The latest County scandal du jour involving Supervisor Gibson has turned into a slow Death By Muddlement, drip, drip, drip. First came the announcement that he had been sleeping with his aide, but that was nobody's business, so move along. Then the County twisted itself into a pretzel to cover it's behind and announce, "nothing to see here, move along." The lapdog Tribune, a paper that never passed up a chance to curry favor with the powers that be, fell all over itself in failing to ask the necessary questions and settled, instead, for expressing editorial "disappointment" in Gibson's behavior, while dribbling out bits of story that contained delightful, contradictory nonsense.
Case in point was December 5th story by Bob Cuddy who wrote that County Counsel Rita Neal said that "Bruce Gibson violated no policy, misused no money and did not expose the county to any significant legal liability."
Misused no money? Really?
The money allocated for legislative aides is to pay aides to, well, do "legislative aide" work for the Supervisors. The job is a direct hire, at-will position, under the direct control of the Supervisor. It is not an interchangeable county job, with the County being the "employer." So, that budget item wasn't allocated to pay Aides to go work in another office doing entirely different duties. Yet Mr. Cuddy's story makes clear that Ms. Aspiro, Gibson's love interest and former aide, "is still an employee of Gibson's, on temporary assigment, earning $68,890, which is paid from the Board of Supervisor's budget." And that "Gibson is functioning without a legislative aide and has not been interviewing prospective replacements . . ." And "It is not clear who is doing that position's work -- the aides of other supervisors, or Gibson himself."
So, let's recap here:
1) Ms. Aspiro is still getting paid from the Supervisor's budget, which was specifically allocated for legislative aides
2) but she is not doing the work she was specifically hired and paid to do
3) and she is still an employee of Gibson's.
Isn't this where we came into this story? Gibson sleeping with his employee who's still his employee? But now it's suddenly O.K because she moved to another office and continues to not do the work she was hired to do?
Yet County Counsel Rita Neal states that Gibson "misused no money?" Really? And Cuddy doesn't ask the obvious followup questions his own article raised, while the Tribune's editorial the next day overlooked those same questions (doesn't anybody at the Tribune read their own paper?) and wrote one of their infamous editorials, known as The Bland Dismissives: Yes, Yes, very disappointing, but it's time to move along now, so shut up and stop asking questions, case closed.
In other words, pure SLOTOWN! at its finest.
Friday, December 07, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
78 comments:
Ann, thank you SO much for the opportunity to add an important, yet completely overlooked, point to this "story":
In the Trib's "story," Cuddy also writes:
"Gibson may have received a clean bill of health from the county legal staff, but a relentless procession of audience members at the board meeting assailed him, county administrators, and fellow supervisors for the affair and the way they have handled it."
Just when we thought Gibson couldn't get any weaselier, this happens: At the beginning of last Tuesday's meeting, Adam Hill made a motion to rearrange that meeting's agenda schedule, where General Public Comment -- where "a relentless procession of audience members... assailed (Gibson)" -- be moved to AFTER a lengthy discussion involving the County's Ag Cluster ordinance, and Bruce voted "Yes" to rearrange the schedule.
That on-the-spot agenda change forced those in that "relentless procession" to wait for HOURS to "criticize the supervisor."
Then, of course, that agenda change pushed General Public Comment, which SHOULD have been heard early in the meeting (like it ALWAYS is), where the thousands of people like me that were listening to that meeting's broadcast on KCBX COULD have listened to Gibson being "assailed" by "a relentless procession of audience members," back until AFTER the hours-long Ag Cluster discussion, when KCBX goes off the air for their noon Democracy Now broadcast, and I -- and the thousands like me -- never heard a word of that "relentless procession of audience members" "assailing him."
So, just to recap: Gibson knows that "a relentless procession of audience members" is there to "assail" him for his "moral or financial" f-ups, then votes "YES" to delay that "procession" for HOURS, until AFTER KCBX goes off the air.
WHAT... A... WEASEL!
And, of course, I'm sure the Trib will get right on that story... NOT!
I've made the comparison before, I'm gonna make it again: The 2nd District is the Florida of SLO County. Its culture of corruption brings the entire Count(r)y down.
Finally, in the context of this "story," this phrase:
"It is not clear who is doing that position's work -- the aides of other supervisors, or Gibson himself."
... takes on a whooooole new meaning, yes?
I'm just going to guess that the answer is: "Gibson himself"... if you know what mean ; -)
Trash talkers the lot of ya!
