual letter or source to it soon because otherwise it will gnaw at me until I remember where I saw it.
Mike, I was surprised to read you posting today. I mean the way your veins must have been pulsing last nite in your response to me, I was concerned for your health. I always wonder why you seem to take it all so personaly.
Sincerely, M

Sewertoons said...

GRO, you brought it up, you made the statements. Stop being lazy. When you can point me to the letter or whatever it is, I will answer. It's not my job to do your work for you.

Again, thanks Alon for being so rational. Thank you for bringing up the point that the CSD may re-agendize the destruction of all of those records. It includes videos, check records, wastewater project coordinator files, etc.

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

I'm not asking you to do any work.

I stand by my statement that I saw the letter from Gordon and Stan.

You can believe it or not, I don't care.

If you were seeking the truth, you'd ask Gordon.

If and when I find it I'll post it. I'll post it at the Community Center for all to see.

Mike said...

Sorry M, but I really have no health issues... I just am tired of the insanity by the few who for better or worse, shall always be "obstructionists"... they(you?) have the need to continuely blame the past directors... Those blamers really do not what they speak about, they were not in the past directors shoes, they have tried to make it sound as those directors had something to gain by actually building a legal sewer in Los Osos... but the biggest problem with the blamers is that they don't see the financial damage they have caused for all of us... They haven't given one damn about this community, only their own greedy, ego driven selves...

If you fit that description, then I feel sorry for you, but would like to know that you are then going to be paying the growing price for what is going to be a huge treatment center that we didn't need...!!! The sewer is coming... you wanted it out of town, well, you got it....!!!!

Now quit bitching...!!!!

FOGSWAMP said...

Delay is what Los Osos needs at this point in time, to rethink why in hell we are doing what we propose to do.

Whether we use step/steg, gravity, vacuum, or whatever, one thing for sure is that is there is not one homosapian alive today that will see any change in the groundwater nitrate level by doing what we are proposing to do.

Unless you are a descendant of Methuselah, we will probably never live to see a change, nor will our grandchildren , or great-grandchildren.

The so-called pollution of the bay will continue without a doubt.

The only change we will see in Los Osos is the faces of the wealthy newcomers.

So, where is the urgency?

Mike said...

Yup, more delay is needed....at least until humans no longer create bodily waste...or occupy this planet... Good thinking foggy, aaron must be lending you some of his mental stability pills...and probably some from Al too... Yup foggy, more delay is needed.... Maybe I won't have to pay for your out of town sewer either...

Sewertoons said...

FOG, do you REALLY think that after ALL of the work done - through the Planning Commission, the Coastal Commission, the survey, that the County is going BACK to anything?

You don't seem to get that WE NEED THIS PROJECT if for no other reason, to solve the water issues with the LOWER aquifer! WE NEED CONSERVATION. THIS PROJECT PAYS FOR CONSERVATION.

Do you REALLY want Naci water or desal? REALLY?

Never mind that the Water Board is not forgetting about us!

Sewertoons said...

I might just point out that the studies that I have looked at say our water table will start to sink in about about three years without the septic discharge. If we get a rain like we did in 1995, we might be glad for that.

FOGSWAMP said...

Mike & Toons

With all due respect, I think you two confuse delay with procrastination. There is a great difference.

A sagacious delay is not all as bad as you make it out to be. It is often referred to as clever, shrewd, wise, observant, keen or cunning.

Delay is a daily occurrence in our lives because we delay one task momentarily while we complete another more important task. Like staying in our homes for instance.

Delay is part of our self-regulation.

Knowing the difference can make all the difference in our lives.

Alon

Check out what just occurred in Carson City. We are undoubtedly in a favorable bidding climate nationwide. In 2005 planned road construction cost was $7 million, so it was shelved (delayed). Now in 2010, just completed for $4.1 million.

The wait was well worth it because construction costs plummeted roughly 40% since 2005.

