Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I understand the arguments about the infrastructure, and I believe I agree with most of them. It is pretty clear from the traffic along our main corridors that the planning and the existing infrastructure are not in harmony.

I don’t share the belief about the water shortage in Nipomo. The finding of Judge Komar doesn’t support that argument. To me the level 3 designation is a political designation, not one based on any actual water shortage. The fact remains that if they wanted, the NCSD could at any time commission a study to support a Water Code section 350 finding or declaration of a true water shortage. This is a finding, that if actually supported by the empirical evidence would and could legitimately bring construction in Nipomo to a halt.

I don’t sit on the NCSD board; however, my assumption is that the reason they do no invoke Water Code section 350, is that they could not possibly support such a declaration by objective, credible, empirical evidence. In my humble opinion, if Nipomo’s water shortage, is as bad as some claim, then the NCSD is remiss in not acting under section 350; but, again the fact they have never done so, tells me there is no such shortage.

That said, I do not mean to imply we can or should throw caution to the wind, and build with wild abandon in our community. But, there are legitimate means whereby we can and should plan for and control our growth.

In my opinion, I don’t believe the type of lawsuit discussed in this Tribune article is a legitimate means. On its surface it is clear the two main players, the attorney and Mr. Hansen have NO Nipomo connections. I don’t know whether the allegations in the complaint about them representing people who actually live out here are true or not. If so, I’d like to know just who these individuals are. I’ve sent both the attorney and Mr. Hansen an email requesting that they identify these so called Nipomo residents; but, both of them so far have ignored my email request.

I have a hard time believing the allegations in the complaint have any merit whatsoever. The Urban Water Management Plan appears to have been well studied, thought out and prepared, by reputable professionals.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how things play out. Thanks again for your comments.

Your discussion of the growth cap is correct. We are at 1.8%, but that doesn’t include the hundreds of homes being built in the Woodlands or the commercial building which is just about ready to start up on Tefft making traffic unbearable for the next few years.

The idea behind the 1.8 cap was for the county and cal trans to identify our problem areas and begin to pencil in Nipomo for some past due updating of infrastructure. Nothing has happened much to the frustration of the SCAC traffic and circulation committe and the counicil.

It seems that some interested parties are trying to make sure that our water is halted just like our traffic. We are at levels of E and F and at a Level 3 for water.

I for one, would like to see someone in the county take on these issues.