UPDATE (1/31/13 3:00 PM): Here is Mrs. Tornatzky’s comments that she’s made on The Tribune (Courtesy: DISQUS)

UPDATE (1/31/13 9:30 AM): Since the article was published, I’ve been in communication with Lynette Tornatzky, who insists that one of the quotes — though they’re all linked to and verified — we’ve shown of hers was . . . → Read More: Meet Bruce Gibson’s Surrogates]]>

District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson

UPDATE (1/31/13 3:00 PM): Here is Mrs. Tornatzky’s comments that she’s made on The Tribune (Courtesy: DISQUS)

UPDATE (1/31/13 9:30 AM): Since the article was published, I’ve been in communication with Lynette Tornatzky, who insists that one of the quotes — though they’re all linked to and verified — we’ve shown of hers was “Photoshopped.” She’s been invited to send us an e-mail and explain specifically her issues with the content shown, but has continuously been unable to do so. Our contact form does work! She continues to insist that I am the “multi-monikered anonymous” who disagree with her views. Paranoia is not a good defense.

Shirley Montague-Devine also responded to the article by asking for my home address to send us her resume. The behavior we’ve seen from Gibson’s most ardent supporters — since this article was published — have been very bizarre and cult-like. We sincerely hope that Gibson doesn’t actually give tacit approval to this kind of behavior.

UPDATE (1/24/13): We received a reply from Lynette Tornatzky, who had this to say about the article and my statements about it. She italicized comments made by me in the Tribune’s January 23 editorial on Gibson, which reflected the nature of the article. “The above statements are all untruths,” she wrote. “But thanks for confirming for me that the bloggers using multiple monikers who spout these same words against me on the comment sections in the various venues are now revealed as being you!” Uh… OK!

News surfaced this week that District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson has re-hired Cherie Aispuro to be his legislative assistant a month after he revealed that he had an affair with her and subsequently transferred her to the County Clerk-Recorder’s office. This came as a surprise to many who thought that Gibson would not reintroduce the topic in such a bizarre way. It’s highly unusual for a sitting politician to continue working with his mistress after already removing her from his office. Gibson’s defiance has clearly overshadowed any of his politics or accomplishments. Because of Gibson’s defiance, the conversation has transmogrified from the morality of his actions to the way he’s handled the issue in spite of growing criticism.

Of course, Gibson has his supporters — and clearly they’re not the kind of surrogates he should have.

Lynette Tornatzky

Los Osos resident Lynette Tornatzky has been the most vocal of Gibson’s surrogates. Tornatzky has been mentioned on Razor Online for some of her contentious remarks and actions. Tornatzky was quoted in columnist Bob Cuddy‘s January 18 article, stating, “Great! Let’s get her (Aispuro) back [as Gibson's legislative assistant] as soon as possible.” Cuddy called Tornatzky a “community activist,” which has somehow become a euphemism for a frantic obsession with sewage.

This is Tornatzky’s blog. It’s called “The Los Osos Sewer Saga.” When you can get past the menacing look of her husband, Cal Poly business professor Lou Tornatzky, in an apocalypse-themed, cringe-worthy gas mask portrait, there are dozens of articles about the wastewater project. And by “articles,” I mean a random assortment of sewer pipes and construction vehicles that indicate nothing more than sewer construction is happening. There’s even a photo of several stacks of green pipes set in contrast with a cloudy sunset over Los Osos. Isn’t that romantic?

Her blog consists of photos that don’t show Los Osos for its timelessly stunning, panoramic views of Montana De Oro or the windy, colorful paths through the Sweet Springs Nature Preserve. Instead, she projects Los Osos as a state of constant chaos, construction and disruption as a tired ode to one of Gibson’s finest accomplishments as supervisor. Oh, and she’s attacked Razor Online points that we weren’t actually making – but she’s been doing that for years.

We’ve written about Tornatzky because she has been the only person to go on the record and vigorously defend Gibson and his record. There’s nothing wrong with defending someone who you support, but when you write things like this…

That’s a problem. If you don’t live here and don’t like Gibson, I’ll stop you.” We’ve heard this before. Interrogating people over where they live in SLO County is very short-sighted since Gibson serves on a board that votes on agenda items relevant to other districts.

Tornatzky has pledged to “stop” people before — whatever that means — who disagree with Gibson or the how the sewer project is being run. The threat has always been ambiguous, but unsettling. When I checked the same comment again on January 19, that line was removed as if no threat was uttered. All we are left with is sentiments from a person who has harassed nearly every person who expressed at least a single ounce of disagreement against Gibson on a 24-hour cycle for the past week. She’s claims she posts ”not in response to the story, other that to point out that it isn’t one, but to try to counter the crack-pot rabid responses to the non-story. People don’t like Gibson for one reason or another and latch onto this tripe like piranhas in a feeding frenzy.”

“If you do not attend those meetings – your local ones like office hours or your own local area advisory council meetings, and you do not see Ms. Aispuro or Mr. Gibson in person at work, you really do not know what you are talking about,” she told one commenter, adding that anyone who lives outside of Los Osos and/or posts anonymously “don’t matter.” To paraphrase, according to Lynette Tornatzky, unless you live in Los Osos, attend every meeting that Gibson also attends, she will “stop” you from talking about it or give you a really hard time until you regret having a conversation with her. This is how she operates, and this is how she’s been operating since the Los Osos sewer project was transferred to the County in late 2006. She operates under the premise that Bruce Gibson has done such a good job in Los Osos, that he is fully exempt from criticism for his actions committed outside of Los Osos’ jurisdiction; that the critics are most likely disgruntled Los Osos residents who didn’t get the sewer they wanted.

Razor Online was told by a source that Tornatzky recently threatened two people — who she’s consistently lambasted as “anti-sewer” via e-mail — who she’s often derided as “anti-sewer,” in an e-mail with an exposé of their personal lives if they chose to issue a statement about Gibson’s conduct. We haven’t actually seen the e-mail so we can’t verify whether it’s true, but she has e-mailed “anti-sewer” people before with similar sentiments.