GetRealOsos said...

Mike (Richard) says:

"...they have tried to make it sound as those directors had something to gain by actually building a legal sewer in Los Osos... but the biggest problem with the blamers is that they don't see the financial damage they have caused for all of us.."

Problem is, Mike (Richard), is that it wasn't a legal sewer -- no Prop. 218 and you started the work without the proper paperwork from the contractors (one contractor did it legal) -- rushed the work a month early at Tri-W -- wanted to put the sewer on VIEWSHED -- and too many people didn't want it in the middle of town.

So, Mike (Richard) you are wrong.

YOU caused the financial damage that we face today. That's right -- you -- more than any "move the sewer" people.

Sewertoons said...

FOG, isn't 30 years enough delay? Anyway, it's out of our hands and in the County's. Who remains, remains. It was always too expensive even when it was almost free. We are in a great bidding climate this time. I hope the LONs don't wreck this chance.

GRO, you seem to have a reading problem, as it has been explained here many times how at that time, that sort of 218 was legal. If it was viewshed, why did it pass through the County Planning Commission and the CCC? If the contracts were not legal, they would have been thrown out of the bankruptcy. 20 more wanted it out of town than in town. Hardly a landslide.

You can slice it anyway you like GRO, you cannot deny there was pain caused by CDOs and serious damage that needn't have occurred to the aquifer - and the bankruptcy is an expensive disaster. So the final cost of this sewer remains to be seen.

It gets tiring doing all the thinking for you.

Churadogs said...

If I get time, I"ll scrounge through my files for the 30% letter. But, meantime, all of you seem to be missing the point of that letter. It existed, I recall seeing it, it was no secret. At the time the CSD folk were using the 30% number based on best guesstimates of the number of people who couldn't afford the then-proposed Tri W sewer project, as in, "Approximately 30% of our community will be displace on account of cost, so [elected official/entity]Please help, please get grant money & etc." What the point here is, isn't the letter -- which exists/existed -- it was the 30% guestimate number. My question was to wonder IF that percentage still pertains or, because of the economy, is it now higher? Or lower? The town has Yuppified since 2000. Likely there's more rich folks who won't be displaced. and if the ultimate costs come in cheaper than Tri-W, then the number of people who will be displaced may well drop a bit. In either case, perhaps the new 2010 census will give better numbers than the best-guess-at-the-time 30% number Stan, Gordon, etc. were using when they were trying to get this town some financial help in 2000 when Tri-W was finalized. Stan and Pandora & etc. were even manning a table at the Farmer's Market or in front of Carlocks, urging people to send out postcards pleading for help from Congress & etc.

So, once again, the issue isn't the letter (which exists/existed) it's the 30% guesstimate which is under discussion.

Mike said...

...who really cares, it's thanks to the NO PLAN but Move-the-Sewer anyway attitude and actions of the post recall CSD5 who threw away years of planning that has caused the possiblity that some number of home owners will chose to move... I can't feel too sorry that this community, who by only 20 votes allowed this to happen... Lisa and Julie were on the old Board and KNEW what would happen if they halted that very legal project...

Quit trying to blame the old Board, they did what the majority of the community wanted and then became too disgusted with the nasty vocal recall... Only 20 votes allowed this fiasco to happen, it wasn't the technology and it wasn't really the location, it was a handful of activists who were more vocal than the community knew what to do with... instead way too many stayed under their covers and allowed the activists to steal our community... and now we still have to put up with those same loud-mouths who had NO PLAN to begin with and yet they continue to nitpik the County Plan... They really are fighting to forward their own egos to somehow continue to show that no sewer is/was necessary in Los Osos... They still have NO PLAN other than stop any sewer for Los Osos...!!!!!

They really are blind to the majority of the community who just want to get any sewer and end this war...!!!! Ask WHY didn't Lisa have a real PLAN...!!!! She only wanted to halt ANY SEWER....!!!!