Julie Tacker, Tom Tacker and Jeff Edwards. How is that "relationship" working out?
Seems to have worked out quite well for Tom and family!
Spot-On Ann & Ron, love it.
By now, it's clear that Bruce Gibson has about as much of a future in politics in SLO County as a snow-ball in hell.
A 2009 Gallop poll found that 92 percent of us think that sex outside of marriage partners is "morally wrong".
We live in a region that has about a couple of hundred or so churches, which may be considered as an overdose of religion or perhaps residual puritanism, nevertheless, most believe that wedding vows are not to be disdained.
To these folk and others, Gibsons' actions connote a reckless dishonesty that is at odds with our basic integrity because it shows a lack of respect for the most important commitment we will ever make.
If he betrayed her with lies & half truths, is it not naive to believe he treated Los Osos any better?
Just curious FOG, did you write any negative moralistic blog comments on Julie when she left her family to live with Jeff? I did look but I couldn't find any.
If not, perhaps your moral disapprobation tied to your sewer politics.
Let me ask you now then, do you believe she treated Los Osos with a "reckless dishonesty" also?
Ron sez:"So, just to recap: Gibson knows that "a relentless procession of audience members" is there to "assail" him for his "moral or financial" f-ups, then votes "YES" to delay that "procession" for HOURS, until AFTER KCBX goes off the air."
Bwahahahah. Of course! It's just Business as Usual. That's simply how the Board rolls -- and who wants to hear from constituents anyway? The BOS has "investigated itself" and given itself a clean bill of health, nothing to see here so move along.
But Cuddy's story still makes no sense. If Bruce is still paying his aide, then isn't he her boss, directly in charge of her salary, in an at-will job? So aren't we right back at square one?
And if Gibson and others are doing his aide's job (yet he's still paying her to do . . . what?) then why doesn't that constitute a "misuse of funds?"
Clearly, I'm missing something here.
Fogswamp:Re Gibson's "morality," and Ron's referencing him for "weasleness" well, what can I say except to observe that these character traits were clear to me from day one, so none of this comes as any surprise. Just a matter of time.
And, of course, the county and the Tribune's reaction to all this is straight out of their "Oh S--t, The County's F--ked Up Again Playbook," a volume which has been used so many times it's in its seventh printing.
and Julie gets a free pass
Lynette
Sorry sweetie, I'm not gonna try to defend, or undo what's already been done in the past because it's already been done, and it's water under the bridge.
Nice try though.
With respect to loyalty, I like this Grant Fairley quote;
"If you want true loyalty ..... get a dog ..... If you want loyalty plus attention ..... get a smart dog".
Lynette
Sorry sweetie, I'm not gonna try to defend, or undo what's already been done in the past because it's already been done, and it's water under the bridge.
Nice try though.
With respect to loyalty, I like this Grant Fairley quote;
"If you want true loyalty ..... get a dog ..... If you want loyalty plus attention ..... get a smart dog".
I guess, like Ann, you defend Julie Tacker's affairs while married, and condemn Gibson's.
Bottome line, we have a real sewer under construction inspite of the few like julie and Ann, and yourself.
All of Julie's sleeping around didn't bring the end she thought she wanted. Well, she broke her marriage and lied to the community.
Was that any worse than Gibson? or are you still fighting the lost sewer war and wanting to blame someone?
Just why wasn't the very public lies of Tacker and her fucking around made an issue by Ann or Ron or evn the Tribune? Wasn't she supposed to be representing the community, a leader or just a slut?
Trash talkers the lot of ya!
Be nice and carry on.
Ann asks:
"(yet he's still paying her to do . . . what?)"
Uhhhhhh... well... errrrr... ummmm, on second thought, no comment!
And, as long as I'm here, a quick trip down Memory Lane to Hypocriteville:
Remember a few years back, when Bruce was whining about all the county staff time that the public commenters were "wasting" when they spoke during the public comment period, so he limited the amount of time they could speak at the meetings?
Well, four years later, we get a punch line. Straight from Cuddy's story:
"(County Counsel, Rita Neal) said she interviewed Aispuro and Gibson several times; examined thousands of emails on their office computers; reviewed all their travel claims; and spoke with other top administrators, including County Administrative Officer Dan Buckshi and Human Resources Director Tami Douglas-Schatz."
Payback's a bitch, eh, Bruce?
Hey Ron, how about Julie? You slept with her too?
