In Los Osos, the lines are drawn as clearly as the partisan lines that we see in Washington D.C.

When you approach the podium at the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesdays, you are an “obstructionist” who goes against the grain of the majority. By speaking at meetings on the subject of Los Osos, you are touted as the “vocal minority” who will stop at nothing to delay the project to kingdom come and cost taxpayers millions of dollars — at least according to County supporters. These supporters have created an impression that their opposition is self-indulgent, clueless and classless. When Bob Cuddy wrote his recent Tribune article about Los Osos sewer critics being deprived of “special speaking time,” the floodgates opened to lambaste the critics in a very self-indulgent, clueless and classless way such as comparing speakers to Nazis who wallow in their own filth. Character triumphs over issue and Cuddy — who facilitates that sort of criticism — shows how easy it is to alienate the critics from the issue.

Los Osos residents who have spoken in opposition to the wastewater project (in its current form) have spent no time at all angrily chiding their opposition. Instead, their grievances were solely directed to the County — and some of the critics expressed interest in establishing consensus and compromises, which would guarantee affordability and sustainability of all affected homeowners. However, each specific issue of contention was swiftly ignored by the County. Despite the verbally expressed concerns — notwithstanding repetitious talking points — and thoroughly constructed, layered appeals, the County would snap back at the critics. “We’ve tested this project for every assertion and our project plan is completely sound,” but when the California Coastal Commission disagreed with the County’s own assertion on January 14, anger from County supporters was immediately redirected to the appellants. According to supporters, the appellants were completely responsible for project delay, which jeopardized efforts to receive $80 million in stimulus funds.

I find the rationale behind the supporters’ criticism of County opposition to be tiresome and weak, but the problem I personally have with their criticism is their presentation. When you take away the yelling, screaming, trash-talking and mud-slinging, all that’s left is pure, unfiltered hate. County supporters are purely driven on hate that — maybe at one time — was derived from completely legitimate fears and concerns about the project. Now, their hated is profoundly absolute, yet extremely primitive in tone.

For example, the very same critics — who have aimed their crosshairs at the opposition — have also criticized me without ever specifying the context behind the criticism. My exchanges with supporters have been well-documented here, but my name is often brought into debates that I’m not a part of. According to County supporters, I’m an “obstructionist” blogger who completely “loses it” when people disagree. This opinion, which is a completely disingenuous caricature, is expressed by critics who assume the form of anonymous monikers. They proudly claim the majority of the community stands behind their every word. Sadly, this behavior is commonplace on web communities and blogs, but it doesn’t have to be, especially when the conversation is limited to about 15,000 people in a small, coastal California town. The community of Los Osos is so tightly knit that hate-fueled discourse — from either side — would disrupt progress and fuel frustrations more than what anyone could say at the podium during public comment.

Like President Obama’s methodology for creating bipartisan debates, I’ve repeatedly asked for an honest, civil discussion between parties as a means of reframing the discourse — and I’ve provided the medium to make it all happen — but if the discourse is going to include Nazi comparisons, obscene remarks and behavior, consider the discussion over.

– Aaron Ochs

As the chairman of the board, Bruce Gibson made the decision for County staff to provide monthly project updates (Cuddy calls it “special speaking time,” a Kindergarden-quality synonym), which naturally elicited public comment from Los Osos residents. It was at the chairman’s discretion to create that special time, but there was no indication — at any point in time — that the monthly updates would be suspended indefinitely. After confirming that project updates would be outsourced to office hours, Gibson says — as quoted in the article — that, “There will be a (Los Osos) item before the board when there is something to talk about.” However, there is something to talk about.

On January 26, California Coastal Commission’s Central Coast District Manager Dan Carl wrote a response to County Public Works’ Mark Hutchinson regarding the substantial issues that were raised by the commissioners. While Carl explains the steps that need to be taken to mitigate each substantial issue raised, there has been no publicly issued response by Public Works regarding their proposed resolutions and how much those resolutions would cost to enact. Public Works has not provided the public with any analysis or a clear explanation with supporting documentation that addresses these problems. The discussion between the Coastal Commission and County Public Works has been made private to the chagrin of many residents — and not just the so-called “vocal minority” — who have been involved with the process. They also include those who support the County and their project. Now, Los Osos residents are left with uncertainty. Everybody loses.

