Question For the CSD Dissolvers
According to CSD Attorney, Julie Biggs, if the CSD is dissolved, then all ordinances passed by the CSD or ordinances/contracts/assessment taxes, etc. passed by the voters living within the CSD also go poof! including – now pay attention here – the CDF Fire Tax Ordinance, the one the community voted on not long ago, the one that gives the community a higher level of service for less cost than the previous fire contract offered.
Gone. If the now dissolved community wants to go back to whatever County Fire/emergency Plan was in place before the CSD was formed, will they get the same level of service for the same price? Or will it cost more?
If they want to hold another special election, that’ll cost about what? $20,000.
In perusing the various flyers being handed out by the group interested in dissolving the CSD, I don’t recall this matter being discussed at all. So, Taxpayers Watch, this inquiring mind wants to know.
Pages
Calhouns Can(n)ons
About the Can(n)ons
Calhoun's Can(n)ons was originally published in 1990 in the (now defunct) Morro Bay, CA, Sun Bulletin, and since 1992 has continued in the various resurrections of the Los Osos, CA. Bay News, Bay Breeze, Bay News, Bay News-Tolosa Press. A few years ago, the Can(n)on was added to the Central Coast NewsMission blogsite. Ann Calhoun lives in Los Osos. You can email her at Churadogs at gmail dot com
To be persuasive, we must be believable. To be believable, we must be credible. To be credible, we must be truthful.
Edward R. Murrow
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; the essential is invisible to the eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
The Little Prince
No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the misfortune is to do it solemnly.
Montaigne
Edward R. Murrow
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; the essential is invisible to the eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
The Little Prince
No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the misfortune is to do it solemnly.
Montaigne
Followers
Posts
Calhouns Can(n)ons
Search Calhoun's Can(n)ons
Adopt a Dog or Cat Today
Local Bloggers and Friends
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(179)
-
▼
March
(24)
- Calhoun’s Can(n)ons,The Bay News, Morro Bay, CACru...
- The Following from Rob Shipe is re-logged for thos...
- The following is a press release from the Los Osos...
- The following is a press release sent from the new...
- Question For the CSD DissolversAccording to CSD At...
- Dang! I blinked and missed it!I hate when that hap...
- Survey Said! Over at www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com, ...
- Calling Paul Revere!The following was sent by Rob ...
- Wait, It Gets Worse. (see previous post)If you’ve ...
- Tribune Writes Context Story, Los Osos Still Goes ...
- Tribune Writes Coherent Story, News At 11!Finally,...
- CDO InfoThe following was written by Rob Shipe, wh...
- Irony 101, Morro Bay versus Los OsosI received the...
- Calhoun’s Can(n)onsThe Bay New, Morro Bay, CA ...
- Job Opportunity!Buried in a small snippet of the C...
- Homework, for those of you with nothing to do of a...
- Law of Unintended Consequences The following is a ...
- Anne’s article originally appeared in the March/Ap...
- Correction & Update: Regarding my previous post, a...
- FRONT PAGE!Ah, my beloved Bangladesh By the Bay ma...
- Read it Again and Weep. Hello, all you folks at t...
- Tree Man, Part DuhThe following email arrived from...
- Calhoun’s Can(n)ons, for March 1, 06, The Bay News...
- A Short BreatherThe Regional Water Quality Control...
-
▼
March
(24)
Central Coast News Radio
Central Coast NewsLinks
CCNM Disclaimer: Calhoun's Can(n)on content copyright wholly owned by Ann Calhoun. Central Coast NewsMission site name and branding images, content and customization copyright © 2005 - 2009. Images courtesy page author, Ann Calhoun, and CCNM editor, Greg McClure; sponsors; and public domain. All writers are responsible for their articles. Permission granted to quote articles herein on a fair use basis, please credit the writer.
15 comments:
Spending $20k once (about $4/household) is considerably less expensive than allowing the CSD to continue to push for a plan that may cost as much as $100/month more than TriW.
As you've said yourself, Ann, we shouldn't worry about chump change items (recall how you dismissed a cost increase of only $4M ... or $800 per household ... to have an out of town plant).
Also, I don't recall you complaining about the cost of the special election for Measures B, C, D and E.
If you want to get outraged at something, how about getting mad at the Solutions Group for promising us something they didn't deliver even though our costs went up and the Recall group for exactly the same?
So what is the purpose of bringing this up? I echo shark, $20,000 is a drop in the bucket. I don't think this is much of a defense for keeping the CSD.
Also, were I you, I would recall that BIGGS said that Measure B would protect us against fines... grain of salt perhaps? Or a bag?
Gosh, Spectator, does that mean we won't be hearing from you again?
As for dissolution being the only solution, since I'm a "twit," that must explain why I'm STILL waiting for factual, accurate, truthful informaton from the County that dissolving the CSD will remove all the CDOs, that the County and County Engineering has actually signed off on assuming the sewer project and returning the Triw W sewer plant to the middle of town, that the County will assume all of the CSD's liabilities and defend against any and all lawsuits that will surely ensue once the sewer plant is re-started, that LAFCO has indicated that they will be reccommending dissolution and, finally, that the County actually intends to vote to take the community back. To date, all I've heard from the county is . . . silence.