Comparing Gibson to Tacker is false equivalence. The impacts as a result of Tacker and her post-recall board's decision-making only apply to Los Osos. Being a currently elected district representative, Gibson's decisions have more of an impact on more constituents in a wider area.
For example, Julie Tacker and her board transferred their wastewater authority to the County. Now the County is managing it. Under Bruce Gibson's leadership, the sewer costs $174 million and counting. For Gibson, the impact is ongoing while the damage from Tacker's leadership is capped.
"Gibson's decisions have more of an impact on more constituents in a wider area."
Then let's hear complaints from people who live in those other communities - but I suspect with the comments set to allow Anon commenters, what we'd get is just BS. (Now who I'd really like to hear from here are the folks in Oceano!)
I think you underestimate Julie's influence. Aside from stopping a project that cost $154 million, she was part of a board that bankrupted the community, the effects of which are still being felt in the loss of improvements to the water infrastructure/equipment and other services due to lack of funds.The water still flows under the Julie bridge no matter how you want to characterize it and the bankruptcy still shows up on the LOCSD agenda. It isn't over yet. Never mind the years of water degradation due to having no sewer or meaningful water conservation measures due to lack of funds. The biggest complaint out of the LO BOS commenters is damage to the aquifers. Isn't that ironic.
http://www.losososcsd.org/Library/2012%20Agenda%20Packet/121213/121207_LOCSD_SpecialMeetingAgenda.pdf
In any case, we are speaking to personal morality, not supposed effects of it, and if you FOGSWAMP condemn the one, you must condemn the other. I didn't think that there was a time limit on moral opinions.
And I guess you might have to add to the list the 11-page document attorney Julie Biggs of BWS had to write to define what Julie T. could or couldn't do on the board when she began employment with Jeff. The community paid for that too.
Ron, you might pay special attention the the link I provided. Look at the closed session agenda. You will see that you have no more takers on your silly idea for CDO recipients to go before the LOCSD Board for their claim rejection. in order to sue them in small claims court.
Which brings up the CDOs. How could I forget those! It was Julie and the board she was on that got the CDOs and NOVs placed on our homes! I have an NOV on my home! See, Anon above, you were completely wrong in thinking that Julie's damages were capped! Her decisions really are the "gift" that keeps on giving.
Wish there was an "edit" tool here. I should have added that the only reason the people could (laughably) sue for having paid the assessment, is that Julie helped to STOP the $154 million project, thus allowing us our new $174 million project, which rolled into it the products of the assessment money that you falsely characterize as a scam. Which is how we got the CDOs, the only takers on your flakey proposition are part of a STILL current lawsuit against those CDOs!
Yeah...that little gem of legal advice from Biggs to Julie cost $6000 in LOCSD/taxpayer funds.
If she had telephoned Jon Seitz and asked her questions, she would have had an answer(s) within minutes sans the bill.
Gee, stuff just keeps cropping up - I was reading the CSD agenda a saw the rate increase proposal to the Solid Waste Franchise. The average yearly gross revenue now from that is $1,556,498 - but we had to sell that off for money to pay off the bankruptcy, so we won't have that revenue much longer. Thanks Julie.
Uh...
One tiny problem, Lynette. You failed to establish any casual connection between her leadership and the laundry list of LOCSD issues you created.
Also, both the past and post-recall board are jointly responsible for the fiscal mismanagement that has taken place. The "hyper-focus" on Tacker is misleading and, frankly, quite scary.
OMG
You are very funny as all audits prior to the recall were declared clean, and showed definitively that the LOCSD finances were all proper, accounted for and in order. In short, the the pre-recall finances of the LOCSD were solid and under control.
However, after the recall (and the tax revenue and bond proceeds money mis-spent by Julie and her board) the 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008 audits were all declared not clean due to the over-expenditure of about $1,600,000 between October of 2005 and August of 2006.
This is all documented fact available from the LOCSD own records and published audits.
It is clear and undeniable that the LOCSD finances went down the toilet because of the actions of Julie and her board after the recall. To this day the LOCSD is still trying to recover from the extreme financial mismanagement of Julie and her board.
Ya think Julie and Lisa got some kickbacks from their BWS lawyers? wink, wink!
Ron had his head so far up his own straw camode that he couldn't be bothered "investigating" or what ever he calls his crap.
3:54, I can't take you seriously. You pulled a lot of that out of where the sun don't shine.
You can't? or are just afraid she might be correct!
