Calhouns Can(n)ons

And The Sewer Project Goes To . . .

In my Nov 8 blog entry, A Mouse Tail , I stated, “ . . . . but you thought the RWQCB “stood down.” Which means you think these people [The Los Osos 45] are “safe” from CDOs and CAO prosecution. You think that because of the 218 vote, the County “has” this project so you’re in the clear.

“Errrrnnkkk, not even close. The RWQCB didn’t “stand down.” The County doesn’t have this project (and won’t have it until the BOS votes to accept it, somewhere waaaayyy down the line) Which means, dear and gentle Homeowners of the PZ, YOU and your home have never left the RWQCB’s cross hairs.”

Well, after posting that, some folks logged on to comment that I had rocks in my head, that the County DID have this project, that a (unnamed) Supervisor said they had the project and so forth. So, I emailed Paavo Ogren to ask him a couple of questions: (1). Did the county have the project? And (2) if it does, “what does it intended to do about The Los Osos 45? They’re still left hanging in the wind . . .”

Here’s Paavo’s reply and my partial reply to his reply. For the folks who claimed I had rocks in my head, sorry, not this time. To the anonymous poster who claimed a Supervisor TOLD him directly that the County DID have the project, please, please contact that Supervisor and send him a copy of Paavo’s email. Clearly, the Supervisor is gravely misinformed, which is soooo not good.

Paavo’s email is followed by one from the Staff of the RWQCB and an e-mail from Gail McPherson sent to Mr. Thomas in response to his email concerning the Dec. 7th agenda.

Read it and weep, Dear and Gentle Homeowner. The Mad Hatter Tea Party Continues Down The Rabbit Hole. Then scroll further below, to the Nov 8 entry, and re-read A Mouse Tail.

Paavo’s reply:

Ann
We need to go through the "due diligence" efforts that are included in AB2701 before the Board of Supervisors considers the formal resolution totake on the project or not. Also, the County cannot begin levyingassessments (making people pay) before that resolution and the duediligence period.

John can help with the details on our upcoming work that will include duediligence, EIR efforts, CDP efforts, technology and site selection, and theresolution.Hope this helps.

Paavo OgrenDeputy Public Works Director

And my partial reply:

Thanks. I also asked about the Los Osos 45, and since you didn't address that, am I correct in assuming that the answer is -- The county can do nothing for them since . . . the County doesn't have the project?. So they're still left twisting in the wind?

And now, an official email from the staff of your local, friendly RWQCB, concerning the December 7th, meeting.

From: Michael Thomas : Tuesday, November 13, 2007 3:24 PM
Subject: December 7 Water Board meeting

The next Water Board meeting is on December 7, in San Luis Obispo. The agenda will be mailed this Friday. There will be a Los Osos information item on the agenda, but it will not be a hearing. The Board will discuss the status of the enforcement actions and the County's process, and may give direction to staff, but will not take action on the CDOs at that time.

Thank you,
Michael Thomas


And now, some interesting comments from Gail McPherson to Michael Thomas regarding this missing agenda item. She reviewed the tapes of the meeting. I didn’t review any tapes, but I sure remember the last meeting. I remember the Board instructing staff to put this item on the Dec agenda so the Board could consider and be able to ACT (if they so chose) on The Los Osos 45’s CDOs and CAOs. (The October meeting didn’t give them enough time for an action item.)

Now, isn’t that funny, how that instruction apparently somehow just magically disappeared. Or an action item suddenly became merely an information item, which can’t be acted upon, but would have to be delayed until some other meeting waaaaayy in the future sometime, maybe., Oh, Darn, Sorry about that. Or, maybe the instructions all just went down a rabbit hole, along with the Mad Hatter. Which means, once again, dear and gentle PZ homeowner, you’re still – despite voting for 218 – in the RWQCB’s gunsights. And you thought the staff and Board would be doing the right thing. That you were “safe.” Think again. Since the County DOESN’T have this project, you’re IT.

(Oh, and need I remind you, some of the Los Osos 45 have hired Shauna Sullivan to file a lawsuit in order to try to secure their (and your) due process rights. If you think they (and you) deserve some help, then give Shauna a call.) .

McPherson’s email: (printed with permission)

Mr.Thomas

Mr _______sent me your message . . . [above] . . . concerning the December water board meeting . I had been looking for the Dec. agenda daily in anticipation of an action item to consider vacating the orders. It is my understanding that the board cannot take action to vacate the orders unless the action is noticed 30 days in advanced and those with the orders are noticed. I have reviewed the tape of the Sept 8 meeting at www.slospan.org the RWQCB staff was directed to do this, and said they didn't have enough time for the October meeting in Santa Barbara. The staff were then told to do it for the December meeting.

I don't understand why staff has refused.

Apparently with the overwhelming passage of the 218 assessment, the county project that is ahead of schedule, the individuals[in] full compliance with all the requirements of the orders- even prior to their issuance- has made no difference to the prosecution staff bent on punishing voters for the 2005 election, as promised.

I am sadly disappointed, and hope the board (and staff) will reconsider and agendize a special meeting to vacate the orders against individuals, level the playing field ASAP.

The Water Board attorney at meetings in May and September has alerted all property owners of their additional ongoing liability that is over and above the individual enforcement orders. He explained that each property could be prosecuted at any time for millions in potential fines for the alleged illegal discharges since 1988. Certainly with that risk and liability hanging over every property in Los Osos should be a sufficient threat to allow the Board to vacate the 46 special orders placed randomly on a few for added emphasis.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and please copy this to all the regional board members and SWRCB.

Gail McPherson




And Now For Something Truly Horrible.

News story recently informed us that the “Small World” ride in Disneyland will be closed for renovation. You remember that torture chamber, don’t you? You get into little boats and ride around from little minature cutzy-poo country to little miniature cutzy-pooo country while that hideous song, “It’s A Small World After All It’s A Small World After All It’s a Small World After All It’s A Small Small World It’s A Small World After All It’s A Small World After Alll It’s a Small World After All It’s A Small Small World,” peeps at them on a continuous feed loop, a torture much more effective and suitable for breaking Al Qaida suspects than waterboarding.

Well, it seems Americans and their children have gotten so fat that the little boats keep sinking lower and lower in the water until they get stuck on the bottom and staff as to come pry them off.

Instead of shutting down that appallingly hideous ride, the good folks at Disney are going to make deeper canals. Or floatier boats. And disappointed patrons being sent away were given . . . wait for it . . . yes .. . . . Food Coupons.