Pages

Thursday, January 06, 2011

Alice in Wonderland, Part HUH?

Some of the Sewer Addicted ankle-chewers who log onto this site and chew, have made it clear to me that they may have missed some important info in the PZLDF case.

A few:
1. PZLDF was originally founded by CDO recipients, among others, who were parties to the lawsuit. The lawsuit was and is and remains an effort on the part of some of the randomly singled out homeowners to protect their civil rights, property rights and constitutional rights from an illegal taking/abuse of process. It has nothing to do with sewer tanks or sewers. It has to do with fines and jail time hanging over these 45 heads (while ignoring all the other homes in the PZ.)

2. If memory serves, and please correct me if I've got this out of order, but the CSD had several CDOs of their own. (Firehouse, Vista de Oro, Bay Ridge Estates) For the ACL heaing, the CSD originally hired Steve Onstott to look out for the district's CDO's on the first Mad Hatter "Trial." During the second Mad Hatter Trial (which resulted when they had to stop and start all over again) Mr. Seitz (CSD attorney) successfully argued that the CSD had no assets the RWQCB could tap into (legally) and slyly noted that the CSD actually IS the People and the People ARE the CSD, hint-hint.  After the ACL hearing, the RWQCB took Mr. Seitz "hint" and then issued their randomly targeted 45 CDO's (Thanks, Seitz).  The RWQCB suggested that  the LOCSD  join the 45 as an “interested party” when they issued the CDO’s to the randomly targeted Los Osos 45 since the 45 were going to be relying on testimony and material already submitted in the ACL hearing, thereby mingling cases and incorporating by reference & etc. I beleive Shaunna and Seitz were the attorneys of record during the second co-mingled Mad Hatter Tea Party “Trial,”  so the 45 and the CSD did have a common interest. At some point after the second Mad Hatter “Trial,”  and after the CSD voted to continue to defend the CDOs in a "real court," (theirs and the 45, which were interwtined), Mr. Seitz severed the CSD’s role as an “interested party” in the lawsuit, while Shauna Sullivan continued on her own to represent the remaining Los Osos 45 who were involved in the suit.

3. The current lawsuit, in which Shaunna is still the attorney of record, is an appeal of the RWQCB actions and decisions. The appeal is confined to arguing only what the prosecution team asserted in the case. This included the RWQCB documents such as resolution 83-13, which is how that issue came into the case. So, while this case has nothing to do with sewers, the reason for all of this goes back to the original 83-13 and the various “findings” and all the other weirdness that 83-13 resolution contained. (For utterly bizarre weirdness, you can’t beat this: Slapping a moratorium on a town claiming that you have evidence that high nitrates in the groundwater are caused by septic tanks. THEN immediately allowing the building of 1,100 MORE homes with septic tanks that will, as you claim, pollute the groundwater with nitrates. You do not “fix” a nitrate problem by ADDING MORE nitrate producers. Then later claim that only 45 people are now suddenly “guilty of” polluting the groundwater when it was your regulatory body that allowed those additional homes &; etc.)

4. The insanity of so much of what the RWQCB asserts has, so far as I can see, gone unanswered by a “real” court of law, including Judge Crandall. And it’s possible that, as I noted in my previous post, looney, left-hand-doesn’t-know-what-right-hand is doing regulatory statutes may trump constitutional guarantees of due process and basic common sense.

For example, one funny (unless you’re one of the 45) outcome in the CDO: The moment The Los Osos 45 hook up to the county sewer, they are in immediate violation of their CDO. The CDO forbids any “discharge” of wastewater/pollution/etc. into the PZ. The County sewer will be “discharging” waste into the PZ. Catch 22: hook up to the sewer, violate the terms of your CDO. Also, the CDO forbids “discharge” of anything, even clean water, so this ban violates the community’s need to recharge the water basin as mandated by laws and regulations adopted since 83-13. More Catch 22.

And, while the RWQCB blandly claims that criminal prosecution and fines are not “likely consequences,” they never explain why are they in the CDO order? Plus, more Catch 22, if these CDO’s are not challenged now, they will not be challengeable if and when criminal actions/ penalties are sought. It’s the old game of: You have to wait until actual harm comes to you and when it does, it’s too late to file your suit since the window has closed. Ha-ha.

