Calhouns Can(n)ons

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Too Bad, Los Osos. Your Happy Days Are Over. Oh Dang!

Well, it was too good to last. When they refurbished our wonderful Bridge Bears from a growly dark ursine brunette into a honey blond, I thought maybe Los Osos was in for happier days. No such luck. The honey blond was undercoat. Got an email that artist Paula Zima and some bridge bear groupies put on the final staid, growly, dark brownish, grizzly finish coat.

Too bad, Los Osos. No blonde flings for you. Put your glasses back on, get rid of the Victoria's Secret push-up bra, it's back to the filing cabinet with you! Get me a coffe while you're up and I want sixteen copies of the Fletcher Report.

66 comments:

Gadfly said...: Ann,

Now I understand!
********************************
Top shrink concludes liberals are clinically nuts!
Makes case ideology is mental disorder

WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, "The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness." "Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."

While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to "the vast right-wing conspiracy."
For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by the two major candidates for the Democratic Party presidential nomination can only be understood as a psychological disorder.
"A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity – as liberals do," he says. "A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do."

Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

• creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;

• satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;

• augmenting primitive feelings of envy;

• rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.

"The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."

***********************************
Hmmm...this article fits the behavior of the post recall LOCSD board their toadies.

Gadfly; 8:27 AM, February 17, 2008
Gadfly said...: Ann,

Why do you poo poo the good and positive intentions of Los Osos citizens who have banded together to repair the sysmbols of Los osos, ie 'da bears'. Your obnoxious 'blonde' postings ridicule good folks who want to overcome your ongoing negativity and failed attempts at humor.

Gadfly; 10:17 AM, February 17, 2008
Maria M. Kelly said...: Dear Gadfly,
What Ann will have to notice soon are twofold. One the bears are actually red heads and two, after standing by repaired bear #2 on SB and realizing where her gaze lies and stared with her for quite awhile, it doesn't really matter what Ann's comments are or where the sarcasm is directed.
The beauty is too astounding to be caught up in snippets of smacks at us because we all have one common root - we love Los Osos.
Maria; 11:22 AM, February 17, 2008
Mike Green said...: "The roots of Bushism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how GHW Bush developed from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the Bush mind," he says. "When the Bush mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the Bush mind becomes painfully obvious."

Top notch stuff there Gadfly, of course you might need a sense of humor to get it. LOL; 11:24 AM, February 17, 2008
Gadfly said...: Hi Maria,

True....the beauty of Los Osos trumps Ann's sad sarcasim.

However,

I am tired of standing by while Ann belittles all the good intent of folks motivated to improve things Los Osos in an apolitical manner.

I am tired of her and others croaking about 'process' when it is obvious that the only 'process' they will support is one that they control or agree with; nary a word of compromise on issues Los Osos.

I am tired of watching these fools critizings and stopping the good and required work of folks who have committed themselves to Los Osos.

I am tired of her carping on sewer issues seemly since time began.....her supporting insane folks who have caused nothing but sewer costs become so expensive that I will have to stuggle stay in the town I love. These mad fools have cost me and my family a fortune.

Mike Green....Bush (atleast the last I heard)....is not a liberal. If you want to believve that the enemies of the USA are 'imaginary'; or that the 2800Americans who died on 911 are 'imaginary', or that the souls of the 4000 American solders who have fought and died to protect you right to blog as you just did, or that the tens of thousands of the victims of Sadam Hussein are 'imaginary'.....that is your right.

Gadfly; 12:01 PM, February 17, 2008
Mike Green said...: Gfly, you missed the point, the entire "liberals hate America" rant you posted is a complete "Straw man argument"
Which I illuminated by simply changing the name of the straw man.
Is Bush a "Liberal"?
Tell me, what exactly IS a "liberal"; 12:17 PM, February 17, 2008
Gadfly said...: Mike,

Liberals love America as much as those not liberal....so what ya talking about?

As for a sense of humor, I laugh at what I find funny....including laughing at oneself. Blogging that I should have a sense of humor about what you find as a 'strawman arguement' is immaterial and just more of 'let's attack the messanger instead of looking at an issue'.