It is unfortunate, but it is a fact that some property owners will move because of the extraordinary expense of this sewer and that cost being DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE DELAYS CAUSED BY THE LISA'S, JULIE'S, GAIL's and the handful of ego-activists...!!!

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

You say, "GRO, you seem to have a reading problem, as it has been explained here many times how at that time, that sort of 218 was legal."

Yeah, right, Lynette.

Because you say it was legal, we are supposed to believe it? There was only a 218 vote on MWH design and Tri-W land. The recalled CSD forgot to have another for the project. Jon Seitz admitted that.

Oh, I forgot, you know more than Jon Seitz too. Because you blog 24/7 with your spin.

Then you say, "You can slice it anyway you like GRO, you cannot deny there was pain caused by CDOs and serious damage that needn't have occurred to the aquifer"

The CDO's were placed ONLY to get a yes 218 vote. That was confirmed by Sam Blakeslee. AND the real damage is salt water intrusion Lynette. What has the County done for that all these years? Why did they County allow over 1,000 more homes to be built? You know so much, answer!

Stop walking on the evil side Lynette.

GetRealOsos said...

Ann,

If anyone knows Budd Sanford, you can get from him. From what I hear, he's got many binders filled with these documents. Public Records Requests I suppose.

Mike said...

...and maybe copies of HIS threats to contractors bidding on the original project...???? Good ol' Budd... friend of the magic sand, ego terrorist in his own unique nasty manner...

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

I KNEW you were BLIND TO THE TRUTH -- but didn't realize you can not see that Tri-W was "Viewshed" and ESHA for that matter. All ruined by your friends of course. It didn't have to be that way.

How did this plan get through the CCC etc.?

Ask your friend, Gordon, he has his friends at these state agencies. Isn't that why he is CoastKeeper?! We sure know he doesn't care about the environment!!

Ask your friend, Pandora, she felt she had the power to ask for almost $1 million dollars. She felt the power to tell Roger Briggs what to do, and when to do it.

You never bothered to research out the truth. You go 100% on what Richard, Pandora, Gordon, etc. tell you. (Talk about lazy...)



Ann,

You can see the numbers of people that can't afford the sewer by just looking at the percentage of seniors and disabled in Los Osos. What do they get on Social Security? Maybe $1200 if they're lucky. When you see that the sewer bill will eat up a large percentage of their total income, well you can see who the Dreamers/Realtors want out. Most of the seniors OWN their home out right and when they can't pay their assessment -- the County will get their houses, or they'll sell out real low to the snaky realtors.

...And all this for a project that will do nothing for pollution of the groundwater OR the bay. Nobody in their right mind could say this whole thing is nothing more than a major scam.

GetRealOsos said...

Mike (Richard),

Don't try to tell us that big, bad, contractors were afraid of Budd? Wow!

Afraid of Budd...???!!!

Now, that's funny!

Mike said...

I think we're going to get an early Christmas present today...

I am chained to my desk this week so can't go watch the parade of fools today, but I'm sure we'll hear some feedback later...

Regardless of the tantrum that will no doubt play out, at the end of the day we will have a project that brings up to about where we were in 2004...for a LOT more money...!!!!!$$$$$$$$ Oh well, water down the toilet now... at least the end of the pollution is visible from here...

Next big event: the bankruptcy hearing in January...!!!!

Ron said...

GRO writes:

"Ron:

If Pandora gets "honored" for her many years of service by the County, then we should arrange for a bus to put as many residents at the meeting to tell the viewers at home how her greed and manipulation has destroyed Los Osos.
"

Yep, that's kinda the point.

Those "presentations" that the Supes do, allow for public comment.

How sweet would that be?