Which is another question a “real” court needs to answer. Is it a violation of basic civil rights and constitutional guarantees to create regulations that trap citizens in legal Catch 22’s with NO way to defend themselves or their homes?

While the Razor/Rock posted their personal take on Judge Crandall’s ruling, (while veering off on some irrelevant personal ankle chewing) many of their comments lead me to believe they are unfamiliar with the case as a whole. And, of course, neither R/R are attorneys, so I fully understand someone non-lawyerish not understanding the case as a whole since it’s incredibly complex, been through two judges, whole parts have been tossed out (with no appeal possible until the final ruling), so sorting through what’s left and what really needs to be appealed, is a real tangle.

Plus, since the case is wrongly but constantly reported in the press as being portrayed as sewerish and septic tankish, it’s easy to forget the narrow, non-sewerish issues that actually are being brought to a “real” court. And so it’s simple to veer off into irrelevant issues.

I have no idea if The Los Osos 45 who are party to this suit will file an appeal. As an original non-CDO part of this case, Judge La Barbara removed me from the case long, long ago. (Only actual CDO holders were allowed to proceed.) So, that decision is certainly not mine to make. But, personally, I rather hope they do since the unresolved issues raised in this case are going to show up again throughout the state in the future. And, if they decide not to proceed, I’ll understand that also.

I have said before and I’ll say again: What the RWQCB did to these 45 people was wrong. The reason for doing it (electioneering, coercion) was wrong. The abusive, Mad Hatter, Catch 22 nature of the regulations was (and is) both looney and wrong. And, if it stands, then everyone in the state of California will be Los Osos 45ers. And that will still be wrong.

Oh, and fair warning to some of the more out of control ankle-chewers who comment on this blog. Mother Calhoun and her little trash can icon are watching you.

64 comments:

Ron said...

I have a question:

Why didn't Shaunna Sullivan include my EXCELLENT point, that I first exposed at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-water-quality-control-board.html

... in her lawsuit?

Where I show how, Jeff Young, top RWQCB honk, said in January of '06, that the only reason the ACL hearings happened in the first place, is because Los Osos voters put the Tri-W disaster "on blocks" in September of 2005, however, thanks to AB 2701, four years and $7 million worth of careful county analysis would go on to show that the Tri-W disaster was just that -- a complete disaster, with an "infeasible disposal plan" -- and stopping that mess was, like, THE BEST THING that ever happened to this county.

Which means that the ONLY reason the RWQCB issued those bogus CDOs in the first place is because they were terribly confused on the feasibility-ness of the Tri-W disaster.

In other words, they got badly confused (read: negligence), and because they got badly confused (read: Jedi mind tricked by Pandora), they punished 45 completely innocent property owners.

So, why didn't Shaunna include THAT excellent, excellent argument in her case?

It seems like it would have won that case, hands down.

Curiously-er, Shauuna sits on a Board, The Bay Foundation, whose members read as a who's-who when it comes to who is responsible for the Tri-W disaster, including Gary Karner, whose wife, P. Na-k, was directly responsible (in more ways than one), for having her neighbors "fined out of existence" in the first place.

So, how does Shaunna reconcile that? What's her take that she serves on the same board with many of the people were not only directly responsible for the Tri-W disaster, but also indirectly responsible for developing a "strategy" to have her clients "fined out of existence?"

Because, I have to admit, she seems to have left out one EXTREMELY important point out of her case, mine (of course), while she's also all buddy-buddy with the same people responsible for the CDOs in the first place?

"Part Huh?," indeed.

If I had Shaunna's e-mail address (and I might, I'll have to look around), I'd send her those questions.

GetRealOsos said...

Ron,

That question about Shaunna has been a big question for me.

How can she sue the very people (CA EPA/Water Boards) who fund the Bay Foundation millions of dollars?

It is a conflict of interest.

On top of that, like you said, she's been on this board sitting with Pandora's husband and his friends for years.

She is no property rights attorney. She is no civil rights attorney. In fact, she is a real estate attorney (who owns MANY homes in the PZ) that works with the Van Burdens and has for many years.