Can you really say that the CSD board and the toadies behavior is sane or productive?

Gadfly; 12:34 PM, February 17, 2008
Mike Green said...: Gadfly, When one attacks a messenger a messenger is usually attacked, nowhere did I attack YOU.

"Liberals love America as much as those not liberal....so what ya talking about?"

Please go up to your first post:
""Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded," says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, "

Do you know what a Straw man argument is?

Description of Straw Man

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

As far as the current CSD board, they have worked themselves into a position of inconsequence, I generally ignore them.; 12:54 PM, February 17, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: -LOSCD bears responsibility for the collection and treatment of wastewater in the Vista Del Oro and Bayridge Estates subdivisions located in the unincorporated community of Los Osos-Baywood Park. Specifically, Government Code Section 25825.5(d)(1), enacted as part of Assembly Bill 2701 states that the LOCSD shall continue to operate those wastewater collection and treatment facilities that it was operating as of January 1, 2006, even as the County of San Luis Obispo undertakes the "study of" the construction and operation of a community-wide wastewater collection and treatment facility.

Green,
Given that the Fraudulent use of the 218 doc. is posted in plain sight on www.NOwastewater.com and the Statement of Facts posted in plain sight on www.NOwastewater.blogspot.com both of which have been sent electronically to the County and it's "outside counsel" and taken together with the "statement" above, it would be hard to consider the LOCSD in; "a position of inconsequence".

But that's just my opinion...

The CDO's issued on November 19, 1999 against the LOCSD are not widely known, are they?
Can anyone tell me who was "at the helm of the LOCSD" when they were issued?; 2:42 PM, February 17, 2008
Unknown said...: Wrecklamator...

Do you understand TSO...?; 4:46 PM, February 17, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Mike has not yet elected to publicly share his Profile.

Wut up! The Show Opener??

A water harvesting appliance does make a "wreck" of the county's study process...; 6:29 PM, February 17, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: TUESDAY

County Board of Supervisors. 8:30 a.m. County Government Center, 1055 Monterey St., San Luis Obispo.

781-5450. On the agenda: Budget outlook for fiscal year 2008-09; review of options for increasing county revenue (including possible ballot measures for tax increases); and a public safety subcommittee meeting on gang issues.

Taking the fork "out of Los Osos-Baywood Park"...?; 7:02 AM, February 18, 2008
Churadogs said...: Gadfly sez:"Why do you poo poo the good and positive intentions of Los Osos citizens who have banded together to repair the sysmbols of Los osos, ie 'da bears'. Your obnoxious 'blonde' postings ridicule good folks who want to overcome your ongoing negativity and failed attempts at humor.

Gadfly"

Oh, pllluuueeze. Ridicule good folks? Rubbish. Get a grip Gadfly. You need to lighten up.

Maria sez:" What Ann will have to notice soon are twofold. One the bears are actually red heads"

Bwa-hahah. Dang, you're right. Redheads! And gorgeous ones at that. But you'd better be careful. Gadfly will accuse you of being sarcastic and negative.

Gadfly sez:"I am tired of her and others croaking about 'process' when it is obvious that the only 'process' they will support is one that they control or agree with; nary a word of compromise on issues Los Osos."

Uh, didn't the CSD vote to support the Blakeslee Oct Compromise That Wasn't -- heh-heh. And later support the Blakeslee amendment that gave the issue to the County to begin The Process? And didn't the people of the community vote to assess themselves so as to finance The Process the County has started? And how many members of the community weekly show up at the BOS to object to The Process? Seems to me the majority of this community is committed to and supporting The Process, the one you apparently oppose.

Or is this just another one of your straw men?

Also, if you want to track how this entire project started going off the rails, you need to go read and track all the official documents at Ron's www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com.

