Job Opportunity!


Buried in a small snippet of the County Roundup in the March 12 Tribune, a tiny story that, for reasons that passeth understanding, didn’t make the front page:


“The District Attorney’s Office will not investigate a 1999 contract that the Los Osos Community Services District claims was potentially criminal because a statute of limitations has run out.


San Luis Obispo Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Brown said there is an exemption to the statute if the alleged problems were recently discovered, but this contract was known to the board for many years. [I presume he means the old CSD Board?)]


Brown added that while his office didn’t do a full investigation, the preliminary analysis of the contract ’found no fraudulent intent.’


In December, the services district alerted the district attorney to alleged irregularities in a contract between the district and Montgomery Watson Harza, the engineering firm that designed the town’s failed sewer project.


The district placed administrative secretary Karen Vega on leave in January, claiming there was “potential criminal liability in how she oversaw the contract. She returned to work last week.”


If you recall, the original issue was this: Former CSD manager signed a contract with Montgomery Watson Harza several weeks before he was hired and weeks before the (old) CSD voted to authorize the contract and payment or anything else. Naturally, being a Tribune story, I don’t think any members of the old board were interviewed to find out what they know about this. As for me, I figured that Mr. Buel had invented a time machine and accidentally set the dials wrong when he was signing the contract. And Vega wasn’t aware Buel was in a time machine, so assumed he’d already been hired and so was authorized to sign anything on behalf of the CSD. And as for the full board not even voting on it as an agenda item to authorize both the signature and spending, well, hell, why quibble bout little stuff like that. So long as they didn’t have any “fraudulent intent,” what’s wrong with shuffling around CSD procedures: Sign and Spend first, vote on it all much later. So much easier that way.


So, I can say that getting the DA’s approval that signing contracts without authorization is really good news for me! I’m gonna start up a new business: CONTRACTS-R-MOI! You want a contract for millions of dollars signed, come see me. For a modest fee, I’ll sign it. I will have no “fraudulent intent” in my heart – Hey, I’m just a nice lady helping out a friend – so whatever I’m signing won’t be illegal.


So, Ernie Dalidio, come on down! If the City refuses to sign that development deal with you, I will! It doesn’t matter that I’m not authorized by the city to sign a parking ticket, let along some kind of development deal worth millions. That minor little detail will only be a civil matter, so sue me after all the money’s been spent and the Target is built and the parking lots are in.


If you have any divorce settlements you want signed on behalf of your wife, bring ‘em in! You know, the kind where YOU get the house, the kids and the Porsche and your mistress gets the bank accounts and the vacation house in Boca Raton? Got any Wills & Estate matters from your rich Uncle Fred? Bring ‘em down. I’ll sign ‘em all.


None of us will go to jail for criminal fraud because the DA will never be able to find out by preliminary checking any “fraudulent intent.” We’ll just claim that we didn’t know we weren’t authorized by the city (or Uncle Fred) to sign anything. Who’s to know?


It’s the start of a new career. One more lucrative than writing this blog, that’s for sure.

Homework, for those of you with nothing to do of a rainy Saturday morning, go to www.sanluisobispo.com (the Trib's) site and download and read the two depositions by CSD interim Manager and CSD administrative services manager Pat McClenahan. Their depositions were part of the Trib's March 10 story. After reading it, see if you can tell me: Does anyone know how money gets tracked and accounted for in huge state/federal/local projects such as the Hideous Sewer Project? To say it's an amazing shell game of "accounting practices," and real bank accounts and "incrementalism," and hide the salami and who's on first is putting it mildly. According to Hyatt's 3/10 story, the district went from having $6.4 million down to having $250,000. So, what happened to the rest of the $4-plus million? The story doesn't make that clear and, so far as I can tell, neither do the depositions. Well, maybe the CSD's budget, due in a few weeks, will clarify the Trib's story? Stay tuned.