I would imagine Shaunna could get in a lot of trouble by accepting the case in the first place.

Did she disclose to her clients that she worked with the Bay Foundation/Regional Water Board?

Ann? Did she?

Mr. Ed said...

Ron,

You obviously have a more objective handle on this than Ann.

The Rock and The Razor stand by every word in our articles. They are filled with truth that the community desperately needs to understand to overcome the lethal legacy of corrupt leadership.

There is no "irrelevant ankle-chewing," just the facts, regardless of who wants or is able to accept the truth or not, for whatever reason.

By the same token, The Rock is not responsible for the impact of the truth on readers with low self-esteem, no sense of humor or absurd political and religious beliefs, or those suffering from chronic guilt, bias, shame or bad karma.

If you're a sand ostrich and don’t want to know what’s going on, don’t read The Rock or The Razor or Sewerwatch -- read the Tribune. Or Calhouns Can(n)ons.

Too many in the community have been too willing to be led by the nose-ring to the slaughter house, so that very soon there will be nowhere to go, and it will be time to pay.

This is our challenge to Los Osos: Break the spell that blinds you. Think independently, act independently. Take your mind back before it's too late, if it isn't already. Wake yourself up from your long stupifying slumber. There's not much time left to figure it out.

Pretty soon paradise will be lying in pieces, and unless things change quickly...overnight...it is highly doubtful that paradise will ever be the same again.

GetRealOsos said...

Ann,

This is fascinating, as I said before.

I have a question that's not being answered.

Gail brought up the "regional plant" in her rebuttal. Why? Why on the CDO's dime? Are the CDO victims wanting a regional plant? Are you wanting a regional plant?

Gail's last appearance on the Dave Congalton show, she again brought up the regional plant and she brought up retro-active fines (the show was prior to the Rates and Charges Co. meeting.)

From what I know, Gail held workshops back in '05 and talked regional (along with Joey) when it wasn't in the picture. They didn't discuss Step in the workshops. A regional plant requires the big pipes.

WHY would Gail promote regional for so many years -- especially when we know that Sam Blakeslee wants one so the developers can build to their heart's content and would then have a place for the entire county to dump their poop and gee, maybe have the PZ homeowners pay for all of it! Gail told at least one person (a credible source) that she herself helped write the legislation with Blakeslee. Gail also said that she would vote "yes" on the 218 on Congalton and she supported the "Compromise" which stated all septic tanks were polluting and supported the County telling everyone that the best project would float to the top and to trust the County to do the right thing.

Well, I have to ask, how well did all that work out us in the PZ?!


Ed,

Thank you. I've always wondered why many half intelligent people here seemed to be "brain washed". But, in time seemed to stop thinking for themselves and rely only on Gail's advice.

Again, how are we doing with that now? We're in deep sh^t! Our town is about to be ruined and we'll have poop coming out of manholes in storms just like the rest of the County. My God!!

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

Ann, the confusion over you being part of this is the fact that your name appears on Case No.: CV 070472, in the recent ruling by Judge Crandall that is the subject of your last 2 blog postings. Since you are not part of the case, yet your name remains, are you liable for anything connected with the case? If not, which legal document supports your being removed from this case?

When the sewer is ready for us to hook up, don't the CDOs go away, therefore making your statement, "The moment The Los Osos 45 hook up to the county sewer, they are in immediate violation of their CDO. The CDO forbids any “discharge” of wastewater/pollution/etc. into the PZ," incorrect?

From the transcript from the public meeting 4:46 p.m. - 7:04 p.m. Friday, April 28, 2006
Page 27, quote from Ms. Okun (or page 33, reading the page number Acrobat displays),

12 "I wanted to address two additional
13 things before making the final staff
14 recommendation. One is Assemblyman Blakeslee's
15 recommendation that the cease and desist orders
16 provide a sunset provision. And they basically
17 do, because what they say is when there's a
18 community system available the dischargers have to
19 hook up to it. Once they do that, they're done,
20 they're in compliance with the order and they
21 sunset."

I believe that this staff recommendation was adopted. Do you want to be the one or part of a group that wants to split hairs over which exact minute the RWQCB is done with the CDOs?