The tracks for this train wreck were laid before the CSD was voted into existence. It was a FAILURE of The Process that led directly to the cliff, and hence to the unnecessary expense that makes it difficult for you and many others to stay in this community. Failure of The Process, Gadfly, not The Process itself.; 7:20 AM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Fortunatly technology and the law that supports its promulgation and use, will conserve energy, water, capital and O & M costs is "present" and "accounted" for so the water will become a thing of value, not waste...

The consulting engineering community et. al., has this "FACT" to put into their P~I~P~E...; 9:21 AM, February 18, 2008
Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...: Ann, part of the Blakeslee compromise included having a 218 vote. The new CSD board did NOT support that. Interesting - that was what they had been screaming about - "the old board did not have a 218 vote" - and here they had the chance to do it and they declined.; 11:30 AM, February 18, 2008
Gadfly said...: Ann,

No need for you to lecture me on the facts or history here dearie...I have seen folks such as you come and go in this little town.

I will be here long after you are gone too.

As for my 'lightening up', you are oblivious as to how offensive and juvenile your 'blonde bear, padded bra' comments are to those who took the time out of their lives to show up and do a good deed for Los Osos. You would have been much better off to SAYING NOTHING AT ALL.

Darn it Ann, for once be accountable for what you editorialize on your blog site. Just suck it up, step up to the plate and apologize to the group you have insulted with your assinine comments.

Gadfly; 1:08 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: -I have seen folks such as you come and go in this little town.

-The more sand has escaped from the hourglass of our life, the clearer we should see through it.
Niccolo Machiavelli

Have you been to you eye doctor yet?

Where's your "I love LO/BP but hate the people from the closet through the key hole blogspot?

Nothing to wear?

Power to the People...; 2:27 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Gadfly,
Maybe you aren't comfortable with what you see "through the looking glass"...(in keeping with Ann's Land)

If you are who I think you are, this one's for you:

The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present.
Niccolo Machiavelli

Technology and the Lawwhich supports its promulgation and usemake it possible. Not just my opinion.; 2:36 PM, February 18, 2008
Unknown said...: Mark, you are so out of step with Los Osos, it is you who should move on. The 60's have come and gone and yet there you are still playing with yourself. Even the LOCSD told you to take a hike 5 years ago.

But, since you can't keep your mouth shut, you will soon have a quiet chat with some Federal folks about false claims. It's coming friend, hope your pocketbook is full. You might even get the chance to drink the output of your toy sewer in front of some interested waste water treatment professionals. Piss in, drinking water out?; 2:48 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: If you don't "know" what you are saying you could be making some false claims yourself there, buddy.
Fortunately having the "Feds" show up will be a good this for Los Osos-Baywood Park and for the RECLAMATOR. The sooner the better, you know that Public Service/Servant thing.

I sure hope you aren't just a ' funnin' me"...

As your profile isn't quite up to snuff Ihope you are not abusing yourself in the closet.

Hoowee, I think I'm beginning to get the hang of this here blogger thang...; 3:06 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Sewertoons said...
Ann, part of the Blakeslee compromise included having a 218 vote.

Toons: Have you been able to get through that 218 doc.on our homepage yet.

You may want to read it all the way thru...or not.

Do you know who was at the helm of LOCSD when it received the CDO's dated November 19, 1999. Gadfly? Anyone?; 3:11 PM, February 18, 2008
Gadfly said...: Mark,

As you peruse your copy of NOTABLE QUOTES, why not provide sage words regarding your twiticisims?

You know:

'I'll paint any reclamator, any color, for only $39.95!, guaranteed!'

'Buy my reclaimator and I'll eat a bug!'

'The reclaimator repair man is the loneliest man in town (because he is in solitary confinement for fraud'

'I am not a crook'

Etc.

Gadfly; 3:11 PM, February 18, 2008
Unknown said...: Mark, you truly are out of touch.

I asked earlier if you knew or understood what a TSO was? You are apparently trying twist a case for the 1999 interaction between LOCSD and State Water Board.

The LOCSD told you to take your endless words to the US Supreme Court as the CSD wanted nothing more from you. You had and still do not have any real data, no installations, just sales pitches.