Because we’ve criticized Gibson and his handling of the wastewater project, we’ve been personally threatened and harassed by Tornatzky before. Our e-mail inboxes and comment system digests have been inundated with comments claiming, “You don’t live here,” and “I know where you live.” Despite reminding her of the irrelevance of her comments, Tornatzky continues to write us. Her reasoning for doing this completely escapes us. Tornatzky continues to demand that we respond to her “statements,” especially when we issue public statements that contradict her point of view. And when we’ve published articles that include her controversial and verified statements, she’s referred to them as “lies.”

Clearly, to Tornatzky, it’s no longer about politics. It’s about instilling fear and intimidation with no rationale: a digital manifestation of paranoia-schizophrenia that’s completely outside the boundaries of acceptable discourse.

Is this what Gibson really wants his supporters and surrogates to do? This is typically not how political surrogates should behave.

So… how is she a “community activist,” Mr. Cuddy? She never was, even if you say she is.

Shirley Montague-Devine

Over the past several weeks, people have been typing in the name “Shirley Devine” in our search engine.  Razor Online checked out her background to find out why she’s been a trending topic locally. At first, we came across a photo of her appearing to be suddenly caught with a migraine as she took a photo of some doll heads.

A dedicated Gibson surrogate, Shirley Montague-Devine is a 77-year-old Los Osos resident who is a self-described photographer, sculptor and designer. Sources say she’s one of the top financial contributors to Taxpayers Watch, a local organization originally established to help dissolve the Los Osos Community Services District over mismanagement surrounding the wastewater project. Like Tornatzky, Montague-Devine has consistently defended Gibson and chided his critics, namely the “anti-sewer” group. She’s also contributed financially to Gibson’s supervisor campaigns, she’s claimed.

On December 13, a tip was sent to us with the subject line, “HORRIFYING!” We were told the comments compared one of Gibson’s “anti-sewer” critics to one of the worst mass-murder suspects in the history of the United States. This is what we were linked to. If you want to avoid the newly constructed paywall on The Tribune site as much as we do, here is a screenshot:

Montague-Devine is referring to George Taylor, a Los Osos resident who was involved in a spousal suicide pact that resulted in the death of his wife, Gewynn. The Taylors were active critics of Gibson and the wastewater project. Mr. Taylor was compared to 20-year-old Adam Lanza, the mentally challenged man who gunned down 20 children and six adult staff members before taking his own life. The comparison from Montague-Devine drew ire from residents in Los Osos still grieving from the loss of Mrs. Taylor.

Then Tornatzky weighed in shortly after her controversial statements:

Source

One could ask, “How is this relevant to Bruce Gibson?” The short answer: it’s not. But Montague-Devine thinks she found a way. In a message to us, she wrote, “It is interesting to me that you condone assisted suicide that goes awry but have a fit about divorce, a  personal love relationship that hurts no one. i would rather have the loving couple who are serving the community than what happened in the assisted suicide incident.”

Huh?

Over the past several years, Razor Online has received hateful messages from Montague-Devine that we’ve brushed off. Her comments have become a topic of discussion in Los Osos and in Gibson’s district. Because of comments like hers, the conversation has shifted from Gibson’s accomplishments and follies to the people that Gibson has surrounded himself with.

Bob Cuddy (The Tribune)

Veteran Tribune columnist Bob Cuddy is a regular guest pest on Razor Online. He’s taken aim at Gibson’s critics in the past, calling them out by name and comparing some of them to the Westboro Baptist Church and Jared Lee Loughner, the 24-year-old man responsible for the shooting that almost took the life of former Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. E-mails show that Gibson has worked closely with Cuddy in painting an unflattering portrait of Gibson’s dissidents.

In his January 18 article, Cuddy wrote about Gibson’s assistant Aispuro returning to work. The article was written in a way that Gibson’s decision to bring Aispuro was legally and professionally appropriate. By common journalistic standards, one would have to wonder, “What does ‘the other side’ have to say?”

An earlier version of the article mentioned that known Gibson critics Julie Tacker and Jeff Edwards would not return calls or e-mails to comment on the news.

That wasn’t exactly the case, said Tacker.

“[Cuddy] called my ex-husband’s house and left a message,” Tacker told us. ” He called a 7-year-old number [...] E-mail nearly always works, too. Last evening my ex called to tell me there was a message from Cuddy, we laughed, and then I sent Cuddy an e-mail with current contact numbers and poof, the sentence disappeared.  Great investigative journalism.”

Great investigative journalism, indeed.

This is not the first time Cuddy has deliberately omitted responses from Gibson’s critics. Cuddy wrote an opinion column in July 2011, which focused exclusively on Los Osos resident and Gibson critic Linde Owen for bringing up Public Works Director Paavo Ogren and Maria Kelly’s children amid accusations of conflict-of-interest between the two. Cuddy omitted from the column that Owen cited CalCoastNews as a original source of those accusations. Owen tried to reach out to The Tribune and Cuddy to explain her reasoning. She was determined to make a statement after Cuddy called on Owen to apologize.

“As soon as I read that article, I called [Tribune publisher Bruce Ray], Cuddy and [Opinion editor Stephanie Finucane] to let them know that I wanted to have a viewpoint and apologize,” Owen told us shortly after the column was published. “Stephanie called me back and said, ‘Of course you can have a viewpoint,’ and she invited me to the office. I tried calling her back, and she wouldn’t return my calls.”

“When I tried calling Cuddy, he hung up on me.”

There was no viewpoint published that countered Cuddy’s front page op-ed column. Tribune readers were left with the impression that Owen was unapologetic, crass and lacked credibility. Children of public officials are off-limits and the basis of Cuddy’s column was based on that commonly held belief, but Cuddy could have and should have included Owen’s comments for the sake of fairness. The readers were owed context.

Cuddy has a lot of trouble with journalism.

The Conclusion

Supervisor Bruce Gibson needs better surrogates. At least, he needs better surrogates than the ones hooked on the heroin of negative attention.

It’s worth noting that Gibson has not once condemned the comments made by his surrogates. Razor Online has published several articles including comments made by his supporters. He’s been sent these articles by e-mail, but he has been silent on what his supporters have said and done in his name. If he did reply, he would likely say, “Anyone is entitled to their opinion,” but when his critics stated their opinions about him, Gibson dismissed them as repetitive and irrelevant; he’s always had something disparaging to say about the people who don’t see eye-to-eye with him. Since his comments are typically made from behind the dais, he always gets the last word.

Since news of his affair came out, he’s remained mostly silent and has — to our surprise — allowed people to call for his resignation among other things. But his decision to bring Aispuro back into his office shows no remorse.