Here's ol' P. being "honored" at a BOS meeting, and one public commenter after another is recounting, blow-by-blow, the absolutely horrible things she's done to Los Osos, AND SLO County (and California, for that matter) over the past 12-years-and counting: From "fine out of existence," to "better, cheaper, faster," to the two $10,000 donations she got from MWH AND Barnard, just days AFTER the recall election, and then how she immediately began to financially donate to the Bruce Gibson for Supervisor campaign, oh just on, and on, and on.

If you want to see an excellent example of what I'm after, check out this link.

It's an official resolution from the Supes 11/23/10 meeting, "Recognizing Eugene Mehlschau for nine years of service on the San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission. "

That's EXACTLY what we need to get Supervisor Gibson to do.

A simple resolution "Recognizing Pandora Nash-Karner, for 20 years of service on the San Luis Obispo County Parks Commission."

PLEASE help me lobby for that, here's Bruce's e-mail address:

bgibson@co.slo.ca.us

How fun would that be? It'll be hilarious. A historic moment in SLO County government history!

Hey, I smell a Kumbaya moment: Considering that "Mike," and 'toons always have P.'s back, they can help out on this one, right guys? You two want to see her celebrated, doncha? How 'bout you A. Sue?

PLEASE, send Bruce an e-mail asking him to recognize her 20 years.

Something we can ALL get together on -- " Celebrate Pandora!"

If I get around to it, I'll create a post at SewerWatch outlining some "concepts" to send Gibson on why he should do that resolution, but, for the love of god, whatever you do:

"Please do NOT copy the concepts in your letter, otherwise, the media will recognize our efforts as a group effort and we lose our credibility."
-- Pandora Nash-Karner

Sewertoons said...

Interesting response to the 30% thing. Having not seen the letter, but writing to what Ann has written, it sounds like they were painting a bleak picture to get money to help the people with lower incomes. Is that a bad thing?

How much was the project going to cost before all the lawsuits by Al and Lisa, etc. caused the price to escalate? I refer to the Sorrel Marks Water Board timeline of costs showing how each lawsuit's delay upped the price on Tri-W.

As to the final cost of this sewer, the damage to the lower aquifer which could have been lessened by the almost identical toilet retrofits, conservation measures of the Tri-W project, the cost of the bankruptcy on the community, the cost to those who had a bad reaction to the CDOs - ALL of those costs must be factored in to the final cost of this project.

Now - will there be 51% opposing the current 218 to further increase the costs? We'll know by this afternoon I guess. It is interesting to see who is leading the call to protest. The same people who have been fighting each sewer incarnation not led by their boy, Ripley. Every sewer led by a government agency is fought, every sewer proposed by a for-profit, praised.

Mike said...

Hey 'toons... ya don't think someone is still wrangling for a piece of the profits...??? ...and I know for a fact it's NOT Pandora, nor any of the pre-recall Directors... so who might that be.... Al already "won" a settlement from the Lisa led CSD, so don't guess that mental midget... think bigger, much BIGGER....!!!!

Sewertoons said...

(Only 801 protest letters - the train is picking up speed.)

Hmmm Mike - you say bigger - Julie?!!

Sewertoons said...

Today's performance by former inmate Tom (Wrecklamator) Mutphy was bizarre. He was offering $500 million dollars for - I'm not sure. He has dived off the deep end into an empty pool; the results were awful. He sports a "Jeff" goatee now. I didn't recognize him.

Ann was still taking notes when I left. Tons of great material in today's meeting. I guess the main interesting thing was the lack of protests. Apparently more people want the sewer than don't.

Also amazing was the perhaps mistaken tipping of the hand of the Sustainability Group. "The bay isn't polluted, we can clean up the water at the wellhead, we don't need this sewer." And they had us thinking that we needed one!

Mike said...

...I watched the BOS meeting and laud Mr.Gibson for putting up with the crap thrown at him... reminds me of some past CSD meetings...

We even watched a clumsy attempt to show that 15% wasn't really 15%... but it was... Protest Vote failed....!!!!!!!!! Get ready to pay or move....!!!!