Law of Unintended Consequences The following is a letter recently read into the record at the March 9th CSD meeting by Rob Shipe, one of the Los Osos 46 CDO recipients. He brings up some important points that all people living in the prohibition zone of Los Osos should pay attention to. I found it telling that he notes that he discussed some of "these issues with the Water Board's prosecution staff and their response is they don't know and this is not their intent. " That remark alone should cause red flags to fly out of everyone's pockets and go down on the field. . . . didn't know and not their intent. As Rob notes, there will be a meeting March 13 of fellow CDO folks and for all interested parties (which includes most of Los Osos.) Dear Neighbor,
We are writing you regarding the proposed Cease and Desist Orders (CDOs). Like you, we are defendants in the Regional Water Board’s attempt to issue CDOs against individuals. We are residents of Los Osos, who love our town. We were not a part of any pro or anti-sewer group, or pro or anti CSD group. We have stayed on the sidelines in the past, but now, like you, we have been drafted into this situation with the CDOs.
In researching this issue, there are a several items we want to share with you regarding the proposed Cease and Desist Orders. CDOs are intended for businesses polluting our water, not residences using a septic tank. Even if you have no issues with pumping your septic tank every other month, there are other unintended consequences of accepting the CDO on you and your property.
We have spoken with local banks and mortgage brokers. Some lenders will not grant a loan against a property with a CDO. Of the one’s that will, the general consensus is that while they will normally loan up to 75% on a loan to value ratio, with a Cease and Desist Order on your property, they would most likely only approve a 40% loan to value ratio. In addition, appraisers believe that properties with a CDO attached will definitely see a drop in value. For example, a home with a $500,000 value would normally be able to borrow up to $375,000. With a CDO attached, the lender would only approve a $200,000 loan at the same value. However a 20% decrease in property value would further decrease that amount to $160,000. That will be $215,000 you will no longer be able to borrow against your home. [1]
The ability to get a loan will also affect a potential buyer's ability to purchase your property. Homeowner's who wish to sell will have to deal only with individuals who can afford to put 60% of the value as a down payment. This would effectively stifle demand and further lower your property value.
The State Water Code prohibits anyone with a CDO from entering into contracts valued over $5000, with the State. In the Water Board's random sampling of 50 Los Osos properties, no conventional businesses inside the prohibition zone were named as a defendant. However, there are many home based and small business owners that live within the Prohibition Zone. If these CDOs go into effect, this will threaten the livelihood of business owners in our community.
Having a CDO on your property puts you just one step away from fines up to $1000 a day, assessments, and other issues we have not yet discovered. You may not be concerned with these issues. You may not own your own business, you may not be interested in selling your home and you may not need to refinance -- now.
What about in the future? This Order, once placed, will remain in effect until the Water Board chooses to release it. Where will you, or your heirs, be at that time? Will you need to refinance to connect to the sewer? What about your neighbors? Do they own a business? What if they have to sell their home? Their potential profit will be decreased and your new neighbor will be purchasing undervalued land with large amounts of cash. We are only the first wave. Your neighbors will be next.
Our intention is not to scare you, but rather to inform you. We did not understand these consequences. Neither did the Water Board. We have addressed these issues with the Water Board's prosecution staff and their response is they don't know and this is not their intent.
The Water Board took this path because they wanted to wake up the community. We are now awake. Are you? We are committed to working with the Water Board and all others willing to clean up the water in Los Osos.
We are not trying to pick a fight, but we cannot continue to stand by the wayside. We believe there are better ways to address the concerns of the Water Board. According to their own Water Quality Enforcement Procedures, there are other avenues to achieve the same outcome without the unintended consequences of Cease and Desist Orders.
We are writing to inform you of these unintended consequences of a Cease and Desist Order placed on you and your property. Even if you agree to pump, you should make sure the Cease and Desist Order is not used as the method of enforcement. We are working to stop the Cease and Desist Orders unintended consequences on everyone’s behalf. We could use your help, even if it is only one more voice on April 28th saying that Cease and Desist Orders are not the way to enforce this. The CDO is a heavy-handed enforcement tool designed to punish businesses and governmental bodies, not individuals.
If you have any questions, we will be happy to try to answer them. Our contact info is below, or you can meet us at Sunnyside Elementary School, 880 Manzanita St., on Monday, March 13th at 7 pm. We are working with other Los Osos Residents in addressing these issues. We look forward to talking with you soon.
Sincerely,
________________________________ ________________________________Rob Shipe, CDO Defendant Tim Rochte, CDO Defendant
507 Highland Drive
Home office: 528-6772
robs@2xtreme.net



________________________________ ________________________________
Rhian Gulassa, CDO Defendant Jim Salio, CDO Defendant


[1] Before CDO After CDO Available Loan Amount
Home value $500,000 Pre CDO Value $500,000 Pre CDO $375,000
Pre CDO L:V x 75% Less value (20%) -$100,000 Post CDO -$160,000
Available $375,000 Post CDO Value $400,000 Equity no longer $215,000
Loan Amount Pre CDO Post CDO L:V x 40% available to borrow
Available $160,000
L:V = Loan to Value Loan Amount Post CDO

Anne’s article originally appeared in the March/April 2006 edition of HopeDance #55 (http://www.hopedance.org/) and is reprinted here with permission of the author.


Shirley Jackson Comes to Los Osos
by Anne R. Allen

In Los Osos, California, during the first week of February, a remarkable thing happened. The few rights left to us by the Bushist corporate oligarchs were revoked by a group of unelected local California bureaucrats.

