Front Page  »  

Super Bowl and the purview of SLO County supervisors

February 1, 2014
Bruce Gibson

Bruce Gibson

At Tuesday’s San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors meeting, board chairman Bruce Gibson attempted to restrict public comment about fellow Supervisor Adam Hill.

Gibson interrupted two speakers who were commenting on a letter published by the New Times in which Hill attacked his political opponents. Gibson said California’s Ralph M. Brown Act limits the pubic to speaking about items within the purview of the board.

“My intent is not to censor your legitimate ability to speak before this board,” Gibson said. “It is very clear in the Brown Act what the purpose for public comment for items not on the agenda is, and that is to speak to the board on items within its purview.”

Yet, Gibson let Grover Beach resident Dane Senser speak uninterrupted about the Super Bowl and spirituality.

“Thank you, Mr. Senser. Go Seahawks,” Gibson said at the end of Senser’s remarks.

Los Osos resident Julie Tacker responded by saying that in San Luis Obispo County the Super Bowl is in the purview of the board, but the conduct of a supervisor is not.

Watch the video below:


Loading...
Subjects:                     
Related:


98 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Los Osos is getting a WWTP, the infrasture is going in, and the health of our beloved Morro Bay will improve. To Bruce Gibson we say ‘thank you’ for taking on the opposition to this long overdue sewer treatment plant. He is a hero to those who want their property to be improved.!! More people than don’t. Bruce Gibson will be elected our Supervisor this year.


0

You realize you are employing argumentative fallacy, right?


ALL FIVE SUPERVISOR VOTED FOR THE L.O. WWTP. What’s so special about Bruce?


NOTHING.


0

Yes, all five voted, but it Mr. Gibson had not gone to Washington to lobby for us, gone to numerous CCC meetings to speak on our behalf, and done countless other tasks to push this project forward, there would have been nothing for the Supervisors to vote on, the project could well have failed, or at the very least, been more expensive.


0

So he did part of his job? While screwing around and manipulating and generally being a twit. He’s a bad person lacking ethics and should be canned along with his sexually harassed paramour.


Just for showing up to work doesn’t make a good leader. He’s a con.


0

At least he won an election, Kev.


0

Really? You think i post using my true identity because i have thin skin that can be punctured by an anonymous warthog? Please.


Ad hominem is inability to posit a counter argument. Thanks for conceding.


0

Why so bitter? Ad hominem makes you just seem more irrelevant.


0

Like i said, thanks for conceding.


0

How many of these anonymous folks are adam hill? The “Why so bitter?” question……sounds a lot like adam….and then again, he and his cronies all sound alike, same agenda, same “don’t care about anybody with a differing opinion” attitude.


0

An election is coming up soon Kevin Rice. Are you in District 2? If so, you can withhold your vote for Mr. Gibson. Otherwise, short of a recall, which HAS NOT happened, you don’t “can” an elected official.


My bet is that Gibson is re-elected.


0

Given the lax political interest in district 2, you may be correct. We’ll see if the opponent has any game shortly. If he does i might have to help educate the voters. Keep your fingers crossed.


0

However.


0

fishing village, you must have missed the truth, recently reiterated by RWQCB Enforcement Officer, Harvey Packard, the health of the bay is not the object of the project. Protecting the groundwater is. There has never been a septic system survey to see if septics are indeed polluting. The ONE sample that indicated human waste was entering the bay came from one freshwater seep, with a known homeless encampment nearby.


In actuality, the Bay will be damaged by the project. The project construction has caused dust in the air, dust on every surface; i.e, road, roof, car and bush, will one day become runoff into the bay. The NUMBER ONE pollutant in Morro Bay is silt. By collecting the wastewater that is currently processed through septics and leachfields will be interrupted and the freshwater seeps may stop flowing. These freshwater flows to the bay are imperative to the balance of the ecosystems that thrive alon the edges of the bay. This is one of the concerns of the MBNEP, read their recent CCMP.


Installing pipes and building a sewer plant are easy, the hard part is yet to come. Getting the treated wastewater (disposal) to go where it benefits the basin, that’s the Achilles heel of the project, whether what is planned works or not won’t be known for decades.