Gibson’s surrogates — including, sadly, the local newspaper — are a reflection of his arrogance, myopia and character flaws. He could easily rein in his surrogates by tightening their leash, but he consistently fails to do so. It is an insult to his district that he allows his surrogates to dictate the conversation and demonize those who sincerely believe that Gibson should be held accountable for his actions. On a national level, surrogates for political officials are heavily scrutinized because of their close affiliations with the official they’re campaigning for or speaking for.

Gibson, I know I’ve criticized you quite a bit over the years and you may have developed an allergy for this blog, but here me out. You don’t want those people to be stumping for you. They are your most fervent supporters and it’s great to have people who will defend you through and through. But they keep going off the deep end and you haven’t said or done anything to make it appear that you’ve above their rhetoric. At the same time, you just re-hired Aispuro as your legislative assistant. What are you thinking? Or are you even thinking at all? The craziness surrounding your affair and the craziness spewed by your surrogates is defining your brand. Your district deserves a whole lot better than this.

– Aaron Ochs

Gewynn Taylor’s life came to a premature end late Monday night on December 10. This is the same Gewynn Taylor who spoke every Tuesday morning for many years at the SLO County Board of Supervisors meeting, reminding every supervisor of their responsibility to the people of Los Osos. This is the same Gewynn Taylor . . . → Read More: The Glowing Compassion of Gewynn Taylor]]>

Gewynn Taylor

Gewynn Taylor’s life came to a premature end late Monday night on December 10. This is the same Gewynn Taylor who spoke every Tuesday morning for many years at the SLO County Board of Supervisors meeting, reminding every supervisor of their responsibility to the people of Los Osos. This is the same Gewynn Taylor who sacrificed her post-retirement life to protect and support people in need as well as the environment.

Making sure that she was completely aware of the issues and developments involving the community , Gewynn did her homework. She was very meticulous in getting all the facts straight. She regularly attended board meetings, advisory meetings and District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson’s office hours. When she wasn’t helping other residents in need or actively contributing to People Helping People and the Maxine Lewis Memorial Shelter, Gewynn combed through thousands of pages of technical documentation from County Public Works and studied. She had the diligence of a teacher and the curiosity and drive of a student who loved learning. She wanted to know exactly how she and thousands of residents would be affected by the Los Osos wastewater project.

In Los Osos, politics is an active bloodsport often played by zealots with axes to grind and bridges to burn. Though she was part of the politic by regularly voicing her opposition to the County’s wastewater project, Gewynn remained above the fray. She spoke to the supervisors sternly, treated them like grandchildren with a habit of being clumsy and irresponsible. She scolded them, asked them for answers for which they never gave — but their silence did not deter her. She knew that the community needed to be educated on the County’s plans for water conservation and addressing saltwater intrusion. She did this in a unique way. Gewynn pronounced her words slowly, allowing the truth to resonate more pointedly in the sometimes-empty chambers. She did this while staring into the eyes of the supervisors, who were always caught in her timeless gaze. She looked into their souls to see if they were stirring.

While the sewer opposition was hounded by observers for being repetitive, noisy and rude, she always spoke with level-headed authority.

Though some disagreed with her positions, Gewynn was admired by her political adversaries for her directness. When she spoke, they at least pretended to listen. Her motherly gravitas captured their attention. They were forced to respect her beyond politics, which was in actuality a fragment of her legacy. This ability was a rare feat, given that some names in Los Osos are synonymous with the bitterness surrounding the wastewater project.

In early September I saw Gewynn and her husband, George, at the memorial for our mutual friend and Los Osos activist Bo Cooper. I hugged Gewynn tight. In her embrace, I felt almost overwhelming compassion coming from a glowing yet very modest saint. She said she admired how much I’d grown since the days I spoke at Los Osos Community Services District meetings in 2005. I told her that I will always be grateful for everything she’s done for Los Osos. That would be the last time I saw her.

Even now, I can vividly remember the twinkle in her eye and her rosy smile when I slowly parted from her embrace. I saw hope and kindness smiling back at me.

– Aaron Ochs

On December 6 The Tribune published an editorial that said District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson shouldn’t resign. This comes as no surprise to us, given that The Tribune has consistently offered favorable coverage, and was, in fact, contacted by Gibson himself to cover “the exclusive” about his extramarital affair. It would go against the grain for . . . → Read More: Tribune Chooses Gibson Over Readers]]>

Supervisor Gibson’s Tribune

On December 6 The Tribune published an editorial that said District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson shouldn’t resign. This comes as no surprise to us, given that The Tribune has consistently offered favorable coverage, and was, in fact, contacted by Gibson himself to cover “the exclusive” about his extramarital affair. It would go against the grain for The Tribune to bite the hand that feeds them. But their editorial missed a few things and airbrushed a few details with an elitist stroke, which drew our ire.

In their editorial, they wrote, “Supervisor Bruce Gibson showed extremely poor judgment when he engaged in a prolonged extramarital affair with his legislative assistant, but a detailed investigation by the County Counsel’s Office shows that he violated no county rules. That being the case, we do not believe Gibson should be coerced into resigning by a small group of individuals, including some who appear to be at least partly motivated by their distaste for Gibson’s politics and voting record.”

The Tribune does not take into account the fact that the County government has had trouble in the “sex affairs” department. In 2009, the County was embroiled in a two-pronged sexual harassment situation between former County Administrator David Edge and Assistant County Administrator Gail Wilcox. As part of the County’s internal investigation into their relationship, it was revealed that Wilcox had an inappropriate sexual relationship with Tony Perry of the Deputy Sheriffs Association — and this was happening while the two were heavily engaged in collective bargaining negotiations. That same year, then-board chairman Gibson oversaw the investigation and had asked Edge to resign. Meanwhile, according to the County Counsel’s office, Gibson was already in his own affair for two years when the Wilcox-Edge scandal broke. Knowing how damaging it was to the County government and their employees’ reputations, Gibson continued the affair and blatantly disregarded the consequences.

Continuing to push for something while blatantly disregarding the consequences… sound familiar?