The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) chose 50 random citizens to be punished — without charges, trials, or legal representation — not because of anything they have done or not done, or even who they voted for, but simply because of where they happen to live.

I believe this is called scapegoating. It would appear to have little to do with water quality and everything to do with terrorizing the population.

Given the turnout for last September’s surreal Los Osos Community Services District (CSD) recall election, and the closeness of the vote, these as yet unnamed citizens have a less-than 30% chance of having opposed the sewer and the RWQCB’s edicts. According to published statistics, they also have less than 5% chance of owning a leaking septic system. Perhaps they have, like me, already forked out the $4000 “prepayment” for the sewer, which has apparently evaporated.

Their only crime is residing in a town that has been torn apart for more than 30 years by controversy over funding for a much-needed sewer — controversy caused by lack of government oversight of developers over a generation ago.

But hey, these scapegoats were chosen by lottery, “to be fair.”

“The Lottery” is the title of a famous story by Shirley Jackson about a seemingly normal town where an annual lottery designates a random victim/scapegoat to be stoned to death. Critic Peter Kosenko said in his New Orleans Review article on Jackson, “The lottery functions to terrorize the village into accepting, in the name of democracy, the power on which its oppressive social order depends.”

Jackson’s story came to my mind (the part of it that wasn’t busy being terrorized) when I read the news of the RWQCB’s latest action in their ongoing battle with the new CSD board of Los Osos.

In his comments in the Tribune, the RWQCB’s executive officer Roger Briggs showed a lack of empathy that appears to border on the sociopathic. He seems to regard the residents of Los Osos as a monolithic entity with the sole objective of thwarting his power, rather than individual citizens who may or may not agree with the new CSD officers. He seems to believe that the actions of a few residents of Los Osos a generation ago are the fault of people who innocently bought or rented homes here in the years that followed.

Mr. Briggs and his board haven’t addressed the fact that if a county project has been a source of constant controversy for half a century, maybe the problem lies in the project, not the character flaws of people who move here. Although – wow — if previously good citizens morph into pro-pollution anarchist crazies just by moving to a place, I’d say there might be something more terrible in the water than a sewer could cure!


I have been out of the country for most of the last three years and did not support the recall, but after watching the RWQCB’s colossally disrespectful treatment of Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee, I could see why Los Ososans felt bullied. After Mr. Blakeslee facilitated a compromise between the warring factions in September, the RWQCB reneged and told him, “It’s been fun wasting your time, dude, but the whole compromise thing was a lie. You lose.”


Our elected representative — the person who stands for you and me in what used to be a government of, by and for the people — was brushed off like so much trash by this organization that apparently answers to no authority higher than its own will.

And now, like the villagers in Shirley Jackson’s story, county residents show little compassion for the innocent victims of this out-of-control bureaurocracy. The new CSD board has so far offered no more comfort than to post a petition on their website and ask fellow citizens to donate to a private fund to help these folks who are about to be fined up to $1000 a DAY. But each of those fellow citizens knows he or she may be next.

The Los Osos mess is a bad one. The lack of oversight of development in the 1960s and 1970s created monstrous problems—from unpaved roads to a lack of public facilities. The solution will probably be as complicated as the problem. But terrorizing a town and pumping the 95% of septic tanks that function perfectly well won’t keep one bacterium out of anybody’s water supply.


Anne R. Allen lives part time in Los Osos and part time in northern England. She’s the author of two novels published in the UK: FOOD OF LOVE and THE BEST REVENGE (available at amazon.co.uk.) She writes the column, IN Her Own Write, for INkwell Newswatch, Toronto’s online writers’ zine, rated the #1 writer’s source on the web. Her short fiction currently appears online at Chick Flicks and Dispatch Litareview.

Correction & Update: Regarding my previous post, a correction/addition: The Tribune did indeed put the public information requests foot-dragging by the RWQCB for the CDO's Los Osos Fifty (now forty-six) on the front page. I stand corrected and thanks to Mr. X for the reminder. And, I need to clarify that my quarrel with this particular story is not with the reporter, but with the Tribune's long history of this kind of muddled reporting when it comes to all things Los Osos. I have spoken with a certain personage at the Tribune and understand the reason for so much muddlement (turnover of new reporters assigned to the Los Osos beat, the lack of historical memory, the sheer complexity of what goes on out here, etc.), so my quarrel is not with the reporter, but with his editor, who should know better. The reporter now stuck with the Hideous Los Osos Beat is one of the few who's actually really trying hard to do a "fair & balanced" job, under difficult conditions, at best. I doff my cap to him, but still reserve the right to smack his editors upside the head with a wet noodle when they don't do THEIR jobs.