Is Judge Crandall's court not considered a "real" court in the eyes of the law, never mind your feelings about it?

The best and cheapest way for the CDOers to defend themselves and their homes is to not stand in the way of the COUNTY moving ahead with the Los Osos WWTF, as the RWQCB has always stood down as long as identifiable progress was being made on getting a WWTF for Los Osos, (they even stood down for the CSD board that could understand the difference between a plan — as opposed to the CSD board that thought a plan was to have an idea to have a plan).

Sewertoons said...

What is left that needs to be appealed Ann?

Churadogs said...

Toonces:"If not, which legal document supports your being removed from this case?"

You'd have to track down La Barbara's rulings (Actuallly, there were lots of rulings, all in the record. It was early on in the case.)
As for the CDO's, they're a legal document, voted into being by the Board, and it's my understanding that the Board would have to rescind them via a vote officially. The Board initially "promised" they would consider rescinding the CDO's after the 218 vote, which is what those CDO's were all about in the first place. But the Board declined, claiming they coudln't do anything because the matter was in litigation. Remove the CDO's and the litigation trying to remove the CDO's goes away. Duh? That genuinely made me laugh out loud. Plus, look out for the word "basically" (above) or any other weasle word when dealing with anything the RWQCB says. And when it comes to "splitting hairs" over what the RWQCB "says" or "claims" or "promises" or . . . sorry . . nuh-huh.

Gro, what's whatever Gail is talking about on Congalton (regional plant?) got to do with the price of potatoes? The TAC considered regional and dismissed it as too expensive, unwieldy etc.

Ron, as for Shaunna's serving on the Bay Foundation Board, how does that old Jesse Uhruh joke go? If you can't drink their whiskey, sleep with their wives and STILL vote against 'em, you got no business being in politics.

GetRealOsos said...

Ann,

You ask: "what's whatever Gail is talking about on Congalton (regional plant?) got to do with the price of potatoes?..."

And I have to ask why Gail would bring this up about a regional plant in her rebuttal in the CDO case? Especially on the CDO's dime? That IS the real question.

What in the world does a regional plant have to do with the CDO case in court? (talk about price of potatoes!) Why would anyone bring that up for this particular case?

That was my initial question. I may have gone on a bit how she's pushed for the regional plant -- only trying to figure out what the heck she's doing!

But one more thing, you are correct that it was Beverly and Bill that initially wanted to collect for an attorney for the CDO's -- problem is -- Gail took it all over, and if she hadn't done that perhaps the Moylans could have hired the right attorney, one that doesn't work with and for the water board, and just maybe their chances of winning the case would have improved greatly! ... don't ya think?!

Spectator said...

Excellent article Ann, and also excellent comments. Stay with your respect for the Constitution. Welcome to the Tea Party! In the meantime, I will be astonished if a sewer is ever built and functioning within 30 years, but fear not, even if we will not have the benefit of the sewer, we will still be paying for it.

Sewertoons said...

GRO - who LET Gail take it over? it's not actually Gail's fault that she was accepted you know. So sue her? Good luck!

Ann, maybe if the PZLDF case was dropped and since the 2nd 218 has passed, there is really nothing left to stop the project to make the Water Board happy. What is so hard about " the Board…rescind(ing) them via a vote….?"

So if you could get the BOS to ask the Water Board nicely, and as soon as they accept the project, the CDOs really could go away.

But maybe the ragging on the BOS about the collection system weekly (changing it is futile anyway, right?), maybe that is NOT the best approach for asking a favor…?

Not everyone is freaked out about having a CDO in case you forgot - many just signed the settlement.

Sewertoons said...

"Oh, and fair warning to some of the more out of control ankle-chewers who comment on this blog. Mother Calhoun and her little trash can icon are watching you."

Ann, I hope that this is true.

Mike said...

How many CDO recipients actually signed the settlement...???

Then out of the 45 Ann always rages on in her cheerleading, just how many did NOT SIGN...??? 5, 10, 15...???

It certainly was never 45 people wronged as Ann seems determined to "protect"... Time for Ann to find out what the real numbers...

As soon as there finally is a real sewer project, the CDO5 can go find another cause to fight...

The other 14,995 families in Los Osos really don't care how long the CDO5 continue their fight...!!!!