Having a sewer does not “improve” ones property, especially when there’s a $40,000 lien against it.


“Hero?” Really? He’s a huge disappointment. For XXX_Sake, he tried to blow up the ocean!


0

Julie, your opinion is important and your respectful answer is appreciated. I’ll ponder what you have said.


0

Here we go again. Sigh. Clearly you have not been convinced that we need a sewer Julie.


Eight to twelve houses per acre are not conducive to returning clean water to the aquifer. That is why the upper aquifer is too polluted to use for drinking water! Look at the early aerial shots of Los Osos. Barren. The lush patches of greenery we see now are a result of leach fields retuning water to the upper aquifer, not the lower one that we are pulling water from and depleting. Too bad that water is too polluted to drink in that upper aquifer, and that 300,000 gallons of it—conservative estimate—is flowing into the bay. Who knows what originally flowed into the bay before all these houses were built.


The liens are for $25,000. That is what we voted on.


Guess you haven’t noticed how the property values of all the towns around here with sewers is greater than our property values.


The bay won’t be damaged. The Coastal permit that mandates monitoring the marshy areas and willow groves throughout the town. I’m sure the MBNEP will be keeping a close watch to make sure they are followed.


Doing nothing for decades sure hasn’t helped our drinking water supply, so what we now have is the very best there is to get water back into the ground.


0

I should have added, getting CLEAN water back into the ground, down to the lower aquifer.


0

thank you Lynette


0

Just how is the clean water getting to the lower aquifer Lynette?


0

Broderson. And you are right, it will take many, many years to get there. But that is the best science has to offer. Too bad we didn’t finish that older, cheaper project called Tri-W. The water would have been flowing from Broderson toward the lower aquifer since 2008. Let’s see, we hook up to the current project in 2016, so that is an eight year delay! Not exactly the best stewardship of our water supply, but that was one of the downsides of stopping Tri-W……


0

Property values schmoperty values it doesn’t matter a hill of beans unless you cut and run (I did) But here is the rub. If LO gets a reliable source of H2O the place will be gold. And Lynette, the upper aquifer is actually cleaner than what is used in Santa Maria for drinking water. The difference being that since SM has a permitted WWTF it is allowed to TREAT the water with chlorine and filters. LO could do the same right now. The reason property values that are outside the PZ are higher is that they are very large properties. Are you that stupid? Why do you think they are complying properties? You know I’ve been gone for quite a while, but I check back once in a while and I’m just astounded at your revisionist history of LO.

Nobody voted FOR a sewer park, they voted FOR 38.50 a month as opposed to 100/ a month. To proposes otherwise is just idiotic. So don’t try to cover up the lie that was told to the public at the beginning of the LO saga. I’m Glad LO is finally over It’s political agony. But don’t try and put a happy face on it. The whole thing was a CF from beginning to end.and LO just might be a winner after all.


0

Vagabond,


What Santa Maria does, Santa Maria does. We can do things like that here when we have a sewer. We tried blending upper and lower aquifer water, but it didn’t work, too much salt. BTW, Santa Maria has a population of 101,000 people. Easier to spread the costs out. BTW, we use chlorine here, or weren’t you aware? Educate yourself by reading the Basin Plan.


No, I didn’t say property values in Los Osos outside the zone are cheaper, I said those in the neighboring towns. Compare the same lot sizes to the prices here and the prices in Morro Bay,or Cambria, or Pismo. Los Osos home prices are just a bit more than the average home price in Atascadero.


The park came with the cheap price. The two were inseparable. Put it out of town and it gets more expensive. Clearly you have not been paying attention. We are up to $183 million right now.


Funny, you aren’t faulting the poster that thinks we have $40,000 liens against our houses. Why not address some REAL revisionist history?


0

I have ALWAYS supported a sewer for the purpose of managing the groundwater. Since this particular plan does little for the basin, we will have to wait and see what it does do.


Really? Towns with sewers have higher property values that ours? I spend a lot of time in Oceano and the homes there are priced considerably lower and guess what, they have a sewer.