I do have to say,some of those continual complainers don't even own property so why they are allowed time to bitch...!!! ...and Lindy, do you need help packing....????

I did find it interesting that our complainers are already to throw the commercial property owners under the bus...or speeding train...

...since Julie doesn't own property, can't she find a baby sitter..?? ...or maybe jeffie could hold the kid (if they must drag him along) while Julie is still reaching for her moment on stage...??? Just a thought... but why is she dragging that kid around to these meetings... no one wants to baby sit...??? no real friends...??? jeff doesn't like children...????

Oh well, interesting but predictable.... same complainers, same hand wringing... sorry, I have no tears for those whinners...!!!!

M said...

Are you two done yet? Sheesh.
Sincerely, M

Sewertoons said...

Yes, Mike, the attempt to re-do the math was rather sad.

There was an air of frantic desperation in the room today from the "we want to look like we want a sewer but we really don't" people. Al threatened a lawsuit (snore). Step/Steg and the "Environmentally Friendly Fixed Fee Ripley Plan" blather was trotted out to make another final bow (please, please, let this be the last time).

Sewertoons said...

No M. But I think you might be.

Mike said...

Very nicely put 'toons.... very nicely...!!!

Sewertoons said...

Mike, sometimes I just get mad. I look at the chart by Sorrel Marks and see how each lawsuit upped the cost of Tri-W and I see these same people trying to stop this project too. I think that they have finally run out of ammo though. I hope that the Supes take the project as soon as we get the green light from the SRF people. I'd like to see them just try to pull the s#!t they pulled before. I think the County would not be as nice as the old CSD board was.

Churadogs said...

Toonces sez:Ann was still taking notes when I left. Tons of great material in today's meeting. I guess the main interesting thing was the lack of protests. Apparently more people want the sewer than don't."

Speculating and assuming and extrapolating what "people want" from the "protest results" should be done with a great deal of caution.If you recall, about 30% of the county surveys were never returned, about 30% wanted X system the other 30% wanted Y system. That was a We Really Need You To Fill This Out And Send This Back (i.e. actually do something proactive) if your voice is to be heard. Yet 30% couldn't even be bothered to do that.

Yet Protest Votes do the reverse. If you do nothing it's counted as a yes, even though you may really hate or oppose whatever is being "voted" on but you do nothing because you're lazy, or feel it's all a done deal and have given up & etc. Or, in this case, you opened up this 4-page letter, could make no sense of it and tossed it in the round file.

So, maybe you should try this one before you make claims as to what the community "wants." Imagine if the county had sent around a similar kind of "vote," burying "voting" instructions in 4 pages of dense type and the issue was: "We're going to build a STEP system unless 50%+1 mail in a protest form (which we don't include in the 4-page densely written notice) so you'll have to track down your parcel number and/or type out a letter, find a stamp, etc.) How would you characterize the results on what that "vote" would be? That the entire community "wants" a STEP system? I don't think so.

Personally, I was amazed that 800- some votes were actually returned. (and Lacey Cooper's guestimate that if you remove undeveloped property owner's possible votes, you actually do end up with a number higher than the 15%)The system is set up to garner as few votes as humanly possible, which kept me chortling at your and Mike's constant hand-wringing comments over the fear that the vote could possibly stop this project. Not in a million years.

M said...

Sewertoons, So I guess you are going to continue with your agenda of Gravity, no Step/Steg, MWH, ragging on the CSD5 even though you already have victory in hand. Congratulations! You won. Now why don't you take your victory and go away and just leave the rest of us to our misery.
Sincerely, M

Mike said...

...misery...??? Hell M, you brought it on yourselves...!!!!

The entire community is going to have a sewer inspite of your vocal efforts...!!!!

The majority of the community is rejoicing today...

...next up is the CSD Federal Bankruptcy...!!!!

GetRealOsos said...

Found the letter from Stan and Gordon.

Click here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?y4653iryxahvy97