Churadogs said...

Gro sez:" What in the world does a regional plant have to do with the CDO case in court? (talk about price of potatoes!) Why would anyone bring that up for this particular case?"

God Almighty, GRO, have you turned into Mikeee and are now making stuff up? How in the world would I know what Gail was talking about in a radio show I didn't listen to?

"Gro also sez:"But one more thing, you are correct that it was Beverly and Bill that initially wanted to collect for an attorney for the CDO's -- "

I am correct? Uh, can you please find the place in my posting where I claimed anything about Beverly and Bill to be correct about? Or even used the words Beverly & Bill? Are you now pulling things out of your. . . uh, thin air? Talk about "potatoes." First babbling about regional sewer plants, now Bev & Bill -- where'd that come from? You're not making a lot of sense or even operating in context, GRO.

Here's a wonderful anonymous mot you and many commenters on this blog really need to keep in mind: "Beware of the half truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half."

Spectator sez:"Excellent article Ann, and also excellent comments. Stay with your respect for the Constitution. Welcome to the Tea Party! "

Hardly, that's an AstroTurfed Corporate Potemkin Party filled with "useful idiots." The Koch Brothers LOVE 'EM!and will do everything in their power to keep 'em in office so in the chaos they create, they'll slip through all kinds of Koch Industries-friendly legislation.

But, you must admit, key points of how the RWQCB (and other regulatory outfits) operate in the real world is really fascinating. About which the average citizen has NO CLUE. They think their rights are founded and defended in law. Hahahahah.

As for the sewer not being build for 30 more years? Care to make a wager? A cup of coffee says it will be built before 30 years are up. You game?

Toonces sez:""Oh, and fair warning to some of the more out of control ankle-chewers who comment on this blog. Mother Calhoun and her little trash can icon are watching you."

Ann, I hope that this is true"

The trick, Toonces, is picking which ox to gore, isn't it? I mean, should I have dumped the letter that a certain person posted, a letter claiming to come from another certain personage, a letter sent to the CSD complaining about you, for example? I found that lettter sooooo revelatory of the writer and sooooo illustrative of the kind of ridiculous ankle-chewing that certain posters regularly indulge in here, that it spoke such volumes I really had a hard time deciding: keep or dump.

I kept it because, having been sent to the CSD, it's now a "public document," not a private correspondence, and because the educational value of that mind-set outweighed any slight embarassment to the parties involved. It was what it was and it spoke volumes.

On the other hand, be careful what you ask for. That trash can's lid can hit the other way as well.

Mike said...

Can't wait to read Ann's rant about Adam Hill... ain't life in Los Osos so much fun... looks like it's going to be an interesting year at the BOS meetings...

GetRealOsos said...

Ann,

Why are you on my case so Ann?!

I'm not talking about any radio show NOW, I'm talking about what the Judge said about the rebuttal. Gail brought up the Regional Plan in the COURT CASE Ann! Did you read what the Judge wrote?

Why can't you read my post correctly? Why do you keep talking about the radio show. When I originally wrote about the show it was only to ask what the heck is Gail doing -- why up till this day and in court would she still talk regional? Good gosh Ann!

And, I have a couple of friends that said it was Bev and Bill who initially wanted to hire an attorney for the CDO's. I'm not pulling that out of anywhere. It might have been another CDO person, but I was under the impression it was the Moylans. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Don't you remember the first meeting at Round Table Pizza after the CDO's came about? Gail had everyone sign in and later those names on that list were sent by her to the RWQCB because many of the people who signed the list soon got correspondence from the RWQCB. When Gail was asked about this she said she faxed it in by mistake.

I don't understand your behavior Ann.

PS You try to imply that I'm making stuff up. Please tell me what I've made up Ann. Gee whiz! Somebody woke up on the wrong side of bed!

Ron said...

GRO writes:

"Ron,

That question about Shaunna has been a big question for me.

How can she sue the very people (CA EPA/Water Boards) who fund the Bay Foundation millions of dollars?

It is a conflict of interest.
"

and;

"Did she disclose to her clients that she worked with the Bay Foundation/Regional Water Board?

Ann? Did she?
"

Well, did she?