In September, Gibson issued a chairman’s rebuke of Los Osos residents who overused their public testimony time, but that had absolutely nothing to do with the board reducing updates to once a month as Cuddy indicated. Residents criticized the board for limiting their free speech because of the time limits that were specifically imposed on Los Osos residents (10 minutes of public comment in the morning and 10 in the afternoon) when each public participant has been given the maximum allowed three minutes per presentation as designated by their agenda and the California Brown Act.

Things are actually worse than what Cuddy described. While it’s true that Los Osos residents are able to speak for the full three minutes on public comment every Tuesday, the fact of the matter is that everyone outside the County government is stonewalled from receiving information and project updates. While supporter after supporter of the County has taken the opportunity to criticize the frequent “obstructionist” speakers, they don’t realize — or may not want to realize — that they have been caught in the same undertow as the people they’re criticizing, as Los Osos is being swept away.

According to the board, there is no need to continue their trademarked pledge of transparency. We can pledge allegiance to the flag, but skip the part about “liberty and justice for all.” After spending $7 million plus on rehashing old studies and copy-and-paste EIRs, after pushing through, then prematurely eliminating, a stillborn, tainted, skewed design-build process, the Mecham board has slammed the door on Los Osos.

Bear in mind that there is an underlying issue of entitlement that needs to be met, and not by silence. While it is inevitable that a project will be designed and constructed for Los Osos, there is, at the same time, a concurrent need for homeowners paying for a $300 a month sewer system to have their questions answered in a public forum. These homeowners are investing $100,000 or more in loans over 30 years to build the County’s sewer, and they need to know about their investment. “Prohibition Zone” residents have been forced to become investors — when everyone in Los Osos will benefit from their investment — and these people are entitled to know the details of their family’s future.

We are also entitled to know the extent of the conversations between the County and the Coastal Commission regarding the County’s response to the the upcoming de novo hearing on project details. How will be the substantial issues — raised by the Coastal Commission — be remedied by the County? What is Public Works’ plan, if they have one? Or is the board robotically aligned with Bruce Gibson’s view that the County’s efforts already addressed all the assertions in their initial presentation to the commission?

In response to former LOCSD board member Julie Tacker’s comments about the lack of transparency exhibited by the County, Chairman Mecham advised people — who are looking for updates on the wastewater project — to attend Bruce Gibson’s office hours, which have no transparency at all. Office hours have zero accountability. There are no cameras, no audio broadcast feeds. There’s just a round table in a small room led by Gibson, who often replies to a small number of attendees with a “no comment,” a dismissive flick of the wrist, an ambiguous topical rebuttal or questions are — as of late — deferred to heavily opinionated, non-County employees (private citizens). What is the board’s intent here? Where is government performing the function Mecham’s advises Los Osos residents to use as the alternative to a public forum?

Because the County has been all too eager to dismiss the naysayers and not address the issues they’ve raised, there are now lawsuits in the wings. Interestingly enough, the County makes no mention of these lawsuits. The board hasn’t even bothered to reply with the formulaic “no comment” response. According to closed session as described on the meeting agenda, the board discusses anticipated litigation, but there’s no mention of any pending litigation relevant to the wastewater project. Why is that? Have all legitimate communications and concerns, like the monthly debate, simply turned to vapor?

It seems like yesterday when Bruce Gibson told the Coastal Commission that there have been hundreds of public meetings on the LOWWP and countless hours of public comment dedicated to that issue. According to the board, there has been an unprecedented amount of time dedicated to deliberating over the details, the same details that the Coastal Commission found wanting and that initiated the current but necessary delay. Yet even before the board chooses contractors and votes on accepting the responsibility of designing and constructing the project — which they haven’t done — it has revoked transparency, denying thousands of residents the much-promised opportunity to look at the process alongside your staff and form their own conclusions.  After all, these few thousands are paying for the project, not the board of Supervisors, none of which live in Los Osos.

