County, Caltrans, OCSD Abating State Highway 1 Flooding! Each San Luis Obispo County Supervisor is aware of the evidence, that the County of San luis Obispo withheld from discovery and San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman!
Governor Jerry Brown, Caltrans has now been allowed to shovel and grade debris into this storm water drainage channel while the Oceano Community Service District is allowed to discharge their Well Water and debris into this California drainage system daily as now seen in California Case law "Bookout v. State of California!
Inverse Condemnation, United States Supreme Court Constitution Appeal for the inverse condemnation in Oceano California by Caltrans, County of San Luis Obispo, Union Pacific Railroad and the Oceano Community Service District!
The California Supreme Court and the Second Appellate Court as of 10/27/2010 allows government actions as seen in these videos that they talk about in their published California Case Law Decision "Bookout V. State of California!
The California Supreme Court and the Second Appellate Court puts responsibility for this culvert as stated: "The court found that the Railroad may have been negligent by failing to enlarge the culvert or requiring that its tenant do so." This statement comes after they mention these videos and photos? OK--Why is Caltrans Shoveling Debris into this drainage channel?
San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman has allowed the County of San Luis Obispo to withhold evidence from discovery and trial. He States September 12, 2008 in a request for rehearing: "No further information was forthcoming and now the questionnaires are here I guarantee they are voluminous, I haven't even read through all of them." "But I think it's imcumbent to demonstrate to the court exactly which factual assertation and which witness would actually produce evidence which would result in a basis for a new trial."
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert State on P. 6 and 7 of their July 28, 2010 published California Case law Decision; ignoring documents from Brebes and Davis prior to State Highway 1 flooding--(Fountain Ave-Airpark Dr)! "Bookout argues the trial court erred in receiving documentary evidence that was not produced during discovery. The document is a county drainage study questionnaire returned by Bookout in July 2002. Bookout stated on the questionnaire that the area floods one foot or more once a year and that the flooding has damaged his inventory."
"Judge Tangeman determined the flooding problem was "static" for several years prior to Plaintiff's purchase of his property. Plaintiff contends the flooding is continuous and can be abated. Plaintiff argues Defendants negligent maintenance of the drainage system increases the frequency and severity of the flooding. That is inconsistent with Judge Tangeman's determination that the primary culprit was POVE's improvements, rather than negligent maintenance of the drainage system. There was no showing that Union's operation of Well No. 8 contributed to the blockage. There was no showing of the County's responsibility for maintaining the drainage channel. There was no evidence that any accumulated debris in State's right of way contributed to the problems in the operation of the drainage system. County, State, Union or OCSD could not have abated the nuisance by undertaking any maintenance."
Caltrans----Stated to the Trial Court regarding their actions:
"Im not sure what there doing in this picture. It appears that there throwing dirt up on the bank at the base of the tree. Question: Is this anything related to the buildup of sediment at the mouth of the drainage channel? Answer. Well its more grass. Well, Yeah, sediment and grass. Question: And wheres this material removed to when you engaged in this particular activity? Answer. Based on the Mud behind me at the base of the tree, I would say we where throwing it up on the bank. Question: So you were keeping it in the four feet that you consider to be Caltrans right-of-way? Answer. YES Question: And how often have you engaged You or your staff engaged in the particular activity? Answer. How often does it rain down there? Question: Is it fairly often Answer: YES Question: Based on the rainfall. Answer. YES, just about every time it rains."
The California Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert have Ruled the actions below are now Permanent and legal in California, per their Appellate Court Decision June 28, 2010! Each Justice is fully aware, that this flooding can be abated for only $43,295.00 Exhibit # 1790. They are aware of the OCSD daily use of this drainage system for well water discharge into the RR/POVE pond--mentiond on P. 2 and P. 6-Video P. 8 of their Appellate Court decision! They are aware of documents withheld by the County Of San Luis Obispo P. 6 and P. 7! (Prejudicial Error)
Loading...
8:35
County of San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisorby SupremeCourtCa83 views
I miss Oceano now Im stuck in gay arizona
januarygurlguzzard92 2 months ago