Open your mind for once, Lisa and Julie were only bent on bankrupting the CSD which they incorrectly thought would end a sewer for LO.
"She," you say? Well that explains why that post sounded like an old vagina gurgling!
You sound knowledgeable, her's Julie's or yours?
I think I made it pretty clear that all my posts were responding to this statement about "false equivalence," "Julie Tacker and her board transferred their wastewater authority to the County. Now the County is managing it. Under Bruce Gibson's leadership, the sewer costs $174 million and counting. For Gibson, the impact is ongoing while the damage from Tacker's leadership is capped."
You show no causality Anon 12:42 about Gibson, but no one is calling you out on it, probably because you are the same person as Anon 3:27 who is calling me out on it.
I was also clear to state that it wasn't Julie alone who did all of this, however, her impact is ongoing in a different way than Lisa, Chuck, Steve and John, as they had pretty much faded from view. Julie is still actively promoting her ideas in a range of venues. So one could extrapolate if Julie had an affair and Gibson had an affair and Gibson's judgement is deemed poor because he allowed himself to have an affair, then the same standard should be applied to Julie. I have enumerated instances of her bad decisions, but the comments here haven't gone beyond the general as to Gibson's decisions.
Please point to the causal relationship of Gibson and "Under Bruce Gibson's leadership, the sewer costs $174 million and counting," if you want to compare apples to apples.
Most importantly, I don't think one bad judgment (an affair) means every future decision will be bad, nor were the person's prior decisions bad. You can make bad judgments without an affair. I even think that Julie's bad judgments had nothing to do with her affair, she just just makes them all on her own. I only brought her into this because Gibson was getting slammed and Julie was given a pass by those who now condemn Gibson.
Lynette, you don't live here any more, you have obviously lost touch with this community, what you say is even more worthless now but you never really had anything to say any way. Oh yeah, sorry your house burned down the other day. It was the only way to kill the roaches in your mattress. Good luck in the hills with the hicks.
Sorry to disappoint you Anon 6:23, but I have been out of town only temporarily - which if you were a friend of any sort or type, you would know. My house is fine and I'll be back before Christmas.
One last note, and this is copied straight out of the District's Auditor's report for year ending June 30, 2012,
Impact on the District’s Future Financial Viability
The approval of the District’s Debt Adjustment Plan by the Bankruptcy Court on August 8, 2011, was a major development that would have allowed the District to continue as a going concern pursuant to the terms of the approved Debt Adjustment Plan. However, the bankruptcy court’s order approving the Plan was appealed by the District’s major creditor on August 22, 2011. This appeal was decided by the United States District Court in the District’s favor on April 2, 2012, upholding the decision of the Bankruptcy Court to approve the Plan. Shortly afterward, on May 8, 2012, this decision was again appealed by the major creditor to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. That appeal has yet not been set for hearing, but may be heard sometime in late 2013. Until the bankruptcy case is finally closed, it cannot be declared with absolute certainty that the District will be able to continue as a going concern.
So we will have to wait and see if we even have a CSD in the future.
What does any of this have to do with Bruce Gibson? You people are out of your damn minds.
Anon 10:34 sez:"What does any of this have to do with Bruce Gibson? You people are out of your damn minds"
Uh, yeah, they are. I diagnose Obsessive Fence Fighting Syndrome.
I'm still waiting to see if anyone can answer the questions my original post asked: 1)The Tribune reports that Gibson's still paying his aide. Legislative Aides are direct hire, at will employees, so is Gibson still her boss? 2) since she's not doing her legislative aid-ish job, why is she getting paid. Do to what, exactly? 3) If Gibson and she are still sleeping together, aren't we right back at square one?
Are you applying for the position as the next woman to sleep with Bruce?
In the 2003 movie "Bruce Almighty", Grace is sitting in a coffee shop when the following infomercial comes on TV & the announcer sez "K-TEL Records brings you the 100 Greatest Love Songs of All Time. You'll hear such classics as"
"All You Need is Bruce"
"If You Can't Be With The One You Love, Then Love Bruce"
"Do That To Bruce One More Time"
And who can forget that classic, "Bruce So Horny - He Love You Long Time"
Order today, and we'll throw in at no extra charge, the video "Sweatin' to Bruce"
Your attempt at humor fell flat.
WAH, wahhh.
Wait, Bruce is a real man, he turned down Julie!
Your issues Ann; so take the matter up with the County. Only they have answers for ya.