It should. That’s literally his record. With all the coverage we’ve had on Gibson, there is no need to regurgitate our supportive evidence and documentation. We have plenty. Whether you, the reader, personally agree with Gibson’s politics or not, he has shown the tendency to aggressively push his agenda without compromise or expressing the faintest desire to compromise. He’s pursued environmentally and socio-economically devastating initiatives that provoked concerns and action from leading environmental groups and agencies, most recently the California Coastal Commission — not a small group. As the dissenting opinion grew, so did his disdain for dissent. While there was public discussion, he largely ignored contentions and dismissed them repeatedly as “assertions” and “irrelevant.”

The Tribune concurred when they addressed who they called “sewer opponents” from Los Osos in their March 2 editorial, calling them “nothing if not wily,” and that was before they called for ”delivering [them] yet another load of pugnacious brickbats.” The Tribune not only endorsed stripping dissenters of their legitimacy with a crudely constructed soundbite — which Gibson has collected like trading cards over the years — but they’ve also invoked violent imagery. Now that’s classy.

Like The Tribune, Gibson has disqualified his constituents by the number of voices who speak against him. He uses numerically inadequate adjectives like “small,” “few,” “insignificant” and “little” to describe his adversaries — yet the growing calls for his resignation are anything but. Despite what The Tribune calls “small group of individuals,” their own website at SanLuisObispo.com offers a completely different perspective.

When the original article broke on The Tribune’s website, over 300 comments were posted. At the time of this article, 356 comments are posted, though further down it reads that there are 458 comments. More than half of those comments came from residents who called for Gibson’s resignation. Granted, some were duplications. Of course, some of the comments posted were deemed inappropriate and were subsequently removed by The Tribune busy online staff — including civil comments that offered more detailed reasons why Gibson should resign. Online comments are usually disposable and not taken seriously, but the sheer number of people calling for the supervisor’s resignation is not exactly “small.” And that’s not counting those who spoke before the Board of Supervisors.

Supervisor Gibson has often attributed his decisions as being moralistic. Because of his affair, because of that moral lapse of judgment, which called into question his personal credibility, there is a natural reflex for people to reassess his record and his previous violations of public trust. It is appropriate for residents affected by his decisions to look at his record and determine if he should resign, be recalled, or put up a candidate to challenge him in the next election. The Tribune sees things differently. They suggest that people should wait until the next election. They reduce the debate that people should have about Gibson’s record by brutishly dismisses all the nuances found in arguments calling for his resignation.

The Tribune concludes that people should focus more constructively on solutions to help prevent these types of scandals from happening again. That’s like telling people that they should have a conversation about gun violence prevention after a horrific shooting takes place. Unless action is taken, the cycle will continue. It already has. And every time a scandal like this happens in the County government, people’s reputations are damaged, lives and marriages are ruined and distrust in the government increases. Gibson’s resignation would show constituents that the County government does not tolerate misconduct. Likewise, Gibson being recalled would lend credence to the notion that democracy is not an illusion perpetrated by officials who restrict people’s opinions for two minutes without a reply.

Clearly, The Tribune continues its impassioned defense for Gibson in spite of its readers — and that’s perplexing. The constant attacks on their own readership is disrespectful and indicative of a carefully concocted false narrative about the legitimacy of Gibson’s critics. We’ll never say The Tribune’s opinions are small or inconsequential — small-minded and journalistically regressive, perhaps — but compared to the general populace that reads their newspaper, they are a small group arguably coercing their “small” readers to stand down. That’s very ironic. The Tribune should let their readers make the case instead of condescendingly making up their minds for them.

– Aaron Ochs

UPDATED (11/17): The rehearing petition has been denied.

UPDATED (11/14): Citizens for Clean Water filed a rehearing petition on Wednesday. More details to come… [Source: Los Osos Sewer Saga]

On October 25, Los Osos’ Citizens for Clean Water (the organization formerly known as the Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund) filed for voluntary dismissal of their seemingly never-ending appeal against . . . → Read More: The Lasting Tragedy of PZLDF]]>

Gail Briggs McPherson

UPDATED (11/17): The rehearing petition has been denied.

UPDATED (11/14): Citizens for Clean Water filed a rehearing petition on Wednesday. More details to come… [Source: Los Osos Sewer Saga]

On October 25, Los Osos’ Citizens for Clean Water (the organization formerly known as the Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund) filed for voluntary dismissal of their seemingly never-ending appeal against the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB). It’s unclear why CCW filed for voluntary dismissal, but it’s clear that Los Osos sewer construction is underway. Because the group is no longer a 501(c)(3) non-profit, and doesn’t appear to be operating under any other group’s 501(c)(3), they will have to pay the water board’s legal expenses.

Second District, Division Six of the California Courts of Appeal judge Kenneth Yegan delivered the appeal opinion on October 25, which echoed almost word-for-word the sentiments expressed by San Luis Obispo Superior Court judge Charles S. Crandall nearly two years earlier. To sum up Yegan’s 17-page opinion succinctly, Citizens for Clean Water’s arguments were unanimously dismissed as having no merit. It’s unclear what the basis of the appeal actually was because the appeal document is not public record. One could speculate that CCW’s attorney Shaunna Sullivan wanted to move the case out of the area in hopes that the appellate judges would be further removed from local politics and biases. But it appears that the appellate judges came to the same conclusions without much variation.

At the tail-end of the opinion, the judge specifically stated that the costs to the respondents (CCRWQCB) shall not be published. But the group is now responsible for paying those costs. At Razor Online, we can only speculate what those costs might be — but since the case has been around for over five years, the costs are likely staggering. There is no question that taxpayers — contributing to the lawsuit — are shouldering the burden of those costs. The district, which initially contributed to the case, will never see a return of their investment. The burden will now supplement the $189-million sewer costs — arguably the byproduct of this litigation and the flawed leadership that embraced it.

Six years earlier, after Los Osos resident Gail McPherson assumed leadership over the Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund, the sewer opposition was in disarray. They weren’t entirely sure which direction they wanted to take, though the new LOCSD board sounded like they had a plan. The opposition basked in the euphoria of their LOCSD recall victory from late 2005 up to when then-Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee proposed his legislation, AB 2701, which handed wastewater authority to the County government. The opposition didn’t hold to the promises that were made by their vigorous grassroots 2005 campaign: the sewer would be affordable, moved out of town, and the design-build process would start anew without oversight from controversial contractor MWH Americas. The proposed project would cost only $100 per month as indicated in fliers that were printed by McPherson.