AND is all buddy-buddy with the very people responsible for the Tri-W disaster.

And sits on the very board of the husband whose wife is in the process (present tense) of fining her clients "out of existence."

I mean, do they joke around at Bay Foundation meetings:

"Hi Gar."

"Hi, Shaunna. Hey, by the way, has my wife fined all of your clients out of existence yet?"

And to make all of this even weirder, like I wrote, the ONE argument (mine, of course) that absolutely proves that her clients are 100-percent innocent, she didn't even use in her case -- and that ONE argument just happens to also show that her friends on The Bay Foundation Reeeeeeeeeee [deep breath] EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEly f-d up.

Now that I think about it, I have another question:

Considering, according to County documents, that the Tri-W disaster posed the "highest" risk for sewer spills into the Morro Bay National Estuary, The Bay Foundation, with all of those Tri-W honks, and the MBNEP as a whole, must be REALLY happy that that disaster was stopped, right? Right?

GetRealOsos said...

Ron,

ANY WISE PERSON NOW CAN CONNECT THE DOTS.

I don't think Ann will answer about Shaunna -- she's been had (like the rest of us.)

We're really screwed and there is no way to appeal anything!

GetRealOsos said...

Ron,

I've got another one.

It was Shaunna who represented the polluters at Lake Nacimento. The Feds came in. It was a big deal. I believe they settled the suit.

Now, we may very well be drinking and paying for that very polluted water when it's imported to LO (so the developers can build.)

How's that for ya?

Sewertoons said...

Ann, I was expecting that you might dump the letter that I posted, never mind that it is a public document. I had been gone for a while, some posters asked why, so rather than come back with no explanation or attempt to explain it in my own words, pasting in the document that caused my absence seemed the best way to return with an explanation. Thank you for your indulgence in leaving it. And I agree with you, if I get out of line, dump my posts. Your blog is the best, most posters post here, maybe due in part to the fact that your rules are applied equally to all.

Sewertoons said...

GRO, I missed the "Gail" broadcast, went back to hear the podcast and found that due to technical difficulties he "Gail" part of the show did not record.

TheOpenEye said...

GRO & Ron,

If, as Ann sez, the Tea Party is "an AstroTurfed Corporate Potemkin Party filled with "useful idiots" -- and Ann's politics keen to the left -- what would you call Dem CDO'ers and sympathizers whose shell organization is run by a pro-LO-pollution, gravity-trained Tea Party supporter????

GetRealOsos said...

I'd be willing to bet on the fact that Gail (just as she picked the CSD board members) will have herself (with her license back) and her son (which is now in LO) and Rachael Rosenthal work at the new plant. Gail encouraged Rachael to train for the job. Of course then Rachael opposed Dana Ripley's Step system.

And another big question, why did the County need over 600 acres (Tonini site) if they (county) didn't want some kind of a regional plant? Why in the world would we need over 600 acres for a plant to serve such a small community with around 5,000 homes??!! Thank goodness for Sarah Christie or they would have done it.

GetRealOsos said...

Funny the take on nitrates from many sources according to the State Water Board -- but only in LO is any nitrate problem from Septic Tanks!

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
BOARD MEETING SESSION – DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
JANUARY 19, 2011

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH PRESENTATION ON NITRATE IN DRINKING WATER “NITRATE EFFECTS ON PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS WELLS”
DISCUSSION
Nitrate is a contaminant that is found throughout California groundwater in concentrations at high enough levels to affect human health if used untreated for drinking water. Nitrate is also a nutrient that is found naturally in groundwater below levels that cause health effects.
Common sources of nitrate in water are associated with wastewater (e.g., wastewater treatment plants, septic systems, leaky sewer lines, dairies) and fertilizer production and application. Nitrate dissolves rapidly in water, and once nitrate enters groundwater it can remain there for decades. There is no simple way to remove nitrate from water. Boiling and filtration as a means of purifying water do not reduce nitrate concentrations.
The Water Boards and other public agencies, including the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), as well as various industries that have a role in addressing nitrate in water, are struggling with and investing financial resources in various aspects of the nitrate problem.
The Water Boards are responsible for protecting the waters of the state from discharges of waste, including issuance of waste discharge requirements, and requiring cleanup or abatement of waste discharges. The Recycled Water Policy adopted by the State Water Board on February 3, 2009 required that salt and nutrient management plans be developed and submitted to the Regional Water Boards for every groundwater basin in California within five years of Policy adoption. The State Water Board has provided funding for projects related to various aspects of nitrate in water through its Dairy Water Quality Grant Program, Small Community Wastewater Grant Program, and Small Community Groundwater Grant Program.

