Comments on: Los Osos/Coastal Commission Analysis (Jan. 14)

By: sewertoons

sewertoons — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:22:25 +0000

It all boils down to the outcome. If we lose the money due to nitpicking I am NOT OK with that. That is just foolishness that really will impact more people than even you first opined here on this blog.

When does perfecting the project cross the line into obstructing water clean-up?

By: sewertoons

sewertoons — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:22:00 +0000

When does perfecting the project cross the line into obstructing water clean-up?

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:33:15 +0000

Those five commissioners said that they support the staff recommendation because the 30 years of pollution was more of an overriding factor than the fact that there were substantial issues. For example, listen to Mary K. Shallenberger’s speech when she announced her support of the motion.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:33:00 +0000

By: sewertoons

sewertoons — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:24:05 +0000

There is no way to have every facet nailed down. To support that idea, 5 commissioners WERE satisfied. It is opinion, and opinions can be swayed.

By: sewertoons

sewertoons — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:24:00 +0000

There is no way to have every facet nailed down. To support that idea, 5 commissioners WERE satisfied. It is opinion, and opinions can be swayed.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:24:43 +0000

It doesn’t matter what kind of project it is. If you’re going to take a project to the Coastal Commission, you better have every single facet nailed down in advance — but look what happened here. Gibson said the project was “tested” for every assertion made by the appellants, but the CCC ruled that clearly not all “assertions” were tested and clearly some of the “assertions” passed the substantial issue test.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:24:00 +0000

By: sewertoons

sewertoons — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:02:07 +0000

Why don’t we say alleged shortcuts. Crying about people losing their homes for years now seems to vanish when the rubber meets the road.

You have to ask yourself, if STEP been chosen and there been the same jeopardy for losing this cheap money, would you suddenly want every single facet to this thing nailed down in advance? Would you be questioning tests for wetlands on tilled farmland because you just wanted your guy, Dixon, who may or may not be available, to test some more?

Interesting how those same standards applied to the last project have been so ridiculed, don’t you think?

By: sewertoons

sewertoons — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 08:02:00 +0000

Why don’t we say alleged shortcuts. Crying about people losing their homes for years now seems to vanish when the rubber meets the road.

Interesting how those same standards applied to the last project have been so ridiculed, don’t you think?