Meanwhile, I find your current batch of issues very boring.
Time for you to move along.
Ann, County Counsel explained Tuesday at the BOS that she works in the office that she used to work in, the Clerk-Recorders office, doing a specialized job that she can do, and that it is a temporary job that has an end to it. Working in a different office, she must take direction from the woman who runs the office to do that specific job.
I side with Linde on this, when the Clerk-Recorder's job is over, she should go back to being Bruce's legislative aide. (There is no rule in place against it.) She did an excellent job there and was liked by "both sewer side" people. No easy feat.
I don't get what happened to the FOGSWAMP we used to know, courtly, erudite and well-spoken. Some crass impostor has taken over and stolen his name.
What troubles me is that this blog, in my opinion, reflects the nature of Los Osos politics. There is some deep, psychological beyond-partisan bile for others that makes the adjective "obsessive" a puny understatement.
Outside the confines of these blogs and comments, Lynette, your words come across as delusional and mindlessly inane. You are mentally unfit to discuss these matters with other adults because you revert to your pointless prejudices and don't comprehend any other argument that differs than your own. You don't acknowledge. You reject it and respond.
Get some professional help.
Gibson will be forced to resign. It's just a matter of time. Cherie was not liked by "both sewer sides." She was always seen as Gibson's pillow cushion.
Aispuro cannot return as Gibson's aide because she is boffing him and there are actually rules about lovers boffing and working together. The county is not a "Couples Retreat". So that's not going to happen.
Gibson will make sure Cherie has a Happy Ending just like she made sure that he's had six years of Happy Endings.
Neither will be working for the county very much longer. As Mrs. Bruce Gibson, she won't have to. Even after losing 50% of his ill begotten gains to his wife, Gibson will have enough for his "Cherie Amour".
A whole lot of guessing and wishful thinking, as well as some pure Los Osos bitterness showing.
None of you really has a clue what will happen with the Bd of Supv's.
You didn't do anything when your own CSD member was having affairs, you can't do anything about the current state of affairs. The only thing different this time is that you won't have to fund a welfare brat.
You're the welfare brat, Lou, not Julie. Get a life,wimp.
Wait, let's go back to the "people who benefit from taxpayers money" discussion for a moment as it pertains to the LO bankruptcy. How much did CCLO and Al's non-profit de jour receive in settlement from the LOCSD? Remember the cases that they lost and then were in the bankruptcy as high creditors and then were gone? Anyone remember that they were settled? With SRF funds? Or, maybe water rate revenue? Hello - pay attention to the whole story rather than the ones that suit your agenda to be miserable and victimized by government. Our own LOCSD has done far more damage to us than the county - in dollars to dollars - we owe more money from LOCSD actions period and yes, brought on by the Julie/Lisa board. Clearly Steve, John and Chuck abdicated their manhood at the door.
Again, irrelevant.
You certainly are!
Lou has never once blogged, so you are wrong Anon 12:24.
Linde and Julie both have said supportive things about Cherie at the BOS podium, so if those two don't quality as people on the other side from the one I'm on (where Cherie is also very much liked), I can't imagine who else would.
Who will force Gibson to resign? No one, that's who. And private business, not the County has rules that you speak of Anon 11:29. "No County policies were violated." says County Counsel (on 12-4-12 at the BOS).
CASE was paid $128,492.00 for attorney fees and there was a remaining balance owed of approximately $40,000. It came our of the Waste Water/State Fund 601, SRF monies.
Yes, attorneys fees paid for to lost cases by Burkes Williams and Sorenson before they stated that they could no longer represent the district as they had too many conflicts. Well Julie Biggs got her firms attorneys fees paid before the bankruptcy went viral and she had to quit. Why the State turned a blind eye on that one, we'll never know. Thanks Sewertoons for finding the amounts. That got swept under the rug and it was a conflict beyond all conflicts as the board that allowed it to be settled was none other than the Julie/Lisa/Chuck/Steve/John board. Hmmm, maybe not settling those lawsuits would have saved the garbage franchise and we'll never know. So those who keep belly aching about that, take a look at the past that determined your future. That wasn't the only settlement and BWS walked away with a heck of a lot more than that prior to the bankruptcy. So did Wildan. The monies spent on those contracts alone destroyed the LOCSD's ability to flounder out of financial unknowns. So frustrating to see the LON's whine about stuff that they themselves supported. What tools. How annoying to watch them castigate Gibson when their conflicts of interest shattered a community.