This process of slowly suffocating the public has stripped residents of their dignity. The board’s actions indicate that “Prohibition Zone” homeowners — the County’s most well-known, cash-strapped investors — are no longer privileged to know what’s going on with their investment.

We, the citizens of Los Osos, can now find closure, knowing that our elected government representatives have turned their backs on us, once and for all.

– Aaron Ochs

UPDATE (7:22 PM PST): A high surf advisory will remain in effect until 9:00 PM, but the advisory warning is no longer in effect for the area. Still, it’s best to stay away from the beaches and marinas until 9:00 PM.

Here are the Wolcott-Blakeslee positions on the key issues in a nutshell.

Abortion: We only support it if the fetus being aborted has a great likelihood of becoming an anti-sewer activist.

Budget and Economy: Maria Kelly will figure it out somehow. We’ll get right back to ya!

Civil Rights: We’re civil. Why would people need rights for that?

Corporations: We like them when they give us money.

Crime: Lisa Schicker did it.

Drugs: Evict the riff-raff. Problem solved. Now where’s my martini?

Education: One plus one equals something, right?

Energy: Invest in sewer-powered alternative energy. Not only will we be full of shit, but cars, homes and businesses will be too!

Environment: Obstructionist predator control is important. We suggest shooting them with rifles from helicopters.

Families & Children: Anti-sewer families and children must be treated as people with special needs.

Foreign Policy: Any countries that are on septics, vacuum systems, ponds or on STEP/STEG are part of the Axis of Evil. We must liberate those nations from the anti-sewer terrorists, install gravity systems, and then we will certainly have no exit strategy.

Free Trade: Allow water to be imported in jugs and sent to homes via FedEx.

Government Reform: See our positions on the Environment. There would be less public comment that way.

Gun Control: We support the Constitutional right to bear arms. The post-recall board makes great target practice.

Healthcare: If the babies are blue, then it’s good for you.

Homeland Security: Focus on fighting the anti-sewer people, not Al-Qaeda.

Immigration: If Alon Perlman can sneak into our country, anyone can.

Jobs: We are currently looking for strong, able individuals who can shine our shoes, flip our burgers and warm our towels. If you qualify, we will give you $7.50/hour in Monopoly money.

Principles and Values: We agree that high school principals are very valuable. Every high school needs one.

Tax Reform: Do we need a 218 for that?

Technology: We wholeheartedly endorse the Internet as a means of anonymously skewering private and public citizens for disagreeing with us. We believe in transparency.

With a platform like that, it’s one and out for Obama in 2012! Don’t you agree?

In response to Allebe, Gibson looked around sheepishly before rolling his eyes. Gibson grimaced and uttered, “I’m not going to comment on that.” And Gibson backed down.

Before and after that exchange, every Tuesday afternoon, Chris Allebe would stand at the podium at every Board of Supervisors meeting as “CDO #1019″ even though the supervisors showed no intention of  listening to his plight nor the plight of many homeowners in the Prohibition Zone who have come and gone — and will have to go because of the expense of the sewer.

After Dr. Thomas Ruehr passed away, Allebe took the responsibility of delivering Ruehr’s EIR comments to the board.

Both Ruehr and Allebe — who remained defiant against common foes until the very end — recognized that a great injustice was being forced onto the community of Los Osos. Though both men were labeled as “no-sewer advocates” by gravity collection aficionados, they were committed to the design and construction of a wastewater treatment system for their community, but they did not support systems that were inherently, fatally flawed.

Given the fact that the County dismissed STEP/STEG as a feasible alternative for consideration in April 2009, Allebe was not pleased with the uncertainty of the wastewater project in its current incarnation. At BOS public comment, he told the Supervisors, “We can’t say what’s going to happen until we spend $200 million on a project. The County doesn’t seem to have an answer to that except, ‘Well, we’ll find out after we build the project whether it’s successful or not’… You don’t spend $200 million on a maybe. Eventually, unless we grow fins and tails, we’ll be getting our water down at Trader Joe’s and taking sponge baths for the rest of our lives.”

Allebe was one of 45 homeowners targeted by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB). Allebe knew he wasn’t a “Discharger.” He also knew that his friends, neighbors and the other CDO recipients were being unfairly intimidated and prosecuted without proof. On March 7, 2007, Allebe told the New Times, “The state really hates this community [...] They just can’t believe this little podunk town would stand up to them.” And they did.