It's still going to be fun watching you piss in the tube and drink out the other end. Maybe you can get Al to join you?; 3:29 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: I prefer to stick with the facts, Fly.

Mike, I would not be so quick to be judging whom is "out of touch", if I were you.

It isn't about what the LOCSD "wanted or wants" it is all about duty of care and fiduciary execution of a public office and such.

You know like when a police officer gives out a speeding ticket even though you "think" it's ok to speed because of a well maintained vehicle and it's a sunny day in the middle of the highway with no cars for miles. See what I mean..

Terribly Sarcastic Orator?

Got law?; 3:50 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Do you know who was at the helm of LOCSD when it received the CDO's dated November 19, 1999. Gadfly? Anyone?; 3:51 PM, February 18, 2008
Unknown said...: Why don't you just call the LOCSD or maybe the RWQCB?; 4:14 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: The question is "on the table" and on "on the record", just waiting for thewritten reply. Thanks Mike.

Trouble Spot Only?; 4:33 PM, February 18, 2008
Gadfly said...: Mark,

When are you going to supply facts/data instead of your bull$hit. We are all waiting.

Oh, you do not have any facts/data! Mark, you are not fooling anyone with your reclaimator song and dance.

Gadfly; 4:37 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Mike said-You had and still do not have any real data, no installations, just sales pitches.

WSM says-
I see you haven't read the Certified Engineering Report either. If you don't know...

There is no requirement for data that has not been met.

The county and the waterboard do not want to lose the project, the water or the money associated with it... Go ask em.

When are those Feds going to get here?; 4:48 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Gadfly,

You need glasses...; 4:50 PM, February 18, 2008
Unknown said...: I'd accept the Reclamator only after the RWQCB says they allow the full scale use for the Los Osos PZ properties. So far they have only said you are making misleading and false claims!; 4:55 PM, February 18, 2008
Gadfly said...: Markj,

You need a brain.

Gadfly

I see no point with continueing any type of blogging with you until you provide valid data supporting the reclaimator.
Adios; 5:55 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: We are working with the WaterBoard. Be patient.; 6:03 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Gadfly,

Got Law?; 6:06 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Didn't think so...; 6:07 PM, February 18, 2008
Howie said...: Mark,

I have a question for you.

I want to sell my house in the PZ, but even if the water board drops the CDOs, almost no one wants to buy into a construction zone that will last years. I have seen the signs that say: "Owner will pay $25,000 assessment."

My question is: If I put in a Reclamator, which costs 10 times less than the county's purple people-eater, can you guarantee me that I will not only be in compliance with State and Federal code, but also that I will be guaranteed protection from legal prosecution by both State and Feds?

I don't want a sales pitch here, and no one else does either. A simple "yes" or "no" response will suffice. If it's a "no" then I would appreciate a "no" (as in the word "honesty"). There is no "maybe" box here. If it is a "yes" I will contact you for further information and then think about it some more.

But, as far as I can see, you and your RWQCB-rattling Reclamator are the only thing standing between Los Osos PZ homeowners and $350 a month sewer bills (via property taxes plus fees and charges).

Maybe as more and more people realize the REAL train wreck coming down county track, the more people will be tempted to turn to the Reclamator -- and be either (a) get caught in your web of false promises, or (b) freed from the clucthes of the corrupt county and state.

Howie

P.S. Gadfly is a pompous jerk who is love with himself. Gee, now I wonder who that could be...?; 7:53 PM, February 18, 2008
Mike Green said...: Mark wrote:
"Green,
Given that the Fraudulent use of the 218 doc. is posted in plain sight on www.NOwastewater.com and the Statement of Facts posted in plain sight on www.NOwastewater.blogspot.com both of which have been sent electronically to the County and it's "outside counsel" and taken together with the "statement" above, it would be hard to consider the LOCSD in; "a position of inconsequence".

But that's just my opinion..."