Good points Anon 9:41! Julie signed on that CCLO case that was against the District BEFORE she was elected to the Board. Then of course, she voted for the settlement! That pretty much puts the "CONFLICT" in the phrase "conflict of interest."
Get professional help, Lynette.
You can't rewrite history, Tornatzi. Everyone knows Lou is an incurable blogger too. We know you can't say anything else because of the paychecks.
Everyone now knows Cherie was Gibson's squeeze toy, and looking back feel betrayed by her act.
Gibson will resign. It's just a matter of time. You are wrong. He cannot be boffing his legislative assistant so don't expect a reunion any time soon.
Watch it happen. Everything falls apart.
Anon 10:17 sez:"Meanwhile, I find your current batch of issues very boring. '
Uh, so tell us again, why are you logging on and spending time commenting on issues you find boring?
Toonces sez:"Ann, County Counsel explained Tuesday at the BOS that she works in the office that she used to work in, the Clerk-Recorders office, doing a specialized job that she can do, and that it is a temporary job that has an end to it. Working in a different office, she must take direction from the woman who runs the office to do that specific job."
O.K. but the Tribune reports that Gibson's paying her from his legislative-aid fund, yet she's clearly not doing legislative-aid-ish work. In other word, getting paid for not doing the work she was hired to do, while the work she was hired to do is undone or has to be done by somebody else whose own work is then being neglected. That strikes That strikes me as a "misuse" of fund.
Anon 11:23 sez:"There is some deep, psychological beyond-partisan bile for others that makes the adjective "obsessive" a puny understatement."
Uh, Anon 11:23, I suggest, in light of what you wrote above, you go back and read your next paragraph. When I read it I thought, "Gosh, that paragraph sure contains a lot of 'beyond-partisan bile.' Yikes!" I suspect the illness must be highly contagious?
We'll wait and see.
Meantime, thanks Lynette.
Even Ann knows that Lynette is correct, but is afraid to mention Julie's affairs and conflicts.
Ask why Ron hasn't spoken of Julie Tacker's affairs.
It's easy to conflate me as Anonymous with the Anonymous who rails on about Julie Tacker. You know, all these rants make me want to like her, and that takes serious work.
You Anonymous who go on and on about Julie like people who deserve restraining orders, it's time for you to hang it up. The sewer is here. Get over it.
But she's not yet wearing her well deserved orange jump suit, that is if they could find one large enough! Her day is coming though!
The real question is...How long did it take for Rita Neal to look at thousands of Emails , and while she did who did her regular job. or does she have too much time on her hands ? Should Bruce pay the bill? This whole mess should have gone to an independent reviewer. Do the right thing Bruce, resign.
Hang in there Bruce, if it was ok for Slick Willie and Monica, then it's ok for you!
Those losers in Los Osos are only whinning 'cause they were afraid to say anything about their own failed leaderships affairs!
Cigars for everyone at the next Bored of Supervisors meeting!
In other word, getting paid for not doing the work she was hired to do, while the work she was hired to do is undone or has to be done by somebody else whose own work is then being neglected. That strikes That strikes me as a "misuse" of fund."
It is for just a few weeks. Maybe Gibson is doing her work. Does it make sense to mount an investigation for who knows how many dollars to investigate this?
I haven't seen so much hysteria over one specific person in Los Osos and grotesque admiration over Bruce Gibson. He's done a lot of bad things and it's widely available on several websites.
Huh? You need to learn to write, what the heck are you trying to say? You must live in Santa Margarita or Nipomo?
I think what they meant was: Bruce Gibson has a problematic record and it's widely documented.
So does Julie, but Ann has never written any articles in this blog concerning the damage she has done to this community and her former family.
Why only single out Bruce for his affair and yet never mention Julie? They both had dealings with the LO Sewer issues, so it seems there must be a personal vindetta that Ann is fighting.
"I haven't seen so much hysteria over one specific person in Los Osos and grotesque admiration over Bruce Gibson."
Anon 1:36PM, I see what you mean about Julie on this particular thread, although I wouldn't characterize it as "hysteria," but where is the "grotesque admiration," or in fact any admiration here, for Mr. Gibson? (I am happy to supply some myself, but you are talking about what has already been written.) Please come back to us in your next post and point out just where that is, OK?
Did anyone, other than me, think it was hilarious when Tacker got up at the BOS meeting a few weeks ago, and castigated Gibson for having an extra-marital affair?