On the October 4, 2006 Deposition of Roger Briggs, Allebe challenged Briggs and the water board’s stance on affordability.

Said Allebe: “I haven’t heard affordability ever discussed [by the water board] concerning the project [...] That’s been the problem, as you call it, for the last 22 years is basically affordability. And the citizens have been filing lawsuits to keep themselves from paying these horrendous costs.”

Briggs responded that the issue of affordability was discussed in a variety of ways at several public meetings and forums, but he would not elaborate any further.

Allebe revisited the topic a year later when I spoke to him at a Los Osos Community Services District (LOCSD meeting).

I remember him saying to me, “I’m not going to let them ram an expensive sludge factory down our throats and I’m not going to let them tax me out of my home. I won’t let them lay a hand on me.” Allebe’s tone of strong resilience was similar to that of John Wayne when he said, “I won’t be wronged, I won’t be insulted, and I won’t be laid a hand on. I don’t do these things to other people and I expect the same from them” (The Shootist, 1976).

We need to acknowledge the sacrifices that Christopher Allebe has made for the community that he loved and deeply cared about. Not only will he always be in our hearts and minds — he will exist in everything that we do for the betterment of Los Osos. Chris has inspired us with his courage. He taught us to dedicate our lives to defying darkness with unrelenting, heartfelt altruism. He showed that it can all be done with a smile, a pat on the shoulder and a great sense of humor.

And just for the record, Chris. You were right about everything. You always were … and always will be.

– Aaron Ochs

Holed up in Lake Havasu City, Arizona, Murphy has been firing off rounds of lawyerless suits in federal courts against the federal government, the EPA, the State of California, and Lake Havasu City. Filing suits is nothing new for Murphy – it’s always been his calling card — but he may have already played all his cards and used up his suit quota for 2010 just in January and February alone.

On January 29 Murphy had “Consent Judgments” delivered to members of the Lake Havasu City Council, giving them a midnight deadline to accept, sign, notarize, and drop in the mailbox at 1802 Combat Drive in Lake Havasu City. It seems Murphy claims not only to have caught the city red-handed breaking federal water law, but city council members personally violating federal law by polluting as well.

“I am filing against 5 LHC city council members as citizens discharging toxic pollutants from their home, i.e. source,” wrote Murphy “To All” in a January 22 email. “They will have 20 days to decide to agree to a Consent Judgment (I am drawing up now for their acceptance), or, they are in for one big challenge to convince a federal judge they have a right to pollute…oh, not to mention at an estimated cost to retain an attorney to represent them in a federal court will be about $150,000 each.”

Murphy’s filing and court costs? Next to nothing.

On February 4 he launched payback suits against a variety of high-level government officials, including Lake Havasu City council members, Governor Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Brown of California, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, USEPA District Administrator Alexis Strauss, the San Luis Obispo judge who heard his case there and dismissed it with prejudice (he still owes $5,000 in court costs), and others who have either previously ruled against him or generally ignored him.

Now the city of Lake Havasu has had just about enough of Dee Thomas Murphy and officials are looking for legal ways to make his stay in Lake Havasu a brief one. That’s won’t be so easy. It seems it’s tough to hold someone accountable in Lake Havasu City if they have no fixed address, own nothing in their own name, and haven’t been charged with any crime they can make stick — yet. At this point, there is nothing the city would rather do than hasten his departure or jail him for abusing the law — as soon as they can figure out exactly which law he is abusing.

Meanwhile, Murphy’s charges are the same as those tossed out by every other court: Failure to obey federal water pollution law which triggers “Murphy’s Law.” Following federal law, he preaches, would pave the way for his exclusive, must-buy, no-questions-asked, souped-up-septic bullet, “The Reclamator.” To freshen his stale brief, Murphy lodged federal R.I.C.O. racketeering charges against the government all-stars for criminal failure to embrace federal law and multiply “The Reclamator.”