Just read the CCMP Lynette, freshwater flows are a big concern. Monitoring all day long does nothing to fix the problem should there be one. What do you think the County will do if the reduced flows are causing damage? The MBNEP is a toothless organization, they will NOT go up against the County or the Water Board…look how they are funded.


Lynette, I lived here when the wetlands were few. I watched them grow. They are there now, the project HA$ TO sustain them.


Silt WILL enter the bay when the rain comes, the County WILL NOT be digging it out. The moratorium has been the best thing for the bay. The development during the 70’s and 80’s caused a tremendous amount of siltation.


0

One little addition: The wetlands may also need supplemental nitrogen. Can you imagine? In 2005 the LOCSD’s “plan” to address it was to use municipal water (because the pipes are nearest to the wetlands) AND fertilize. I have not heard or read what the County’s approach will be if that turns out to be the case.


The really sad thing, is that upper aquifer has to stay topped off for the health of the vegetation as part of the project and those who flooded will flood again because the groundwater levels won’t be returned to what they were when those houses were built. (Unless of course it never rains again).


0

Anything the CSD planned in the old project was subject to approval from the CCC.


0

Most of the 70’s & 80’s construction sediment loading due to the fact that the county required no paved streets, no sidewalks, no gutters in addition to NO sewer despite the overwhelming build out Rather,septic tanks, leach fields, and sand…the perfect storm.

Before we founded the NBNEP, it was a free for all, with little of no attention to the declining ecosystem of the estuary.


0

Couldn’t agree more.


0

Same old rant…different day.


0

Oh really? Do you really think that the bay’s ecosystem is dependent on leach water from people’s septic tanks. That bay was pristine back in the days the Chumash roamed these parts. It sure isn’t now. If you are concerned about that water not making it back to the bay you are also misinformed. Where do you think the treated sewage water will go? Eventually back to the bay. Everyone keeps forgetting about the crappy treatment plant for the Men’s Colony. 6000+ poop and pee into that plant several times per day. The high nitrate water goes right back into Chorro Creek and eventually to the bay. If we really had our act together, they would upgrade the treatment plant there and recycle that water back to the prisoners. We have abused the bay to the point it is polluted. And btw, there are underground seeps that enter the bay and are below the tide line.


0

Standup,


I agree the bay was pristine long before development/agriculture and septic systems. Yes, I do think the health of the bay is dependent on freshwater flows. That’s what makes the brackish balance that only certain things live in.


The concern for reduction of freshwater due to the collecting of LO wastewater is not my idea, the MBNEP’s CCMP has a lengthy discussion about the potential losses of freashwater as the sewer’s collection of leachate ceases to enter the ground.


As for where the treated wastewater and where it will go, that’s a terrific $200M) question. As designed, the LOWWP flows of treated wastewater to the Broderson (where the estimate is 8 years for only a portion of the water is admitted may reach the bay as it flows on top of a 40 ft. thick clay lense) and Bayridge (included in the project expressly for the health of Little Willow Creek) leachfields are the ONLY return of treated wastewater to the ground. Currently, as proposed, all other purple pipe use is to school turf and dry farmers, the recycled water will not get back to the ground for peculation in those applications.


The freshwater seeps that have been supplemented by leachfields will be reduced to only rainwater (if we get some) and outdoor irrigation (30% of our overall water use — efforts are on to reduce that too) that will continue. Yep, there are seeps under the tide line, not sure of your point. There is even fresh water under the sandspit — so?


The CMC sewer plant, for all intent and purposes, is the same as the LOWWP. Recycling the water back to the prison for what? It is not being treated (neither is ours) to drinking water standards. If that were an acceptable use, it would come at a cost borne by me and you, as the CMC sewer is paid for by all taxpayers in this State. (Currently the County of SLO is trying to take it over, that’s another story).


Last I looked, the health of the bay nearest Chorro and Los Osos Creek mouths are the most polluted from myriad sources. The oyster farms are the canary’s in the bay that suggest pollution is too high, they are still farming and they are closest to Los Osos…so where’s the nitrate coming from? Yeah, I think you answered that question, not here.