Sewertoons said...

GRO, septic tanks if used properly on enough acreage don't pollute. That is not the case in Los Osos. The town used to be able to drink from the upper aquifer. Houses, more and more of them were built - you have said so yourself I believe. Less and less is grown over the tail end of the aquifer - i.e. the unused Giacomazzi fields, and there are not as many cows either. We now drink from the lower aquifer because the upper is too polluted - even for blending. The upper South Bay well can't be used, only the lower. We return all used water to the ground above our drinking water supply…

Do you now connect the dots?

PS, the largest part of the 600 acres, not all of it useable for anything, BTW, were to accommodate sprayfields. Remember sprayfields? Regional was rejected early on in the process. Get a grip.

Churadogs said...

GRO sez:"Gail's last appearance on the Dave Congalton show, she again brought up the regional plant and she brought up retro-active fines (the show was prior to the Rates and Charges Co. meeting.)"

GRO also sez:"Why can't you read my post correctly? Why do you keep talking about the radio show."

Uh?

GRO sez: "Funny the take on nitrates from many sources according to the State Water Board -- but only in LO is any nitrate problem from Septic Tanks!"

Remember the "stealth RWQCB updates" on septics throughout the state? Part I of changing the laws on septics throughout the state. As I said, We are ALL Los Osos now.

GetRealOsos said...

Ann, Ann, Ann:

You keep repeating about the radio show, why? THIS is what I posted:

"I'm not talking about any radio show NOW, I'm talking about what the Judge said about the rebuttal. Gail brought up the Regional Plan in the COURT CASE Ann Did you read what the Judge wrote?"

...I'll repeat that for you again Ann. The Judge wrote that Gail talked about regional in her court rebuttal on the CDO case. Forget about the radio show now Ann please! The Judge seemed puzzled too. Would you like me to locate his statement regarding this?

Well Ann, did you read the Judge's ruling?! Why are you acting so strange?


Lynette,

I posted the State Water Board material because it shows that nitrates are from (not just cows) but other sources (some natural and treatment plants and leaky pipes) AND that grants were available. Has the County applied for any of those?

And it was Bruce/Paavo that said they would be able to add to the plant if necessary.

You get a grip Lynette. The County hasn't been honest one time yet! 600 acres and sprayfields were a complete waste of taxpayers (PZ) money.

Sewertoons said...

GRO, the County went for sprayfields because of political correctness. The Clark Valley people raised the same objections to the plant being in their neighborhood as the town did and threatened to sue. The town not wanting it in their turf but being fine about putting it in someone else's backyard prompted that reaction.

If you are so concerned about the cows, why don't YOU ask the County GRO?

Yes, we agree - adding to the plant was my main wish to keep it in town to prevent further growth. You can't have it both ways. Oh well. Too late now.

GetRealOsos said...

Lynette,

You comment: "If you are so concerned about the cows, why don't YOU ask the County GRO.."

Who is saying anything about cows (but you Lynette) -- get a grip!

PS But we do have horse farms outside the PZ and close to the bay. What about those nitrates?

Sewertoons said...

GRO,
How about asking the Water Board about that - the horse farms, I mean? Feel free!

Churadogs said...

Gro sez:"Gail brought up the Regional Plan in the COURT CASE Ann Did you read what the Judge wrote?"

The only reference I can find to "regional plan" in Crandall's ruling is on P. 14, line 6 (a side reference to what some people brought up during the Mad Hatter Tea party hearings.) I can find no reference to "Gail" or a "rebuttal." Can you find what page and line you're refering to in the ruling?

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

Ann,

The following is what I'm talking about, please notice that the Judge said, "...Petitioners devoted
MUCH of their time to "political" issues (e.g., support for a regional treatment system..."