McPherson screened the opposition recall candidates and acted as the unofficial adviser to the new LOCSD board majority immediately after the recall election. McPherson attended the meetings and sat in the front row. She made eye contact and often made hand gestures, signaling to members their cues on how they should vote on items pertaining to the wastewater project. Essentially, she was the puppeteer who performed with not-so-invisible strings wrapped around her fingers. This became evident when former LOCSD president Lisa Schicker called out to McPherson during an October 2005 meeting and asked, “Okay Gail, what do we do now?”

There was a reason why the board was so reliant on McPherson. Before moving to Los Osos in 2001, McPherson was a Wastewater Systems Manager for the City of Riverside for 10 years. In Riverside, her job was to oversee all operations of their wastewater project and make sure that their project was in regulatory compliance. She had 10 years of valuable experience that theoretically would have given Los Osos the foundation they needed to design and construct a more appropriate wastewater solution. But her experience was plagued with legal troubles, which resulted in the suspension of her Grade V SWRCB Operator license.

In October 1998, the Riverside Free-Press reported that McPherson was accused by San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office of falsifying her son-in-law’s credentials so he could get a state wastewater operator’s license. She was investigated for the same thing a year earlier, but no disciplinary action was taken. It also came to light that, in 1997, a group of black employees filed a lawsuit against the City of Riverside, claiming that McPherson discriminated against them. One of the workers, Alfred Thompson, claimed that McPherson tried to get him fired after he complained about her conduct. In court documents, employees claimed McPherson allegedly threatened to lay off black workers and demote them to lower-level jobs “without hesitation.” All lawsuits that were filed were settled, and the criminal charges against her were dropped. She worked out a plea agreement with prosecutors, which kept her out of jail. She was fined $40,000 and her license was temporarily suspended for two years.

Most of the opposition knew of her troubled past, but they supported McPherson regardless. They saw the allegations and charges against her as an elaborate, carefully constructed ploy by the corrupt water board to destroy her reputation. They saw her as the gutsy, battle-tested heroine who was going to put Los Osos on the right path and stop the water board in their tracks. It was a story of personal revenge, and many in the opposition played a supportive role. She had the appearance of a competent, semi-retired professional. When she spoke, she talked a good game: she spoke with conviction and seemed to command a firm understanding of wastewater engineering, a subject matter that more than a few residents have claimed to be proficient in.

But McPherson wasn’t as infallible as supporters made her out to be. She held a series of workshops in late 2005 to showcase several project alternatives for Los Osos, but when, at one of the workshops, distinguished local environmental scientist and civil engineer John Alexander stood up and frustratingly asked her which technology was most feasible for Los Osos.

“Pick one!” said Alexander.

She replied blankly, “I don’t know.”

She later told attendees that she preferred the regional plan, a gravity collection-based system that would also serve Morro Bay and Cayucos. Though she’s occasionally expressed support for the STEP/STEG alternative, which was constantly championed by the opposition, McPherson always preferred the gravity collection-based regional plan. McPherson promoted the regional plan in the courtroom when Judge Crandall heard the case. In his ruling, Crandall sharply criticized CCW for using the courtroom to promote her sewer system, which she once bragged to supporters at meetings that she could “manage it very easily.”

The water board had no interest in the regional plan. Given that they readily accepted the trajectory set forth by the recalled LOCSD board, which included a permitted and funded community sewer, the CCRWQCB was not amused with the recall and the direction taken by the post-recall board. The CCRWQCB moved forward with imposing enforcement action on a selected group of homeowners four months after the recall took place. The enforcement action would later manifest as a proposed Cease and Desist Order (CDO). The emergence of the CDO caused a stir in the community, and a handful of targeted recipients decided to come together and form the Prohibition Zone Legal Defense Fund. Though she wasn’t a resident of the Prohibition Zone, McPherson offered to take over the group as an active director and assist residents in becoming compliant with water board enforcement.

For a short while, the opposition controlled the Los Osos Community Services District and had the authority to build the wastewater project. However, at the same time, there was the prevailing belief among the core opposition that PZLDF’s legal measures would revolutionize the process and force the water board to back down.

According to October 2006 PZLDF press releases, McPherson and her supporters stated that there was no legal justification to enforce the Prohibition Zone, but apparently their case was not air-tight. The group had to amend their case briefs several times. The presiding judge at the time, Judge Barry LaBarbara, criticized the group for turning in those briefs late and not exhausting their legal remedies when they had ample opportunity to do so. By the time PZLDF changed their name to Citizens for Clean Water in 2007, the group assembled a web site — which is no longer available — that contained basic information about their case, but the site was no longer updated after June that year.

McPherson and supporters solicited donations in the community and garnered financial support from the LOCSD to contribute to legal expenses. Community members donated thousands of dollars to the group, and used an unlikely source to fundraise. By November 2007, a YouTube video from Activist and Documentary Film Producer Steve Murphy‘s “Insider Exclusive” appeared, which showcased the struggles of Los Osos from the group’s perspective.

Opinions outside the PZLDF mantra were conspicuously absent from the show. Razor Online came across e-mails from McPherson, who wrote to Murphy months before the show, that specifically excluded any other opinions about the wastewater project. She reasoned that PZLDF-CCW was “the only voice that mattered” in Los Osos.

McPherson had a strong disdain for people who had visions that differed than her own both politically and strategically. She was obsessed with suppressing her critics with name-calling and off-the-cuff snarky remarks, which was eerily reminiscent of the complaints she received when she worked in Riverside. McPherson used divisive and derogatory labels to describe her critics, which alienated some, but not all, of those who once stood beside her. McPherson’s callously constructed rebukes were laden with racial, ethnic and partisan slurs that echoed the sentiments of foul-mouthed conservative pundit Ann Coulter, one of McPherson’s idols. Ironically, McPherson repeatedly insisted that partisanship played no role in the wastewater project and urged the opposition to be “united.”