Murphy may have had the right idea regarding the need to send a broadside across the bow of corrupt government bureaucracy married to heavy industry (MWH). Yes, greener, cheaper onsite wastewater solutions are currently available that would be a far better fit for coastal, small-town Los Osos than a leaky, big-city raw-sewage pipeline through high groundwater with eventual $400 a month sewer bills.

But Murphy, more than “The Reclamator,” was not up to the task. He is simply the wrong messenger with the wrong motives. Who willingly wants to do business with him? After spending more than a year in Los Osos trying to sell his high-strung waste-to-water machine, Murphy came up bone dry. Not a single customer. Not a single testimonial. He offers no plausible evidence whatsoever of the competency of the man or his machine.

Only what suits him.

— Ed Ochs

In his opening keynote speech on Thursday, Tancredo took aim at voters who voted for Obama, saying, “People who could not even spell the word ‘vote’, or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House.” According to Tancredo, 53% of American voters are illiterate or can’t say “vote” in English. What does Tancredo’s outlook say about the president’s policies? What does his perspective tell us about Barack Hussein Obama, the “socialist”? Absolutely nothing. However, if we take Tancredo’s words and put them in a geographic and historic context, there’s an indication that Tancredo truly knows his audience.

Prior to the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights movement, literacy tests were used in the south to deter African-Americans from voting. At the time, African-Americans were 4-5 times more illiterate than whites due to rampant, racial discrimination.

Former president Jimmy Carter wasn’t totally off the mark after all.

Watch Tom Tancredo’s speech here:

Of course, not everyone in the Tea Party subscribe to that point of view, but when Tancredo is one of the keynote speakers at an organized convention representing a certain movement — along with the ever-controversial 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin — one can’t help to wonder: is the Tea Party launching a “revolution” against liberal ideas and policies or is it simply about Barack Obama?

Judson Phillips, co-founder of the Tea Party Nation told CNN that he thought Tancredo’s speech was “fantastic.” He added, “Tancredo doesn’t feel like a lot of people who supported Barack Obama understand the basics of this country.” Like literacy?

People have said that the Tea Party movement is becoming a passing fad. In reality, despite the Hatfield-McCoy infighting between the Tea Party Nation and the Tea Party Patriots — which has been commonly credited as the most prominent, fatal flaw for the movement — the glue holding everything together is the mutual disdain for the President.

The Tea Party movement is heavily fragmented at best. While local groups continue to thrive and market themselves as the people’s movement — and not a political one — organizers are left deprived of political expertise. Most of the movement’s base includes people with no political backbone; that prevents the movement from organizing on a federal level without the aid of Fox News. In other words, there are many people who are angry — and they have legitimate concerns — but they don’t have enough of a grasp to tackle the political complexities and circumstances that relate to their problems.  The best they can deliver are media sound-bytes, calling Obama a “socialist” and comparing his administration to the Nazi regime. Why?

In November 2009, Tea Party protesters and loyalists distributed t-shirts and other merchandise that referred to Psalm 109:8 in the bible, labeling the passage as a “prayer for Obama.” The passage reads: “May his days be few; may another take his office!” Following the Psalm, it reads, “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.” There is no mistaking it. The Psalm was used as a prayer, wishing for the end of the President’s days. Why? What does this Psalm tell me about Obama’s “socialist” policies?

At the Tea Party Convention’s Dinner Party on Friday, WorldNetDaily’s Editor-in-Chief, Chairman and CEO Joseph Farah talked about a quote made by conservative radio shock jock Rush Limbaugh: “What does Obama and God have in common? God does not have a birth certificate and neither does Obama.” Limbaugh made the joke in June 2009. Several months later, Farah said he believed that Obama didn’t have a birth certificate despite substantial evidence to the contrary. Questions have already been answered about Obama’s citizenship. How does this relate to Obama’s policies?

Before Sarah Palin delivered the closing keynote address on Saturday, numerous panelists and other speakers talked about getting followers of the movement motivated enough to financially support their candidates in upcoming elections. Tea Party leaders openly support candidates with “traditional American values” and the limited American imperialist worldview. These values are observed by people from the “real America,” which — according to Palin — is located in the midwest.