Mark, unless I've lost all comprehension of the english language, (some would consider that a foregone conclusion) The LOCSD is prohibited from assuming responsibility for the construction of any wastewater treatment system inside the PZ.
Signed by the Governator himself!
By position of inconsequence, I'm greedily thinking of my own pocketbook, a PZ property owner.
I don't see any action that the LOCSD could take, even if they all signed a petition on a stack of whatever holy book you want, that the reclamator or any other system is the best and we are all gonna die in the streets like dogs of we don't get it,
will make a bit of difference.
If you and Mr. Murphy can't stop the county and the RWQCB within one year or less, the County is going to steam full speed ahead with whatever they want.
If you simply delay them you will increase the cost to us dramatically, that would not be a good thing.
Please make all haste to either win or die, I would be perfectly happy to install a reclamator if you could guarantee a recinsion(sp?) of my N.O.V.; 8:41 PM, February 18, 2008
Unknown said...: We are in agreement Mike Green!

Let's see an iron clad guarantee that if we install the Reclamator, that the RWQCB or County or FedEPA won't be dragging each of us into court while the Reclamator slides or the hill just ahead of the LOCSD!

ps. Rescission is basically an equitable remedy that wipes out the existing contract and restores the parties to their situation prior to entering into the contract.; 9:06 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Howie:
I am very encouraged by the insight exhibited in your post.

The answer is "not yet".
We are currently exhasting our administrative remedies.

Please be patient awhile longer. It will be worth it.; 9:12 PM, February 18, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Green,

I wish I had you and everyone on blog in my blind copy section of my correspondence.

You would have gotten copies of the November 19, 1999 CDO's for LOCSD and a copy of the legal opinion regarding AB 2701.

Having that information may have been useful to you...

The county is studying the LOSTDEP and will not decide, as I understand, to "take" the responsibilty until the EIR is complete, sometime in September, 08.

We are in now way delaying The LOSTDEP RECLAMATOR Solution or the County's Study Process.
I would say that the county's own process time consuming. What happens if it gets decided to not take the project?

If you think with your pocketbook, which is always a great idea, then think "RECLAMATOR".

Mike,
Death, Taxes, "Administrative Remedy", Drought and Federal Law, not necessarily in that order.; 9:58 PM, February 18, 2008
Mike Green said...: Mark:"You would have gotten copies of the November 19, 1999 CDO's for LOCSD and a copy of the legal opinion regarding AB 2701."

Yep, got it, The key word here is "opinion"

Who's opinion Mark? Until I get that "opinion" in writing from the State of California or their legal representatives, in my HUMBLE opinion.

It holds no more water than this blog.; 10:15 PM, February 18, 2008
Unknown said...: This blog has turned into nothing more than an extension of the Wrecklamator advertisement

When will the next snakeoil salesman take up this blog? and there surely will be another and then another. Each a new age alchemist with a unique and perfect way to turn piss into drinking water! Never an approval from any goverment authority, only "administrative" excuses!!!; 5:28 AM, February 19, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Green:
We are exhausting our administrative remedies.

Glad to see the "information" is making the rounds.

Mike: Watch out for the ~P~I~P~E~ people, they are after your treasure.

We are working to preserve it.; 6:57 AM, February 19, 2008
Churadogs said...: Howie sez:"P.S. Gadfly is a pompous jerk who is love with himself. Gee, now I wonder who that could be...?"

Himself? Gadfly called me "dearie." Don't think a guy would use that term. Also, please note the whining tone of victimization in "her" comment re the bridge bears: In my having some fun with the refurbishment project, "she's" feeling unloved and unappreciated, all "her" hard work going un-noticed, how I've insulted all the good folks who worked their fingers to the bone, Lo into the wee hours of the night unloved and un-remarked, all alone doing good works for the community, volunteering to refurbish the bears & etc. and all they get is larkish fun from the likes of evil me, boo-hoo. What's next, the cri de coer YOU NEVER CALL ME! ALL I'VE DONE FOR YOU AND YOU EVEN FORGOT MY BIRTHDAY! YOU UNGRATEFUL CHILD!

Lordy, Dearie Gady, get a grip.(You'd best get a grip because my next column, unless changed, will be about the refurbishment project. So, please let me kindly suggest you'd better start in on the Valium before it's posted. Don't want to give you the vapors.)