For the most part, the PZLDF-CCW case was roughly assembled into a series of incomplete thoughts by blogger Ann Calhoun of Calhoun’s Cannon, who was once listed as an interested party in their legal proceedings. Calhoun occasionally posted press releases, which were written by McPherson, but information about the case itself was scarce. By 2008, updates about the case were no longer provided. Commenters repeatedly asked Calhoun for more information, but she refused to oblige. Early that year, Razor Online received an e-mail forwarded to them by a former PZLDF-CCW member. The e-mail was from McPherson, who issued  a “personal gag order” to PZLDF-CCW supporters that prohibited them from discussing the case publicly. In the same e-mail, she also noted that any legal initiatives spurred by other members of the community were a “blatant distraction.” To date, Calhoun remains loyal to the gag order and has repeatedly refused to answer questions about the organization she once belonged to.

While dodging questions about the case, Calhoun dismissed critics for not understanding the legalities and not understanding the purpose behind the lawsuits. This left critics scratching their heads, wondering how much the lawsuits cost the community and the district. They were — and continue to be — greeted with radio silence. In light of their case being dismissed and their appeal being voluntarily dismissed, there are more unanswered questions that deserve answers. One question is more prominently asked: “How much will this cost the community?”

We don’t know.

Citizens for Clean Water is one of the most obtuse, opaque and exclusionary organizations located on the Central Coast. The organization has been led by McPherson, who has adopted and shed several different organizational shells during her eight years in Los Osos, re-branding herself each time. McPherson is now president of McPherson Consulting Services, and unabashedly touts Citizens for Clean Water, previously comprised of Prohibition Zone residents looking for a lawyer to represent them, as a success — which is a distasteful, costly parody of the facts.

We have repeatedly asked members about the organization and received no reply. People have asked questions and demanded answers on Calhoun’s Cannon, but have received no reply. Time and time again, we were criticized and ostracized at every turn for questioning McPherson and her motives. But we were ultimately right to do so. We were told that McPherson’s suit would break up the Prohibition Zone, and stop the wastewater project and the water board “in their tracks.” McPherson was wrong.

The sewer is coming. It costs twice as much as McPherson promised, but at least we know how much the county’s overpriced sewer costs. We don’t know how much the community will have to pay for PZLDF-CCW’s trials and tribulations. People’s lives and livelihoods are not a game. McPherson selfishly paved her path to professional rehabilitation with the tears of thousands of residents, and because of that they will be shedding fresh tears over the sewer for years to come.

– Aaron Ochs

CORRECTION: It was stated that the Los Osos Community Services District is currently shouldering the burden of the legal costs incurred by the lawsuit. We clarified our statement to reduce confusion. 

Confusion. Corruption. Chaos.

The City of Paso Robles is embroiled in a police department scandal that has rocked the community of just under 30,000 residents. The scandal, which started with accusations of misconduct against former city Police Chief Lisa Solomon, has been a widely discussed and hotly debated topic — and now . . . → Read More: Paso Robles is Burning]]>

Paso Robles spills wine of discord

Confusion. Corruption. Chaos.

The City of Paso Robles is embroiled in a police department scandal that has rocked the community of just under 30,000 residents. The scandal, which started with accusations of misconduct against former city Police Chief Lisa Solomon, has been a widely discussed and hotly debated topic — and now it has snowballed into fiery hysterics from several sides of the debate.

People should recognize the dangers of getting too involved in the story and losing their perspective — and integrity in the process.

Under siege for legally questionable ticket quotas, policies, and accusations of sexual harassment by former police officers, Solomon was relieved of command on March 20. For two decades of community service and positive performance marks, Solomon worked her way through the ranks of the Paso Robles Police Department until she succeeded now-retired Chief Dennis Cassidy in 2007. She led the department through the economic recession, which resulted in staff and budget cuts for the department. Because of cuts, the department had dwindling resources — and those resources were tested when the city experienced a rise in gang-related violence last year. Then in 2008, her personal .380-caliber handgun was stolen from her unmarked, unlocked police car, which was parked at her Paso Robles home. She later admitted and apologized for what she called her “big mistake.”

This year, Solomon was the subject of sexual harassment allegations by former officers, including Brennen Lux, who claimed inappropriate sexual contact by the former chief. Another officer, T.J. McCall, alleged that Solomon touched his genitalia while he sat in her car. A third officer, Dave Hernandez, told investigations of an incident in 2007 when she allegedly pushed Hernandez’s face into her breasts at a local bar. Officers who reported the alleged misconduct were subsequently terminated while others stayed quiet out of fears of termination. More officers came forward with allegations that portrayed Solomon as sexually crazed, shamelessly incompetent, and drunk with power. One officer claimed that Solomon pushed for illegal ticket quotas that could pressure officers to write bogus tickets.

The numerous allegations resulted in Solomon’s early retirement, which cost the city $230,500 as part of a separation agreement between Solomon and the city. Taxpayers, who started expressing concern for the city’s handling of the scandal, were shocked to discover that costs expanded to $330,000 and now included $80,000 in investigation costs; $71,000 of that went toward legal fees while the rest went toward the investigation itself. To date, several details uncovered in the investigation remain classified.

Frustrated with what they believe was gross mismanagement by Paso Robles City Council and staff, a group of citizens formed an organization called Change Paso Robles Now (CPRN2012), led by resident Sally Reynolds and local business owner Karen Daniels. Reynolds and Daniels served as interim co-chairpersons during the group’s formative stage. The group has been actively campaigning to terminate the employment of embattled City Manager Jim App and replace the current City Council with leaders who they assert are looking to restore fiscal health and stability to Paso Robles.

But the community group has had its share of controversy. In April, The Tribune wrote that CalCoastNews (CCN) co-founder Dan Blackburn registered the domain for the CPRN2012 website. Recently, domain registration information for cprn2012.org was made private, though organizers have and continue to advocate transparency. CCN originally revealed the allegations against Solomon. Without disclosing their financial support and personal involvement with CPRN2012, CCN has published several articles and op-ed columns related to the Paso Robles scandal. Supporters defend Blackburn and CCN, claiming that Tribune writers and columnists have never disclosed their ties to political causes, candidates and political action committees (PACs). But sources close to CPRN contend that the news site has been “intimately involved” with organizing the group’s campaign since their inception.

Since the allegations were revealed, CCN has tripled its radio presence. Writers including co-founder/reporter Karen Velie and Blackburn have been recurring guests on shows like 920 KVEC’s Dave Congalton Show, hosted by a former Contributing Editor to the site.