0

The MBNEP also says this:


The Estuary Program supports the installation of a wastewater treatment plant and supports the completion of the project to bring about positive changes in local water quality. The Estuary Program also supports careful study of the impacts and benefits of additional and future project elements to develop recycled water systems and implementation of those systems when appropriate. The Estuary Program supporting activities may include:


• Sharing relevant water quality data with the partners involved in the plant construction

• Supporting agencies in any information needs related to estuary and creek impacts

from the upgrade

• Providing technical expertise for any planned monitoring efforts related to the new

plant


BMP 10, page 43 if you open this file in Acrobat,

http://www.mbnep.org/Library/Files/CCMP/CCMP%20Update/CCMP_Chapter03_ActionPlans.pdf


0

Lynette, Enough.


0

Actually, the nitrate level allowed back into the creek isn’t high. You can read the report here:


http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/rwqcb3/board_decisions/adopted_orders/2012/R3_2012_0027_CMC.pdf


0

Gibson,


Your interpretation is slightly skewed, but no surprise there. People can comment on anything, however, the Board can only respond to things on the agenda, Also, you can limit public comments and can even stop comments when it becomes obvious that the comments are redundant and thus in the need to expeditiously conduct the business of the Board, then you can end the public comment period. Case law on this topic. Your motive is clearly to protect your buddy.


0

Gordo , I’ll remember NOT to read what you write, as you are too rude!


0

Yeah whatever…


0

Unfortunately this is nothing new for the BOS.

They strictly follow the letter of the law when it suits them, but if the audience wants to talk about something important to them, like view shed or protecting red legged frogs they throw the rules out the window.

Old Moe should not be doing anything to alienate the voters right before the election final filing date in March. He might offend someone enough to get them to run against him. If Moe loses he will have tp play hide the salami on his own time!


0

You know nothing about Supervisor Gibson’s private life! Leave his exwife out of your comments. Public officials deserve respect for what they do to make this County a better place in which to live.


0

We know he’s been banging his secretary for years behind his wife’s back. Gibson deserves a swift kick out of office and nothing more.


0

Gibson just recently recused himself (for the first time in 6 years) from voting on a labor matter that involved a small increase in Cherie’s benefit package. I guess you weren’t officially “conflicted” from voting on Cherie’s salary and benefits until you (finally) admitted publicly you were having a relationship with her; only then you noticed you were conflicted out of voting on her salary and benefits? You’re smarter than that Bruce.


Too bad the voters weren’t.


0

All the legislative assistants make the same amount of money. Why don’t you point us to the dates of the other raises the LAs have received to prove your point.


0

Yes Lynette, they all make the same amount of money. So when one wants to increase the salary of his beloved it’s multiplied by five. In other words, the cost of his conflict is actually 5X’s the cost to the taxpayer.


0

The BOS will never decline a raise in salary or benefits for their aides, whether one or all five deserve it, Their assistants are their right hands, and some like Gibson, just happen to get extra bangs from his aide.


0

What? Gibson alone gets to decide these things?


Seems to me that you are forgetting there are FOUR OTHER votes involved in the process.


You are not letting us know how often these pay raises occur in order to prove your point of Gibson’s involvement. Please, enlighten us!


0

If Mr. Gibson’s affair was with the manager of his orange grove, his personal life would be less of the public’s business. But the situation is elevated because Mrs. Aispuro is also a County employee. His fight to keep her in his office when she should have been put out to pasture or put to work at the orange grove is what put/s the County on the hook. The people of this County do not owe her a job; a $69,000 a year job, plus benefits, of course.


Gibson publicly embarrassed his respected, physician, professional, wife. He made a fool of himself and the County.


fishing village, I need to know, just what has he done to “make this County a better place to live”? I’m not seeing it.


0

CM, look around you, so much beauty has been protected under the guidance of Supervisor Gibson.


0

Fishing Village…….LMAO!!!!! What has Gibson and Hill actually done besides make asses of themselves as well as the seat hey sit on! ?


0

So I guess if he steals or murders, hey no big deal if they did a good job???


Yes you are right about private live and I would defend this to the death IF not an elected official, screwing his assistant, while I pay for it!!!!!


0

CherieMckee writes, “she should have been put out to pasture.”


Feminist are we CM? Nice language.


The County is not “on the hook” as you put it either. “Fool” is in the eye of the beholder, in this case, yours.