Of course, being a Twit may also mean that my head is filled with sawdust and my ears are stoppered up with beeswax, and so I was just MISSING all those official assurances from The County.
Ann, I don't believe that the County is the group that gets to tell us what happens to CDOs. The RWQCB is that group. Ask them.
Furthermore, even if CDOs won't be removed in a dissolution, it doesn't mean that a dissolution is a bad idea on the balance. Certainly it is a factor, though.
I find it odd that you are now arguing that we ought to get all the information before making a dissolution decision. Why didn't you want to get all the information about the "out of town" plan of those behind measures B, C, D and E before promoting that idea.
Ann typically provides information that supports her POV.
She's a columnist, not a reporter. Perks of the job.
Just look at her public documents diatribe. She completely ignored that 6-7 cities were only identified for not providing a phone list, which they did for privacy objections - not because they had major problems complying with requests. And she complains about the Tribune's lack of context!
It appears that Shark and toons are again victims of selective reading or the fact all the services and ordinances you mention don't mean a thing to them. Why do you think that is?
Expectorator gone? Damn maybe we should bust out with the basic cable profanity more often!
Amazing how rudeness with some folks is always a one way street & when their bullshit gets called they get pious, huffy, or just get plain unhinged.
Ann, you are not a twit, you are a thorn in their side, a voice thet try to be crush with derision and pomposity.
" I have the numbers" "Tri-W uber alles". Dissollution & brutal punishment, these are the calls that will unite this community, only these voices matter. All others are fools to be laughed at or bullied.
Bouquets and beer to Ann, Ron, This LOCSD board & Dana Ripley.
A Pile On the Refugee from the Snark, verks and now probably from Toonces predicted within 6 hours and counting...
I don't think that the RWQCB (which is what you meant to say on the CDO's) or the county are going to be very forthcoming on what they are going to do as they don't have all the parameters in which to place their answer.
Do you really think the county is going to say, "sure, we want more work, and we know just what we are going to build?"
One fact though, if the CSD is dissolved, the county HAS to take the governance of this community back, like it or not, and this community needs to comply with state law regarding discharge. The county doesn't VOTE to take us back.
If the CSD is gone, the county will assess the options available and put in a sewer where they find the most viable spot. We do not know where that will be, and how could they at this point? The CSD might surprise us next meeting and say that they have a buyer for Tri-W. The county doesn't have the money or time to waste answering specious questions.
The CSD's liabilities could possibly be rolled into the price of a new sewer if the CSD goes away. They are not going away even if the CSD stays. Either way, thanks to the present CSD we have this debt, and we will pay for it.
As to services and ordinances, we certainly have learned that Ms.Biggs assertions are not necessarily fact. (The supposedly protective Measure B, in effect, got us the CDO's.) The community voted the CDF Fire Tax. The community didn't go away. That will be up to the courts.
LAFCO isn't going to recommend anything until they have looked at what is presented to them. They will look at it in June, the 15th, I believe.
Be patient, Ann. We are never going to know all of the facts in advance. That is called LIFE. And because we want to continue to have a life here, we are trying to get rid of the CSD.
Either way, thanks to the present CSD we have this debt, and we will pay for it.
Actually, it's thanks to the recalled three that we have the debt. If they had not started pounding that money into the ground, the SRF would still be in Sacramento.
Ann,
Wrong again. Thanks to the CSD (irregardless of board members), we have this debt. So Ann, if it was wrong to get the SRF before the election, is it not wrong as well to spend the SRF on lawyers and reports it wasn't intended for?
Now, if there was no SRF money, where would the money for the reports and lawyers come from??
Ann,
You forget that it both the start of construction (which you consider to be a mistake) and the stop of construction (which I consider to be a mistake) that has caused the debt. Your choice to blame Stan and Gordon is out of line if you're not going to blame Lisa and John as well.
The fines and CDOs were caused by the stopping of construction alone.
The previous CSD pounded all that money into the ground RIGHT BEFORE an election that would change the location! So it is thier FAULT for the big debt! They intentionally front loaded the project to spend us into submission! Ann I am so sorry you have to deal with these screwed up dissolvers.. And I still confirm that a property was condemned by the previous CSD on Ramona. It was in a early summer meeting Buel called a 'friedndly condemnation'. Check it out. respectfully Anon
Okay, sure ... the current board's decision to stop construction and keep the remaining money and to spend it on stuff other than construction has nothing to do with our debts.
You are right that if the money hadn't been borrowed in the first place, the nature of our problems today would be different.
Will these identity assumers just stop it? You are proving nothing but your own stupidity, as it is easy to discern the real from the fake. Stop wasting my time.
To all, Unless someone hacks into the blogsite and starts assuming MY identity on the MAIN PAGES, everyone should assume that NOBODY logging comments in this section is who he/she says they are. We have so many anonymouses and now duplicated Spectators and who knows who else. NEar as I can tell, there is no way, except to check postings, to determine who's who. Even Mike Green, the only one who's signed his "real" name may not always be Mike Green, So, take everything typed in this box with about a pound of salt. Please.
Post a Comment