Hi there kettle, it's me, pot!
"kettle pot"?
Wouldn't it be interesting if Lynette revealed something about her background?
It explains her obsession with Julie.
"KETTLE POT"!!!!!!
What's Ann's obsession with Bruce?
Yes, I did see that and thought, my, that sure takes a lot of gall, she must think no one will notice.
"KETTLE POT, TORNATZI!!!! KETTLE POT!"
Do tell us ALL about your past!
I don't know Julie all that well, but I recall that she separated from her husband, Tom, before she dated Edwards. It's similar to how Maria Kelly separated from her husband prior to having a relationship with Paavo Ogren. And Paavo Ogren was already divorced from his wife, Jill, before he dated Maria.
This is really silly and sad that people focus so heavily on people's personal lives. And I don't agree on having a lengthy discussion about Gibson's personal life either. It should be a discussion about his record and there's plenty to talk about.
Talking about Julie over and over again is, in actuality, griping over someone who hasn't been in office for more than four years. Then when Ron Crawford talks about Pandora Nash-Karner and the recalled board seven years after they're recalled, the same critics of Julie tell Ron to "get over it." You can't have it both ways.
Then when you look at the critics who criticize Julie and think, "OK, that makes sense." Lynette has been madly obsessed with Julie for years, starting from the wood-chipping incident a few years back. Then it went downhill from there. Did you know Lynette was encouraging people to call Social Services on her and have her son, Jack, taken away?
She's followed Julie home after LOCSD and LOCAC meetings. Tom told me that he even spotted her at his house after Julie dropped off one of her daughters there one day and then drove away when she was spotted.
Lynette is one sick puppy. I've encouraged Julie to call the police on her and her husband, Lou, if they cause any more trouble.
You seem to be the one overly concerned about protecting Julie.
If you really know Julie, then you know she had been having affairs throughout her marriage. If she hadn't let her self go into the bloated huge cow she is now, she would still be bed hopping around. Why do you think Edwards won't marry her?
People, people. you're jumping the shark now and have gone completely stupid. Enough pathology.Go home and take cold showers, the lot of you.
Good advice ......... Spiro Agnew called it "nattering nabobs of negativism".
Gibson's damage control talking heads come across as an effete rock band that had done too many tours, singing there old hits too many times.
Gibson best stay in his present day bunker mode and tell them to shut up eh?
"KETTLE POT!" Lynette is just an old dried-up Julie!!!!
God Bless Gwynne Taylor,
Love,
Los Osos
LOL and right on!
I think you nailed the kettle!
Had to pop in and post this great letter in today's Trib, from someone named Joe Dervin, of Atascadero, that goes straight to Ann's question of:
"If Bruce is still paying his aide, then isn't he her boss, directly in charge of her salary, in an at-will job? So aren't we right back at square one?
... and my smart-ass point about:
"... 'he's still paying her to do . . . what?' Uhhhhhh... well... errrrr... ummmm, on second thought, no comment!"
Joe writes:
"Since we are the 'shareholders' of our county, it seems that we are getting worked over — although only financially. Ms. Aispuro has been transferred to another department that had no job openings. Gibson’s budget center is still covering her salary/fringes/etc. Sounds like a 'position' was created for her."
Perfectly put! A perfect marriage of Ann's great question, and my smart-ass point.
I mean, talk about a hint of impropriety: Here's Aispuro, STILL getting paid by Gibson's "budget center," and the two, so far as I know, are STILL... well... you-know-what-ing... and Aispuro's STILL a county employee, and Gibson's STILL a County Supervisor, AND her boss, AND he's STILL paying her "salary" out of his "budget center."
What are we missing here?
Ann's 100-percent right when she wonders how that situation isn't right back to square one (yep, Ann, sure sounds like it), and I'm 100-percent right when I joke about how that arrangement sounds a WHOLE lot like a county employee using public funds to have sex with another county employee. (And no disrespect whatsoever to Aispuro, but that's what that sounds like.)
Devin ends with this great blast:
"By the way, while it’s great that our county attorney has stated that Mr Gibson 'did not expose the county to any significant legal liability,' maybe she left out 'yet.'"
Zingo!
Great letter, especially his, "Sounds like a 'position' was created for her," smack. The funny thing? That hilarious argument is so real, and it's just sitting there... happening... right now. Fruit on the ground, for smart-asses like me, and Joe in Atascadero.
Post a Comment