Gibson worked hard to get Los Osos a sewer, so here in LO, to not be peeing and pooping in our drinking water supply which we sit on top of, makes this town a better place to live.


BTW, your fake name doesn’t mask your identity.


0

Some of us know how to “up” the likes or dislikes on this comment section. Clearly that is what has happened here to fishing village’s comment by someone else who know the trick. Leaving Gibson’s ex-wife out of this only makes sense out of DECENCY and respecting HER privacy and should not have been hidden.


0

No Lynette, 50 votes is not “gamed” just unpopular.


I know how it works, you have accused us before.


0

And you asked me not to talk about how to do it and I agreed.


I don’t mean at all or ever that YOU game it, just that another poster like me knows how to do it and has voted down the comments that they don’t like.


0

Pffft. More people disagree with FV’ s opinion than agree with it. You, of all people, should be familiar with that phenomenon.


0

The above post was in reply to Lynnete.


0

MaryMalone, what I am familiar with is who the readers are over here and what their politics are.


0

And we are quite aware of your politics. Your point?


0

Supervisor Gibson is right to insist the agenda topics to adhered to! People come to speak at public comment, pretending to have information to share, but they are really just trying to promote their own agendas. They want to embarrass Supervisors that they are not supporting. The meetings are too important to spend time listening to whiners, political opposition, rehashing old complaints. Write letters to the editors of the papers, but don’t take up time at the Supervisor’s meeting for yourselves. I’m tired of seeing and hearing it!


0

ABSOLUTELY 100% WRONG.


CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS


SEC. 3. (a) The people have the right to instruct their

representatives, petition government for redress of grievances, and

assemble freely to consult for the common good.


Supervisor Hill signed his hate letter with his elected title. It’s absolutely board business.


No one cares if you’re tired of other people exercising their rights. That’s your problem.


0

What Kevin said.


Hill is a rambling fool bordering on psychosis.


0

Oh and BTW, GO BRONCO’S!!!


0

This an off topic remark, and should be summarily removed.


0

(Go Seahawks!)


0

Thank you for the nice clip. We (voters, residents) really have a problem in the autocratic and misinformed Gibson. The City of Los Angeles case which I have quoted previously on this site makes it clear that elected officials have voluntarily subjected themselves to critical and disapproving speech as wide as the public wishes, save for the timer and of course profanity or violence. Gibson is so completely out of his range to stifle such comment. These are the general rules in California. I sadly have to admit I liked Tacker’s sarcasm.


As to Gibson’s use of the issue of topicality or purview of the board, Gibson’s wrong again; public and printed comment (from Hill) which insults a large part of humanity directly involves the attitude and performance of an elected official (it chokes me to call Adam Hill by that once-hallowed title). Public comment on the wild-eyed ramblings of Supervisor Hill is ABSOLUTELY related to the purview of the Board, which I define as the conduct of lawful and good government in our jewel of a county. Gibson is flat-ass wrong to say that speech regarding conduct of governmental officials is “not appurtenant” because it doesn’t address a line item topic, project, or agenda item. Wrong wrong wrong.


Many of us who have chaired meetings know much better than Gibson how we must permit speech that we might not enjoy or desire. You’re a bush league third string, Chairman Gibson, if you choke off the public like this, Sir, and I remember now why I don’t sit in your chamber. I’d be up in arms trying to give you 2 minute 59 second lecture and explanations of the Government Code which you so tragically misapprehend. You’d probably have me removed without cause.


I know you’re doing your best, but stifling public comment by your bully pulpit of misapprehension of the G Code just makes me ill. It (your repression) is the antithesis of our system of government, Sir.


0

This SLO County Board of Supervisor’s is just taking their cues from big government. They will decide what’s important for us peons. Yessuh!


0

Is anyone here surprised at this?

And so it goes….


0

Gov as on and HIll, partners in sleaze.


Whatat makes it worse is when one of the sleaze partners abuses their power as County Supervisor to protect the other sleaze partner by stopping critical public comments at BOS meetings.


0

My kindle edited my post for me.


EDIT: “Gibson and Hill…” instead of Gov and on…”


0
1 2 3