Watch Sarah Palin’s speech here:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

In her keynote speech, Sarah Palin delivered a series of bumper-sticker talking points. Her focus is narrow as she speaks to who she calls the “real people,” not the politicos. She appeals to the lowest common denominator: the angry middle-class right wing who are looking for any reason to legitimize their fear, paranoia and angst. Because she’s relatively inexperienced in assessing national issues compared to issues found in her home state of Alaska, Palin sells the crowd by preaching “common sense conservative principles,” which are left unexplained. However, she found more time to criticize the agenda on the left and the Obama administration for being “out of touch, out of date.”

Palin embraces gutter politics. She closes out the convention by inadvertently reminding millions of Americans that the Tea Party is just that: gutter politics.

The problem is the complete failure to establish a clear contrast between the policies upheld by the Obama administration and “Real America” values that have the potential of serving as tangible policy. The movement often reiterates the need to push for the incorporation of their values into the government, but there is no strong consensus on how to implement it. Thus, they rely on what they perceive to be Obama’s weaknesses. From there, they follow the footsteps of Senator Joseph McCarthy and haphazardly attempt to purge the country of what they believe is the resurrection of Communism, which is coming straight from Obama.

Unfortunately for the Tea Party, they’ve spent so much time living in the adrenaline rush of dehumanizing their enemies — and riding the trends of fevered, populist rage — instead of systemically scrutinizing public policy, they’ve lost themselves and the promise of their movement in the process.

-- Aaron Ochs

Gibson wrote: “Perhaps [the Coastal Commission] felt that a project of this scope and significance must have some substantial issue unresolved, even as we provided considerable evidence to the contrary. In the end, they sought more details on a few specific topics: wetland determinations, mitigation for habitat impacts, implementation of water conservation and agricultural reuse and temporary construction staging details.”

Translation: “We were right — and our project has been tested for every assertion — but the Coastal Commission wanted us to elaborate on some details that we clearly talked about already.”

“Significantly, the commission showed no interest in further deliberation on collection or treatment technology choices and did not direct their staff to analyze those topics for the future hearing. That decision is significant, and we conclude that the debates on STEP vs. gravity, conventional vs. pond treatment systems, treatment plant siting and disposal options have been settled.”

Translation: “Our County staff and consultants, who prefer building conventional gravity systems over the alternatives — and decided before AB2701 was even signed into law to pursue gravity collection as part of their original project scope evaluations — conclude that the debate is settled. Now scram!”

“If the commission diverts its attention to those issues already settled, it could cause insurmountable delay and continue the risk of dire consequences for this community and its environment. If the commission works with us in a timely fashion and acts on the specified issues, this project will be on the threshold of a successful completion.”

Translation: “The Commission already raised some issues and I already mentioned that we provided considerable evidence that shows no substantial issue. They’re causing the delay, but if they work with us with some expediency, fine.”

“We’re encouraged by the strong support of numerous agencies, organizations and the vast majority of Los Osos residents. We’re focused and determined to finish this effort…”

Translation: “Everyone is on our side. If the Commission isn’t going to clean house, we will.”

The County is encouraged by the “strong support” of numerous agencies, but if the County’s arrogance toward the Coastal Commission serves as any indication of how they conduct business with local and state agencies, Gibson’s claim of “strong support” would be questionable at best. Gibson’s assertion of “vast majority” support is unfounded. The 218 was an assessment vote for a sewer, not a customer satisfaction survey. The Opinion Studies community survey sampled 34% of the entire community of Los Osos. That survey never asked, “Do you support the County?”

The arrogance is misplaced.

On January 14, the County failed to deliver the perfect “assertion”-proof project. As a consequence, many Los Osos residents are angry and people are starting to see that the County is incapable of serving the needs of Los Osos. Though the de novo hearing will assess details that are minor in scope compared to the larger issues at hand, the vote to proceed with the hearing should serve as a reprimand to Mr. Gibson to leave his high horse and accept the project’s deficiencies. Failure to acknowledge the substantial issues — out of unregulated, unrelenting arrogance — will put the County at an impasse with the Commission that will cause extensive harm to the community.

Curb your arrogance, Mr. Gibson. Stand down.

– Aaron Ochs