Sources close to Solomon told Razor Online that members of CPRN2012 have allegedly tracked down the former chief’s Facebook profile and harassed her through messages via the social networking site; some of which were supposedly threatening. Other members of the group have joined the choir of anonymous voices, which have repeatedly lampooned Solomon and the city government for their handling of the scandal. The anonymous scrutiny became the subject of a July 4 editorial by the New Times‘ Shredder (also anonymous and often excessively provocative), which condemned the “online trolls” — namely vocal supporters of CCN — for “insufferable and petty childishness of their dialogue.” CCN scoffed at the editorial in a no-byline article the next day, decrying the “verbal assault in Thursday’s edition of New Times’ vapid version of what now passes for the ‘Shredder.’” CCN states that they provide an opportunity for reader comment, though Razor Online discovered that most of their comments – like this one – are actively screened by moderators.

Paso Robles is in serious trouble, and it’s unfortunate that scandals like these dominate local headlines. There is an abundance of allegations — many of them offer very little evidence and don’t venture beyond the occasional internal memo and bizarrely candid exchanges between city staff. Like the responses to this controversy, charges levied against Solomon and the City of Paso Robles are troubling, obscene and absurd. If at least some of the accusations are true, Paso Robles citizens have every right to be concerned about how their government is operating. But the problem is how people are responding and handling the controversy. Seeing how CPRN2012 and their supporters are conducting themselves, there is little hope that there will be measured reforms for a city widely known for its hot springs, vineyards and wineries that dot the scenic valley landscape with timeless elegance.

Some Paso Robles residents are clearly obsessed with retribution more than rehabilitation. This is because the local media cabal built its reputation on a shaky foundation of sensationalism, and they often do not exercise real journalistic gravitas to present their facts in an objective, journalistic manner. To date, even with all that’s already transpired, the facts surrounding the controversy remain few and far between. Yet so many are way too keen on playing the role of judge, jury and executioner — and the media clearly encourages readers to act that way.

Many of the online discussions I’ve read on the subject are full of pestilent, unnecessary antagonism, but rarely do they touch on policy and the logistics for putting sound policies in place. Similarly, at City Council meetings there is plenty of unresolved tension and calls for resignations, but rarely are there any individuals who are willing to take a deep breath and discuss solutions analytically.

Paso Robles residents should lower their torches and pitchforks, and tune out questionably motivated media sources that directly profit from their anger. They need to focus on meaningful reforms and policy discussions. Razor Online does not begrudge community activists for organizing a movement to unseat local officials and city council members, but grassroots organizations like Change Paso Robles 2012 need a coherent, grounded, established platform in order to rise above the politics-as-usual muck and fray. To date, CPRN2012 has no statement on the issues, which include rising infrastructure costs and street maintenance. Instead, their home page provides a cartoon showing Jim App speaking to councilman Fred Strong.

Paso Robles needs to diligently avoid being a cartoon. The ineptitude, from all the parties involved, is no laughing matter.

– Aaron Ochs

I want to enlighten you on a recent decision that I’ve made regarding controversial wastewater project in Los Osos. I’ve decided to no longer publish any articles about the Los Osos sewer on Razor Online. Hit the jump for more information.

This decision was based on a series of factors and personal experiences. While we, . . . → Read More: Final Thoughts on Los Osos]]> To my readers,

I want to enlighten you on a recent decision that I’ve made regarding controversial wastewater project in Los Osos. I’ve decided to no longer publish any articles about the Los Osos sewer on Razor Online. Hit the jump for more information.

This decision was based on a series of factors and personal experiences. While we, at Razor Online, remain adamant that the $190-million sewer project will be an insurmountable social and economic burden on thousands of Prohibition Zone homeowners, it has been difficult for me to uncover the truth from those who claim they know what that truth is. The real travesty is not the inevitability of the sewer, but it is the lack of communication and consensus that resulted in the project being the way it is at any cost.

It only takes a few rotten apples to spoil the whole pie.

We hope the County project team will push forward with realistic expectations and a goal to uphold the quality of life for residents throughout what many believe to be a very arduous process.

Razor Online will continue to provide in-depth political analysis on local and national issues with the same passion and intensity that has garnered readership from all over the world.

Sincerely,

Aaron Ochs
Lead Blogger, Razor Online

The politics in San Luis Obispo County has never been pretty. The choice between District 3 Supervisor and incumbent Adam Hill and Pismo Beach city councilman Ed Waage has electrified the political debate in this county. There have been many wild twists and turns during the course of their campaigns, including but not limited to: prank . . . → Read More: SLO Politics: Guilty By Association]]>

Pulitzer to Cuddy: Nope

The politics in San Luis Obispo County has never been pretty. The choice between District 3 Supervisor and incumbent Adam Hill and Pismo Beach city councilman Ed Waage has electrified the political debate in this county. There have been many wild twists and turns during the course of their campaigns, including but not limited to: prank calls, tampering with online newspaper polls, bizarre diatribes on racism and birtherism by the Tea Party, and kindergarten-grade character attacks from a newspaper that prints opinion columns as actual front-page news. This is clearly anarchy, and that reflects poorly on everyone who is involved in the mudslinging.

On May 6, Tribune columnist Bob Cuddy provided his analysis of the conflict between Mr. Hill and Mr. Waage. Mr. Cuddy also mused about the election between District 5 Supervisor and incumbent Jim Patterson and challenger Debbie Arnold. Mr. Cuddy appears to be very dismissive of what he calls a “subterranean contest [which] includes an odd and intriguing mix of subject matter,” and he lists subjects that are irrelevant and apart from the “more mundane issues of government.” However, the article goes deep into the “intriguing mix of subject matter” instead of focusing on issues such as pension reform, homelessness, budgets and public safety. Those issues are listed by Mr. Cuddy himself. Ironically, he never touches on them again in the article. This is considered “news.”

For the past several months there has been renewed partisan vigor in these political campaigns. People like Mr. Cuddy have been very eager to link conservative challengers — like Mr. Waage and Mrs. Arnold — to the Tea Party. Mr. Cuddy and others have associated conservative candidates with right-wing extremism like the birther movement and those who still believe that President Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim. By creating a link, candidates are forced to weigh in on national issues that venture beyond the local purview of their candidacy.