Mike Green sez:"Mark, unless I've lost all comprehension of the english language, (some would consider that a foregone conclusion) The LOCSD is prohibited from assuming responsibility for the construction of any wastewater treatment system inside the PZ.
Signed by the Governator himself!
By position of inconsequence, I'm greedily thinking of my own pocketbook, a PZ property owner.
I don't see any action that the LOCSD could take, even if they all signed a petition on a stack of whatever holy book you want, that the reclamator or any other system is the best and we are all gonna die in the streets like dogs of we don't get it,
will make a bit of difference.
If you and Mr. Murphy can't stop the county and the RWQCB within one year or less, the County is going to steam full speed ahead with whatever they want."

No, Mike, you haven't lost comprehension of the English language. Excellent points and excellent observation.

I thought Mr. Low said Mr. Murphy would be filing something in Federal Court Feb 5th? Did I remember that right? Was it filed? Whaaat?; 7:29 AM, February 19, 2008
Gadfly said...: Ann,

(sigh!) You just do not get it. How sad!

Next time we meet (and we have many times), I'll just smile and chat with you as usual; all the while thnking of the insensitive witch you are. You'll even continue thinking I am your friend. Well I have news for you dearie; many of us laugh at you as you waddle away; stripped socks and all.

Gadfly; 8:33 AM, February 19, 2008
Ron said...: Mark asked:

"Do you know who was at the helm of LOCSD when it received the CDO's dated November 19, 1999."

Directors: Pandora Nash-Karner, Rose Bowker, Gordon Hensely, Stan Gustafson, and Sylvia Smith.

Hensley, Gustafson, and Nash-Karner were all members of the Solution Group.

There were two GMs: The interim GM, hired by Nash-Karner, was Paavo Ogren. (Yep, good ol' P. was a-sittin' in the GM seat while that agency wasted all that time and money chasing a project that was never going to work.) The second GM in 1999 was Bruce Buel... my main man.

As of November 1999, that board had already wasted one year chasing the Solution Group's dead-on-arrival "better, cheaper, faster" ponding project (the one that formed the LOCSD, yet failed two years later), and Briggs and Co. were getting awfully fed up with their futzing around, but he allowed them to futz around anyway... for another year!

These days, Briggs and Nash-Karner act like "best friends forever," but that wasn't always the case. Briggs, Marks, and their bosses on the RWQCB, from 1998 - 2000 all harbored an intense dislike for the Solution Group, because all those water quality professionals knew that Nash-Karner's "drop dead gorgeous," dead-on-arrival project -- the one they wasted two years chasing -- was never going to work in Los Osos, as per a stack of official studies -- studies that were around BEFORE the election that formed the LOCSD on the back of that failed project.

Clearly, the Los Osos Community Services District was founded on nothing. It is foundationless. To go Seinfeld, there is no foundation.

And that's a very, very bad way to begin a government agency.

Gadflea wrote:

"I am tired of her (Ann) carping on sewer issues seemly since time began... These mad fools have cost me and my family a fortune."

Hey Ann, was that you that popped out that unsupported, and therefore illegal, Statement of Overriding Considerations in 2001?

Damn... had no idea. And I thought my history on this story was tight.

Next thing you know, someone'll be telling me that it was Ann that illegally used public funds in 2001 to hire a survey company to phone hundreds and hundreds of LO property of owners and then lie to them right before a critical 218 election -- an election that involved ONLY property owners.; 10:21 AM, February 19, 2008
Gadfly said...: Ron,

Your bull$hit reeks as much as than Ann's and Mark's. No need for me to respond to your Solution Group/Pandora/Buel/RWQCB/CCC conspiracy/phobia/mania theories; as I and others know you're Santa Margaritia's very own town fool/drunk.

Gadfly; 11:50 AM, February 19, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: I thought Mr. Low said Mr. Murphy would be filing something in Federal Court Feb 5th? Did I remember that right? Was it filed? Whaaat?