So, you are right that it doesn't say "Gail" but Gail was running the show with Shaunna. Why "MUCH" of their time to political issues??
You say "some people" brought this up at hearings -- can you tell us who that was if it wasn't Gail/Shaunna?

I just don't understand why Regional was brought up at all in any CDO hearing! That is/was my point!

And my other key point is that it would have been "wise" to have hired a property rights lawyer rather than Shaunna, a real estate attorney that works with the RWQCB!!

I know you stand by Gail, no matter what she does, but hiring Shaunna was a bone-head move for the CDO people. And by hiring Shaunna it sure prevented CDO people from hiring any other attorney that would represent their best interests rather than the interests of the water board!

GetRealOsos said...

Ann,

One more thing. If I was an attorney for the CDO people -- I would have wanted a jury rather than a Judge in SLO.

hugh jass said...

Ann, It's amazing to me how you insist on making "excuses" for Gail/Shaunna. You cannot defend the indefensible...Gail has failed miserably at everything she's attempted. Look at the track record and name JUST one thing she's done that has had a POSITIVE result for Los Osos. As The Razor has stated & Ron agreed with, Shaunna has a big conflict of interest problem with her "representing" the CDO recipients. Another thing I don't understand is the rage exhibited by Lynnette, Alon & Mike (LeGros) toward THE RAZOR & THE ROCK. Have they perhaps "hit a nerve" with you in exposing some very "painful" truths?
Sincerely,
Hugh Jass

Alon Perlman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Churadogs said...

Huge Ass sez"Another thing I don't understand is the rage exhibited by Lynnette, Alon & Mike (LeGros) toward THE RAZOR & THE ROCK. Have they perhaps "hit a nerve" with you in exposing some very "painful" truths?"

Naw, they're just being imature jerks, as usual. Just like you.

hugh jass said...

Please Ann, just the answers please.

Anonymous said...

ambien zolpidem ambien side effects fatigue - ambien causes sleep eating

Anonymous said...

xanax anxiety xanax drug screen test - 2mg xanax equivalent valium

Anonymous said...

buy ativan online buy brand ativan - ativan side effects weight

Anonymous said...

diazepam 10mg diazepam drug interactions - side effects for diazepam

Anonymous said...

sniffing diazepam valium diazepam 5mg side effects - apo diazepam uses

Anonymous said...

buy diazepam diazepam dosage compared to alprazolam - buy diazepam 2mg

Anonymous said...

can you really buy xanax online order cheap xanax no prescription - drug interactions xanax geodon

Anonymous said...

zolpidem ambien zolpidem tartrate er generic - generic zolpidem manufacturers

Anonymous said...

cheap lorazepam ativan dosage usage - ativan dosage guidelines

Anonymous said...

zolpidem high zolpidem tartrate medication - where to buy ambien in canada

Anonymous said...

lorazepam mg 1mg lorazepam much xanax - ativan zombie

Anonymous said...

ativan online generic ativan reviews - how much ativan and alcohol will kill you

Anonymous said...

buy xanax online legally xanax overdose amount - drug test results for xanax

Anonymous said...

cheap ativan how long ativan withdrawal last - ativan side effects benefits

Anonymous said...

soma for sale carisoprodol snort - generic brands of soma

Anonymous said...

valium pills buy valium online overnight - generic valium from india

Anonymous said...

buy carisoprodol online carisoprodol 350 mg interactions - somanabolic muscle maximizer work

Anonymous said...

diazepam drug safest place buy valium online - 4 mg valium effects

Anonymous said...

can you buy valium online effects of valium on sperm - best online pharmacy valium

Anonymous said...

buy valium online what is valium given for - online doctor prescription valium

Anonymous said...

soma sale where to buy soma seeds - soma muscle relaxer generic

Anonymous said...

soma cheap carisoprodol bioavailability - order soma watson

Anonymous said...

buy valium online valium pills buy - cheap valium buy

Anonymous said...

buy ambien online overnight drug interactions ambien and alcohol - ambien dosage body weight

Anonymous said...

buy valium online valium for sale online - buy cheap valium online no prescription

Anonymous said...

buy valium online valium diazepam cats - valium for sale in the uk