Similarly, Mr. Hill had attacked the Coalition of Labor, Agriculture and Business (COLAB) for right-wing extremism, though it was later revealed that Mr. Hill took exception to only a few COLAB supporters who echoed extremist positions. On the other end of the political spectrum, liberals and progressives constantly draw ire from conservatives for their passive-aggressive support of the Occupy Wall Street movement, which has its own share of extremist supporters. However, Democratic candidates in SLO County are often praised by the local media without question or a hint of journalistic skepticism. In fact, Razor Online can confirm that no Democratic candidate or incumbent has been linked — by the local media — to the Occupy Wall Street movement or any other progressive movement that is sometimes co-opted those with extremist ideologies. Incumbents such as Mr. Hill, Mr. Patterson and District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson were never questioned on whether they’re able to separate themselves from the extremist cliques of their respective ideological movements.

Then there’s the matter of hyperfocus on issues that seem minuscule at first glance, but show insight into the character of our local politicians. Take the supposed “prank call” that Mr. Hill made to one of his supporters, Sheila Blake. Regardless of the call being a wisecrack from a candidate to a supporter, the incident showed what Mr. Hill thought of Mr. Waage: a man with seemingly no substantive positions other than asking people if they’re Communists or Socialists. The call was recorded, sent to the media, and it became the subject of gossip fodder for months. Many didn’t find the call to be humorous as it was seen as a misfired partisan attack that’s irrelevant compared to issues that many of his constituents are concerned about. Mr. Waage continues to use the recorded voicemail as an indication of Mr. Hill’s questionable behavior. Mr. Cuddy appears to be taken aback by the Waage campaign’s insistence of using the voicemail as a political ploy — despite Mrs. Blake’s wishes to put the matter to rest — but this strategy is not uncommon in political circles. In his article on Sunday, Mr. Cuddy focuses heavily on questioning Mr. Waage’s character for repeatedly using the voicemail in his campaign, but fails to look at Mr. Hill’s long history of erratic behavior that led up to the call in question. Veteran journalists should know that context matters.

Take Los Osos, for example. Despite Los Osos being outside of his district, Mr. Hill has been the subject of criticism for his handling of public comment speakers from that town. Razor Online has covered this subject extensively. Not much of the issue bears repeating — as we know how much the media has a fanatical disdain for the repetitive “anti-sewer contingent.”

In Mr. Cuddy’s article, the people of Los Osos are seamlessly woven into the radical beliefs observed by some members of the Tea Party. Once again, Los Osos is the strawman that helps Mr. Hill look dignified in his hyper-aggressive moral crusade against those who have the chutzpah to accuse government officials of being corrupt. It’s true that some Los Osos residents have used the podium to go after officials in a very personal way — by talking about their private lives and their families — and that is considered uncouth. However, consider the context. Speakers have cited news sources such as Cal Coast News and The Tribune as a reference point. There was no unprecedented personal attack of their own invention. Quite the opposite. The lax local media has embraced this coverage and dignified the stories as fit to print. But when a Los Osos resident regurgitates information that was previously published as news, suddenly they are the poster children for communal dysfunction and lack of civility. As someone who has previously linked Los Osos residents to extremist figures and organizations and wrote a column personally attacking one of the residents, Mr. Cuddy repeatedly, conveniently fails to take all this into account. Mr. Cuddy does, in fact, work for a newspaper and a news industry that consistently generates revenue from publishing stories about public figures and their personal lives.

There was another thing that Mr. Cuddy left out of his analysis. Last week, New Times reported that the SLO County Democratic Party has urged members to vote multiple times in an online poll featured on the New Times web site. The question was, “Which of these candidates for SLO County Supervisor has your vote?” According to the one who calls himself the “Shredder,” 86% of those votes went to Mr. Hill while only 4% went to Mr. Waage. The question is: why go through all the trouble to manipulate some unarguably insignificant online poll? Why would the SLO Democratic Committee care so much about this? There is something unsettling about a local Democratic Party, who — instead of touting their candidate of choice’s “solid record” — spends their time encouraging members to vote multiple times. It’s common logic to say that online polls do not have any sway in any sort of election, but to encourage manipulation of any statistical data is ridiculous. This doesn’t necessarily reflect poorly on Mr. Hill himself, but it calls into question the credibility of the party that he so proudly represents.

There are several occurrences on record now chronicling Mr. Cuddy’s awkward forays into journalism, and it doesn’t look like he’s getting better with age. But thanks to Mr. Cuddy, we get a glimpse into the seedy underbelly of SLO County politics. Unlike politics unfolding on a level playing field, the politics here is designed to brainwash over time, and turn readers into perpetual hatemongers that can operate only within partisan boundaries. Within these partisan boundaries, there is no debate. Just decisions. And all decisions are final. Questioning decisions and actions by the incumbents has been met with an all-too-familiar “guilty by association” retort.

There is a recurring theme in all these lines of attack: Reverse McCarthyism. Former U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-Wi.) was the face of a nationwide Communist witch hunt. Mr. McCarthy held several hearings to determine who was a Communist/Soviet spy or sympathizer and effectively ruined many careers and lives. Today, the term “McCarthyism” represents reckless, misleading and false accusations about a person or a group of people. In San Luis Obispo County, there is McCarthyism coming from the local Democratic Party, their candidates, supporters and media organizations that clearly back those candidates.

Articles like Mr. Cuddy’s May 6 article epitomize a big problem in SLO County politics. There is a prevailing belief — which is, in a major way, perpetuated by news media with large distribution — that it is acceptable to dismiss people and groups based on loosely connected associations alone. There is rarely a no-holds-barred conversation about a candidate’s record, though it’s often alluded to as something people should focus on instead of the distractions. Oddly enough, the focus is kept on the distractions — and on where the challenger, not the incumbent, is to blame for it. In the case of Los Osos, the media declares that the “vocal minority” (or the “anti-sewer” contingent) is the problem, not the County government. Los Osos residents, writes Mr. Cuddy, can be readily associated with the organized, virulent, anti-government sentiment that is the Tea Party.

It’s dishonest. There is no other way to describe it.

Should they — “they” being the manipulative and factually abusive journalists and political organizations — continue to propagandize while pretending to be on some objective plane, we can no longer trust what we once considered “news.” When it comes to County politics, no side is completely right or justified in their actions. Because of this, people need to come to their own conclusions and vote for the best candidate based on their positions and their ability to lead. Clearly, The Tribune has already chosen the candidates — but really, the choice is only yours to make. Not theirs.

– Aaron Ochs