The addition of all parties has delayed the State Court filing. Nothing federal at this time.

Ron: XXCELENT. So Paavo wasn't actually employed by the LOCSD when the CDO's were served...

Thank's for clarifying, I sure wish the rest of the Tribune(ites) could crank out information as well and as easily as you...; 12:10 PM, February 19, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: I guess Fly can dish it out but can't take. No identity no problem. Cowardly coward from the keyhole of their closet.; 12:12 PM, February 19, 2008
Unknown said...: I was not aware this was a game of one-up-manship as Mark so simply believes. I'm sure I can both "take it" and "dish it out". However that is a very poor tactic in trying to put your product before the community. It is NOT the technology, but rather your egotistical bullshit that has eliminated you and the Wrecklamator from serious contention as a viable solution to the Los Osos waste water treatment and reuse issues.

So far Mark, you are nothing but a blowhard with no data to support any of your claims. I sure as hell will never purchase your toy sewer from YOU specifically.; 12:55 PM, February 19, 2008
Gadfly said...: Mark,

Cut your bull$hit.

Just supply the operational data requested to prove that the reclaimator works. Otherwise, stop wasting our time.

Cannot your mind comprehend what a blowhard you are? Or is your mind experiencing ED too?

Gadfly; 1:09 PM, February 19, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6:11 PM, February 19, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: data; facts on which a decision is to be based.

It's a good thing that you two are not making a decision for anyone other than yourselves...; 6:13 PM, February 19, 2008
Unknown said...: ...and a VERY good thing YOU are not making the decision for this community and the County!

You will find there are quite a "few" of us tired of the theatrics and are 100% behind the County to select the best solution for Los Osos. So far your lack of supportable facts and data are appalling! You make more excuses that the CSD.

Sorry Mark, but until the RWQCB bless's the Reclamator, you might as well go back to selling fertilizer!!!!!!!!!; 6:50 PM, February 19, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: there are quite a "few" of us -100% behind the County to select the best solution for Los Osos.

Fortunately, there is law to protect you and the others from yourselves.; 7:02 PM, February 19, 2008
Churadogs said...: Gadfly sez:"all the while thnking of the insensitive witch you are. You'll even continue thinking I am your friend. Well I have news for you dearie; many of us laugh at you as you waddle away; stripped socks and all."

First I'm "Dearie," now I'm an "insensitive witch?" Plus, you apparently think that I believe you to be a friend when we meet in person? You mean you'd continue to smile to my face then anonymously log on to call me a witch? Hmmm, what word comes to mind for that kind of behavior? Ethical? No. Honest? No. Ummmm, Hypocritical? Dishonest? Cowardly? Why, yes, those words certainly seem worth what?

Ron sez:"Gadflea wrote:

"I am tired of her (Ann) carping on sewer issues seemly since time began... These mad fools have cost me and my family a fortune."

Hey Ann, was that you that popped out that unsupported, and therefore illegal, Statement of Overriding Considerations in 2001?"

Gosh, I don't think so. Let me think. No, wait, No I'm absolutely sure I did NOT pop out that SOC. Nope. Sorry, that must be some other person. I know, let's ask Gadfly. She knows much more about that than either of us do. And there's one thing about Gadfly: She's as honest and as truthful and as trustworthy as the day is long.; 6:30 AM, February 20, 2008
Ron said...: Gadflea wrote:

"Ron, No need for me to respond to your Solution Group/Pandora/Buel/RWQCB/CCC conspiracy/phobia/mania theories; as I and others know you're Santa Margaritia's very own town fool/drunk."

Yo, G.Flea, do me a quick favor -- run down to the Tri-W site and let me know if you see a park-with-a-sewer-plant there.

Mark wrote:

"CDO's dated November 19, 1999."

Mark, do you have that CDO linked up somewhere? I'd be very interested in reading it. And if that's real, nice job digging it up.

Ann wrote:

"You (Gadflea) mean you'd continue to smile to my face then anonymously log on to call me a witch? Hmmm, what word comes to mind for that kind of behavior? Ethical? No. Honest? No. Ummmm, Hypocritical? Dishonest? Cowardly?"

I'll tell you what word comes to my mind: creeeeeepyyyyyyy!; 6:55 AM, February 20, 2008
Gadfly said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8:51 AM, February 20, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: Mike wrote: I'm sure I can both "take it" and "dish it out".

Got data? Got Law? Got link?

Ron: Check your mail box for the 4 Nov. 19, 1999 CDOs...; 10:13 AM, February 20, 2008
Gadfly said...: Ann,

You know the wise adage 'keep your friends close and your enemies closer'. You'll just have to accept the reality that you have far few friends than you think. So as you waddle around town aping your fashion guru (Raggity Ann) just know you are not held in high regard amongst your 'friends'.

Ron,

Your prattle makes no sense.

Mark,

See 'Ron' above.

Gadfly

('gadflea' works even better for me, as that bug's bite is even more annoying to you than a fly's....I like it! Thanks!); 11:21 AM, February 20, 2008
*PG-13 said...: Ron > I'll tell you what word comes to my mind: creeeeeepyyyyyyy!

Gotta agree. On the Creepy Slime Scale this is pretty creepy slimy. And getting more so with each post. Taking umbrage on blond bear jokes is one thing. But ..

Gbug > Next time we meet (and we have many times), I'll just smile and chat with you as usual; all the while thnking of the insensitive witch you are. You'll even continue thinking I am your friend. Well I have news for you dearie; many of us laugh at you as you waddle away; stripped socks and all..... You'll just have to accept the reality that you have far few friends than you think. So as you waddle around town aping your fashion guru (Raggity Ann) just know you are not held in high regard amongst your 'friends'.

Wow. Sure glad you're not my friend. BTW, do you have any friends?

Are you sure?; 1:55 PM, February 20, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: When the attacks get personal those who are attacked win the argument.

Flea or Fly consider the source. In the closet, looking through a key hole.
No identity, no problem, no credility.

Whoever this conflicted poster child is, they need profeeional help. Maybe they should head on down to the County before they admit they are out of funding.
Gee, isn't that where you get your problems solved?
Got Blog, Flea/Fly/Ticked?; 2:52 PM, February 20, 2008
Gadfly said...: Paranoid, aren't you?

Funny that Mark, Ron and Ann do not like my (or others)tiny stinging remarks. That is what a gadfly does, dearies. Just a little taste of what you fools have been doing to Los Osos for years.

Also funny is that it is impossible for anyone to identify a posting blogger, even if a poster names themselves. Your feeble attempts to shame me over my anonymity are laughable.

I keep my own council in public for a very simple reason; you fools are foul folks fermenting fear, fiscal fiasco and foppery. Meanwhile, I can blog peacefully without fear of you interfering in my life.

But I am very bored with you folks. Nothing editorialized by Ann, Ron or Mark on their corresponding blogsites is of any importance; or even based in reality.

But do not worry. From time to time I will drop in to say hello.

Gadfly; 4:39 PM, February 20, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: From tiny minds come tiny remarks.; 5:05 PM, February 20, 2008
Churadogs said...: Gadfly sez:"But I am very bored with you folks. Nothing editorialized by Ann, Ron or Mark on their corresponding blogsites is of any importance; or even based in reality."

This is what's so weird about folks like Gadfly. She professes contempt for all things connected with me or this blog, (heck, she even hates my socks) and claims nothing connected with this blog is of any importance, yet spends ENDLESS time logged on playing anonymice neener-neeener games with others who take the time to add their comments.

Lordy, it's soooooo high school.; 7:09 AM, February 22, 2008
Watershed Mark said...: I understand Maria Kelly, Bruce Gibson and Pandora Kash-Karner(fly?) where on the front page of the Bay News.Hummmm.

An intereasting picture of these "players" smiling in front of "The Bear" that is getting ready to take a bite of liberty and BADCT*.

Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology; 9:28 AM, February 22, 2008

Pages

Sunday, February 17, 2008

66 comments: