California Supreme Court--Inverse Condemnation Caltrans Steve Price, deputy district director for area operations and maintenance talks about the fix of the flooding of State Highway 1 would showing that this flooding can be abated!...
State Assemblymember Katcho Achadjian
Abel Maldonado-Katcho Achadjian pdf....
Dear Mr. Katcho Achadjian, Why would the County of San Luis Obispo want to withhold evidence from discovery? Please review your letter attached above August 21, 2002 to Caltrans Gregg Albright and his response to you on September 26, 2002! Attached above is Exhibit # 1768 presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman showing that the flooding of State Highway 1 can be abated! Why does Caltrans mention the Oceano Airport as a problem with our State Highway 1 Flooding in their September 26, 2002 letter?
Please review the following websites: www.governorarnoldschwarzenegger.net
www.inversecondemnation.net www.californiasupremecourt.info www.californiasupremecourts.com www.secondappellatecourt.com www.oceanonursery.com www.supremecourtofcalifornia.com www.supremecourtcalifornia.com www.supremecourtjustices.net www.heritageoaksbankquestions.com www.unitedstatessupremecourt.net
www.governormegwhitman.co www.unitedstatessupremcourt.com
www.governorbrown.net www.lieutenantgovernorabelmaldonado.com
www.senatorsamblakeslee.com www.governorjerrybrown.net
www.governormegwhitmancalifornia.com www.assemblymankatchoachadjian.com
Being an elected OCSD Director--Whistleblower in California Per the flooding of our State Highway-as seen in this March 1, 2007 E-Mail to Scott Radovich and the February 6, 2007 Clayton U. Hall letter To: Ms. Mauri McGuire, Carl Warren & Company CC-Rita L. Neal ESQ--Debra A Hessli-Risk Manager County of San Luis Obispo--Trying to Make A Deal in regards to the Evidence that they Withheld From Discovery involving their County Insurance. Plus their Documents presented to Judge Tangeman showing that Flooding Could Be Abated for $43,295.00---pdf County December 18, 2006 Statement-("Potentially Dangerious Situation") involves public safety to our Pacific Ocean!
Caltrans, County of San Luis Obispo and OCSD. 
California State Highway Patrol Put in Danger with flooding--Toxic Waste
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert do not believe as seen in the video above, that the County, and Caltans storm water from State Highway 1 --13th and Paso Robles Streets inside the Oceano Nursery property is the use of a "Public Enity Physically entered Bookout's land or maintained possession and control over any portion of it." They Believe--"The Trial Court correctly concluded the three-year statute applies." The Second Appellate Court States this even after seeing photos and videos and hearing Caltrans testomony of their shoveling and grading Caltrans storm water debris into the Oceano Community's storm water drainage channel!
March 1, 2007 E-Mail "It is unfortunate that i'm the one that has to be the whistleblower on the County/State/OSD-Cover-up. This has had a Defamation on my reputation, tremendous financial losses and caused a stigma on my Business that will last forever. You initially took this case on a inverse condemnation assumption and I still feel, that's the case. P.O.V.E. and Union Pacific is purely irresponsible and negligent."
March 1, 2007 E-Mail County in 2007 Withholding of Evidence! "The County Of San Luis Obispo has withheld key information regarding flooding and prior actions of other agencies this has cost the County Tax payers thousands of dollars as drainage studies have been done without this information being provided."
Video --
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert have ruled June 28, 2010 that this 2001-2002 Oceano Community Service District drainage change is not Causation of our State Highway Flooding! The Appellate Court has seen the videos of this OCSD pipe inside a storm water drainage channel discharging well water and debris daily into a storm water drainage system used by the County, Caltrans, OCSD and Union Pacific Rail Road! The Appellate Court States: "Plaintiff brought this action against a number of public entities and a railroad claiming the defendants caused his property to flood when it rained. The complaint alleged inverse condemnation and tort causes of action. The inverse condemnation cause of action was tried to the court. After plaintiff's case, the trial court granted nonsuit based on the statute of limitations, failure to prove causation, and a determination that the railroad is not a public entity. Thereafter, the defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings on the tort causes of action. The court granted the motion based on the trial court's previous finding of lack of causation and the statute of limitations. We affirm."
Second Appellate Court-Inverse Condemnation 
Train Wreck
Jun 28 2010
B214906
[PDF] [DOC]
Bookout v. State ex rel. Dept. of Transportation CA2/6 filed 6/28/10 
The Second Appellate Court allows withholding of evidence as talked about by Judge Martin J. Tangeman September 12, 2008 and believe's that it is OK for Caltrans to Grade and Shovel Storm Water debris into this California storm water drainage system after Caltrans raised State Highway 1 a foot! The Second Appellate Court beleives that the flooding of our State Highway cannot be abated! The Second Appellate Court believes that this flooding is caused by Pismo Oceano Vegetable Exchange in 1977 construction and that their is no government Liability for Caltrans, County and OCSD drainage changes since 1977! The Second Appellate Court does not take into account that this POVE construction was over seen and permitted by the County Of San Luis Obispo. The Second Appellate Court ignores the fact that the County of San Luis Obispo required the outlet of this drainage system raised in 1985 County Building permits!County Discovery Abuse Brebes-Sutton per the Baughman Property from State Highway 1 PDF File...
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert State on P. 6 and 7 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." The Second Appellate Court call this a (Single) document instead of what Judge Martin J. Tangeman Stated September 12, 2008 in regards to some of these (Redacted) whiteness statements, questionnaires and evidence withheld from discovery below! "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." County Discovery Abuse Brebes--Sutton per the Baughman Property--Highway 1 PDF File...
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert have Ruled the actions Above and 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 documents above and below withheld from Discovery Exhibit # 579. They are aware of the OCSD Exhibit # 1756-Prescriptive Easement daily use of this drainage system for 2500 hundred gallons per minute of well water discharge as seen in this 1983 letter to the County of San Luis Obispo Rail-Road taking this drainage system. They are aware of the Video's of this pipe discharging debris into this drainage system since 2001 per exhibit # 1768! The County 1985 Approved and permitted--RR/POVE pond--mentioned 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! The Appellate Court is aware that this drainage course was not changed by POVE per Caltrans Drainage Documents December 17, 1973 Exhibit # 1772 (Prejudicial Error) (Accrual Date) (Causation)
County of San Luis Obispo and Caltrans Liability to the Pacific Ocean
Plane Crashes San Luis Obispo County Airport Oceano-Flooding Second Appellate Court-Inverse Condemnation The County of San Luis Obispo Exhibit # 579 Documents withheld from discovery show how this drainage once traveld to the Oceano Airport in 2002 as stated in these County Questionnaires! These documents will ultimatly close the Oceano Airport when Caltrans and the County San Luis Obispo end using State Highway 1 for Storm Water Retention!
YOUTUBE 
County Of San Luis E-Mail Deal and Withholding of Evidence
California State Government (Caltrans, County, OCSD) should not be allowed to use our storm water drainage channels for their Debris and Well Water! These videos above were presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman and the Second Appellate Court! Please read the following two PDF files regarding San Luis Obispo County and OCSD actions during discovery!
County of San Luis Obispo--Trying to Make A Deal in regards to the Evidence that they Withheld From Discovery involving their County Insurance. Plus their Documents presented to Judge Tangeman that Flooding Could Be Abated---pdf
OCSD Attorney Conflict Robert Weeks--Fiancee/Wife Was Oceano Nursery Bookkeeper that the Oceano Community Service District Hired knowing this Fact!---OCSD Directors Full Knowledge of Their Action!. pdf..
The Second Appellate Court does not find an (Abuse of Discretion) in their June 28, 2010 decision P. 6 and 7 or, that it is a Prejudicial Error for the County of San Luis Obispo-or Union Pacific Railroad to withhold 150 Oceano/County whiteness-plus photo/Questionnaires/ documents from discovery until after trial July 30, 2008! They allow Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman to withhold photo attachments that went with Exhibit # 579 showing Caltrans maintaining the Oceano Communities Storm Water Drainage Channel--Raising State Highway 1 and blocking drainage on the East Side of State Highway 1!. The Second Appellate Court does not find this to be a Prejudicial Error in California!
The Second Appellate Court States Page. 7 and 8 of their June 28. 2010 decision "Even if the trial court erred in applying the statute of limitations, the trial court found that Bookout failed to carry his burden of proof as to causation in his action against the District, the County and Caltrans. Plaintiff has the burden of proving a substantial causal relationship between the defendant's act or omission and the injury. (California State Automobile Assn. v. City of Palo Alto (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 474, 481.) To carry that burden plaintiff must exclude the probability that other forces alone produced the injury. (Ibid.) " These YOUTUBE videos below show (Causation) Each State Senator and State Assembly Member is fully aware of these videos and Caltrans, County, OCSD use of this drainage system!Train Wreck 
State Highway Patrol put in danger by Caltrans! Railroad Train Wreck
Video talked about by the Appellate Court----Oceano Train Wreck as seen in photo exhibits withheld from discovery by the County Of San Luis Obispo in exhibit # 579! Caltrans Caught shoveling and grading debris into storm water drainage channel as seen by the California Second Appellate Court and San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman!
State Highway Patrol put in danger by Caltrans! Railroad Train Wreck 
California State Senators--State Assemblymembers knowledge of Caltrans, County of San Luis Obispo-Inverse Condemnation, affecting Public Health and Safety of our State Highway along with Photo/Statements and Documents withheld by County Of San Luis Obispo And Union Pacific Railroad at trial as allowed by Judge Tangeman, as Judge Tangeman Stated "All Right" --Prejudicial Error--
The Appellate Court is aware of their June 23, 2010 decision, which exercised dominion and control over the private drain as seen in Barrett v. County of Ventura CA2/6 filed 6/23/10 PDF]
"For liability to be imposed on a public entity for a dangerous condition of public property, the entity must be in a position to protect against or warn of the hazard." (Mamola v. State of California ex rel. Dept. of Transportation, supra, 94 Cal.App.3d at p. 788.) County of San Luis Obispo--Trying to Make A Deal in regards to the Evidence that they Withheld From Discovery involving their County Insurance. Plus their Documents presented to Judge Tangeman that Flooding Could Be Abated---pdf
Caltrans, County, Oceano Community Service District were each aware from their documents that State Highway 1 Drainage could be abated for only $43,295.00 As seen in the PDF file above per Appellate Court Exhibit # 1790
The Second Appellate Court ignored (Marin v. City of San Rafael) and their Statement in their June 23, 2010 decision and the Railroads and Our exhibits # 1756, 1874, 1875 "The taking of private property for the purpose of constructing storm drainage systems has been recognized to be for a public use. (Marin v. City of San Rafael (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 591, 595; Ullery v. County of Contra Costa (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 562, 568; DiMartino v. City of Orinda (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 329, 336.) "An action in inverse condemnation will lie when damage to private property is proximately caused by use of a storm drainage system for its intended purpose." (Souza v. Silver Development Co. (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 165, 170.) When accepted and approved by a municipality, drainage systems become a public improvement and a part of the system of public works. (Frustuck v. City of Fairfax (1963) 212 Cal.App.2d 345, 358.) "The fact that the work is performed by a contractor, subdivider or a private owner of property does not necessarily exonerate a public agency, if such contractor, subdivider or owner follows the plans and specifications furnished or approved by the public agency. When the work thus planned, specified and authorized results in an injury to adjacent property the liability is upon the public agency under its obligation to compensate for the damages resulting from the exercise of its governmental power." (Id. at pp. 362-363; see DiMartino, supra, at pp. 338-339.)"
OCSD Exhibit # 1756 Causation-Exhibits # 1278, 1337, 1338 P. 8 OCSD Respondents. Breif
The Second Appellate Court States in their decision P. 2-regarding what they think is the couse of State Highway 1 -13th Paso Robles Streets and Oceano Nursery flooding! "The Pismo Oceano Vegetable Exchange (Exchange) first leased, then purchased, from the Railroad the property west of the raised rail bed. The iron pipe discharges onto the Exchange's parcel. Around 1977, the Exchange installed a subsurface junction box at the pipe's outfall. From the junction box, the water is diverted 90 degrees through a second 24-inch pipe to a retaining pond 200 feet away. The junction box is inadequate, causing the water to back up and flood Bookout's property." California Supreme Court and California Residents---How is this Oceano Community Service District Well # 8 Discharge into a government storm water drainage system legal and not a cause?
The Second Appellate Court ignored Causation-No Date of Stabilization Exhibits 1756, 1757, 1758, 1768, 1769, 1772, 1773, 1790, 1830, 1874, 1875 County March 27, 1985 permit letter requireing POVE to raise this Drainage system. On P. 9 of their June 28, 2010 Decision State: "(Marin v. City of San Rafael, supra, 111 Cal.App.3d at p. 596.) In other words, the city was liable because it directed the installation of, used, and owned the pipe. It even obtained an injunction to prevent plaintiffs from interfering with its operation. None of those factors are present here." The Appellate Court ignored direct testimony by Phil Davis showing the County Approved and their involvement in the OCSD pipe constructed in the Rail Roads Drainage channel! P. 385 Court Transcripts-- Question: Are you aware of any permission sought by the district, itself for operating this pipe? Answer: “Other then the Health Department, I don't know of any." This Statement shows the County Liable per (Marin v. City of San Rafael)
The Second Appellate Court ignored California Case Law of Dedications as with the Oceano Community Service District Prescriptive Easement Exhibit # 1768 giving a 5 Year Statute of Limitation since Caltrans and OCSD drainage changes in December of 2002. Caltrans Fred Brebes testified that Caltrans had maintained this drainage system for 30 years prior to 2002!
[PDF] [DOC]
The Second Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert have Ruled the actions Above and 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 documents above and below withheld from Discovery Exhibit # 579. They are aware of the OCSD Exhibit # 1756-Prescriptive Easement daily use of this drainage system for 2500 hundred gallons per minute of well water discharge as seen in this 1983 letter to the County of San Luis Obispo Rail-Road taking this drainage system. They are aware of the Video's of this pipe discharging debris into this drainage system since 2001 per exhibit # 1768! The County 1985 Approved and permitted--RR/POVE pond--mentioned 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! The Appellate Court is aware that this drainage course was not changed by POVE per Caltrans Drainage Documents December 17, 1973 Exhibit # 1772 (Prejudicial Error) (Accrual Date) (Causation)
County of San Luis Obispo and Caltrans Liability to the Pacific Ocean
Plane Crashes San Luis Obispo County Airport Oceano-Flooding Second Appellate Court-Inverse Condemnation The County of San Luis Obispo Exhibit # 579 Documents withheld from discovery show how this drainage once traveld to the Oceano Airport in 2002 as stated in these County Questionnaires! These documents will ultimatly close the Oceano Airport when Caltrans and the County San Luis Obispo end using State Highway 1 for Storm Water Retention! YOUTUBE County Of San Luis E-Mail Deal and Withholding of Evidence California State Government (Caltrans, County, OCSD) should not be allowed to use our storm water drainage channels for their Debris and Well Water! These videos above were presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman and the Second Appellate Court! Please read the following two PDF files regarding San Luis Obispo County and OCSD actions during discovery!
County of San Luis Obispo--Trying to Make A Deal in regards to the Evidence that they Withheld From Discovery involving their County Insurance. Plus their Documents presented to Judge Tangeman that Flooding Could Be Abated---pdf
OCSD Attorney Conflict Robert Weeks--Fiancee/Wife Was Oceano Nursery Bookkeeper that the Oceano Community Service District Hired knowing this Fact!---OCSD Directors Full Knowledge of Their Action!. pdf..
The Second Appellate Court does not find an (Abuse of Discretion) in their June 28, 2010 decision P. 6 and 7 or, that it is a Prejudicial Error for the County of San Luis Obispo-or Union Pacific Railroad to withhold 150 Oceano/County whiteness-plus photo/Questionnaires/ documents from discovery until after trial July 30, 2008! They allow Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman to withhold photo attachments that went with Exhibit # 579 showing Caltrans maintaining the Oceano Communities Storm Water Drainage Channel--Raising State Highway 1 and blocking drainage on the East Side of State Highway 1!. The Second Appellate Court does not find this to be a Prejudicial Error in California!
The Second Appellate Court States Page. 7 and 8 of their June 28. 2010 decision "Even if the trial court erred in applying the statute of limitations, the trial court found that Bookout failed to carry his burden of proof as to causation in his action against the District, the County and Caltrans. Plaintiff has the burden of proving a substantial causal relationship between the defendant's act or omission and the injury. (California State Automobile Assn. v. City of Palo Alto (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 474, 481.) To carry that burden plaintiff must exclude the probability that other forces alone produced the injury. (Ibid.) " These YOUTUBE videos below show (Causation) Each State Senator and State Assembly Member is fully aware of these videos and Caltrans, County, OCSD use of this drainage system!
Train Wreck State Highway Patrol put in danger by Caltrans! Railroad Train Wreck Video talked about by the Appellate Court----Oceano Train Wreck as seen in photo exhibits withheld from discovery by the County Of San Luis Obispo in exhibit # 579! Caltrans Caught shoveling and grading debris into storm water drainage channel as seen by the California Second Appellate Court and San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman!
State Highway Patrol put in danger by Caltrans! Railroad Train Wreck
California State Senators--State Assemblymembers knowledge of Caltrans, County of San Luis Obispo-Inverse Condemnation, affecting Public Health and Safety of our State Highway along with Photo/Statements and Documents withheld by County Of San Luis Obispo And Union Pacific Railroad at trial as allowed by Judge Tangeman, as Judge Tangeman Stated "All Right" --Prejudicial Error--
The Appellate Court is aware of their June 23, 2010 decision, which exercised dominion and control over the private drain as seen in Barrett v. County of Ventura CA2/6 filed 6/23/10 PDF]
"For liability to be imposed on a public entity for a dangerous condition of public property, the entity must be in a position to protect against or warn of the hazard." (Mamola v. State of California ex rel. Dept. of Transportation, supra, 94 Cal.App.3d at p. 788.) County of San Luis Obispo--Trying to Make A Deal in regards to the Evidence that they Withheld From Discovery involving their County Insurance. Plus their Documents presented to Judge Tangeman that Flooding Could Be Abated---pdf The Second Appellate Court ignored (Marin v. City of San Rafael) and their Statement in their June 23, 2010 decision and the Railroads and Our exhibits # 1756, 1874, 1875 "The taking of private property for the purpose of constructing storm drainage systems has been recognized to be for a public use. (Marin v. City of San Rafael (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 591, 595; Ullery v. County of Contra Costa (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 562, 568; DiMartino v. City of Orinda (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 329, 336.) "An action in inverse condemnation will lie when damage to private property is proximately caused by use of a storm drainage system for its intended purpose." (Souza v. Silver Development Co. (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 165, 170.) When accepted and approved by a municipality, drainage systems become a public improvement and a part of the system of public works. (Frustuck v. City of Fairfax (1963) 212 Cal.App.2d 345, 358.) "The fact that the work is performed by a contractor, subdivider or a private owner of property does not necessarily exonerate a public agency, if such contractor, subdivider or owner follows the plans and specifications furnished or approved by the public agency. When the work thus planned, specified and authorized results in an injury to adjacent property the liability is upon the public agency under its obligation to compensate for the damages resulting from the exercise of its governmental power." (Id. at pp. 362-363; see DiMartino, supra, at pp. 338-339.)"
Caltrans, County, Oceano Community Service District were each aware from their documents that State Highway 1 Drainage could be abated for only $43,295.00 As seen in the PDF file above per Appellate Court Exhibit # 1790
OCSD Exhibit # 1756 Causation-Exhibits # 1278, 1337, 1338 P. 8 OCSD Respondents. Breif
The Second Appellate Court States in their decision P. 2-regarding what they think is the couse of State Highway 1 -13th Paso Robles Streets and Oceano Nursery flooding! "The Pismo Oceano Vegetable Exchange (Exchange) first leased, then purchased, from the Railroad the property west of the raised rail bed. The iron pipe discharges onto the Exchange's parcel. Around 1977, the Exchange installed a subsurface junction box at the pipe's outfall. From the junction box, the water is diverted 90 degrees through a second 24-inch pipe to a retaining pond 200 feet away. The junction box is inadequate, causing the water to back up and flood Bookout's property." California Supreme Court and California Residents---How is this Oceano Community Service District Well # 8 Discharge into a government storm water drainage system legal and not a cause?
The Second Appellate Court ignored Causation-No Date of Stabilization Exhibits 1756, 1757, 1758, 1768, 1769, 1772, 1773, 1790, 1830, 1874, 1875 County March 27, 1985 permit letter requireing POVE to raise this Drainage system. On P. 9 of their June 28, 2010 Decision State: "(Marin v. City of San Rafael, supra, 111 Cal.App.3d at p. 596.) In other words, the city was liable because it directed the installation of, used, and owned the pipe. It even obtained an injunction to prevent plaintiffs from interfering with its operation. None of those factors are present here." The Appellate Court ignored direct testimony by Phil Davis showing the County Approved and their involvement in the OCSD pipe constructed in the Rail Roads Drainage channel! P. 385 Court Transcripts-- Question: Are you aware of any permission sought by the district, itself for operating this pipe? Answer: “Other then the Health Department, I don't know of any." This Statement shows the County Liable per (Marin v. City of San Rafael)
The Second Appellate Court ignored California Case Law of Dedications as with the Oceano Community Service District Prescriptive Easement Exhibit # 1768 giving a 5 Year Statute of Limitation since Caltrans and OCSD drainage changes in December of 2002. Caltrans Fred Brebes testified that Caltrans had maintained this drainage system for 30 years prior to 2002!
From: Bill Bookout
[mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 9:52 AM
To: 'Senator.Blakeslee@senate.ca.gov'
Cc: 'Lt.governor@ltgov.ca.gov'; 'Senator.Yee@senate.ca.gov';
'Congresswoman Lois Capps'; 'James, Melissa'; 'mmosley@sezalaw.com'; 'John
Belsher'; 'Greg Connell'; 'rmiller@newtimesslo.com'; 'velie@calcoastnews.com';
'bray@thetribunenews.com'; 'bcuddy@thetribunenews.com'; 'Wilson, Nick - SLO';
'jwasserman@sacbee.com'; 'jboren@fresnobee.com';
'eslater@timespressrecorder.com'; 'bmcewen@fresnobee.com'; 'Teresa E. Sotelo';
'Weber, Tad - SLO'
Subject: RE: Caltrans flooding our State Highways per exhibit # 1789 and
photos seen with exhibit #579
September
23, 2010
Dear
Senator Sam Blakeslee and Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado
www.lieutenantgovernorabelmaldonado.com
www.senatorsamblakeslee.com
It
is important that California Residents are aware of the actions by Caltrans in
regards to why our
Please
review the testimony of Caltrans before they raised State Highway 1 and the
Maintenance that Caltrans abated to the Oceano Storm water Drainage channel up
to 2002! This information is seen in pdf files at the two websites
attached above! Caltrans does not mention this information in their
request for California Case Law! Caltrans does not mention this in their
“ Answer To Petition For Review”
Please
review the Court Transcripts " P. 1509 By Mr. Belsher: Did you instruct your employees on
maintenance activities with respect to the channel that's depicted in
1467? Answer: YES.--------Question: So up to the years of 1996
when you became Superintendent, did you instruct workers under your supervision
to clear the channel? Answer: YES
The
Bottom photo in this exhibit # 579 is Exhibit photo # 1467---Judge Martin J.
Tangeman would not allow these photos into evidence showing what Fred Brebes of
Caltrans had testified to in regards to Caltrans having a history of abating
drainage problems on State Highway 1 in Oceano!
Senator
Sam Blakeslee, This new published opinion affects everyone in
Your
Help is needed in abating this flooding caused by Caltrans,
Sincerely
Bill
Bookout
Please
review the information below that has been attached to these websites”
www.lieutenantgovernorabelmaldonado.com
www.senatorsamblakeslee.com
www.governorjerrybrown.net
www.governormegwhitmancalifornia.com
www.assemblymankatchoachadjian.com
Mr. Derek S. Van Hoften, representing Caltrans misleads the
California Supreme Court in his Opposition Depublication request from the
Second Appellate Court. Mr. Van Hoften, ignores the Amicus Brief showing
Baker v. Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority (1985) He States: "(1) the three-year statute of limitations
applies to bar the action because the flooding allegedly caused by the public
entities did not constitute control or possession of plaintiff's
property," How is it that Caltrans can raise a State
Highway and not have to address State drainage per new California Case Law
"Bookout v. State of California"?
Caltrans
Answer to Petition For Review September 15, 2010 ignoring Baker v.
Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority (1985)_...
Mr. Van Hoften, States: "Second, Plaintiff asks whether public agencies should be
allowed to use and maintain a public improvement for their surface water
discharge and drainage systems in a manner which creates flooding of nearby
neighboring private property. (Pet. at 1., 7.) However, the Court
of Appeal did not find that the agencies in this case had used or maintained a
public improvement: moreover, the plain holding
of the Court of Appeal's decision was that the public agencies did not cause
the flooding of Plaintiff's property."
Mr. Van Hoften ignores
the Testimony of Caltrans in front of Judge Martin J. Tangeman- P. 1506 of the
Court Transcript of Caltrans Supervisor Fred Brebes. Mr. Brebes States: "Question: And
did -- And did during this period of time, do you recall your maintenance crews
working within the channel that leads from Highway 1 off of 13th Street? Answer:
Yes." P. 1508 By Mr. Belsher: So did your crews engage in this
practice of using a loader to clean the channel that's depicted in that
photograph, on more then one occasion? Answer: Yeah -- Yes,
I Would say Yes." Question: So was this part of the maintenance
that you oversaw as Supervisor during those years, '83 Through '88?
Answer: Yes. Question and did you continue that practice in the
years until your retirement in 2002, to your knowledge? Answer: I
can't say. Question: Well, we saw the photograph of 2000, for
example. Answer: UH-HUH Question: That's the one you're
looking at. You were a Superintendent at that time; Correct? Answer:
Yes" P. 1509 By Mr. Belsher: Did you instruct your employees on
maintenance activities with respect to the channel that's depicted in
1467? Answer: YES.--------Question: So up to the years of 1996
when you became Superintendent, did you instruct workers under your supervision
to clear the channel? Answer: YES Question: And that
clearing went how far into the channel, to your recollection? Answer:
Well, in the case, it's probably about as far as that loader went, but that
depends. At certain times, I know that we have gone back to the
culvert." Page 1513 Answer: Um, I didn't know the Railroad
--I Don't know the Railroad owns that property but. Question: You
didn't obtain permission from anybody at that point in time in terms of
entering--" Answer: For
Caltrans
Derek S. Van Hoften request for California Case law in Bookout v. State
California July 13, 2010 pdf...
Mr Derek S. Van Hoften ignores Caltrans
Statement to Judge Martin J. Tangeman also seen in exhibit # 579 photos
withheld from discovery by the
Mr Derek S. Van Hoften of Caltrans states:
"Second, the opinion explains another existing rule of law: where the
judgment is against the party who has the burden of proof, it is almost
impossible for him to prevail on appeal by arguing the evidence compels a
judgment in his favor." Inverse Condemnation should now be
herd by a Jury instead of a Judge with these statements by Caltrans!
From: Bill Bookout
[mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 2:03 PM
To: '
Cc: '
Subject: RE: Caltrans flooding our State Highways per exhibit # 1789 and
photos seen with exhibit #579
September
22, 2010
Dear
Senator Sam Blakeslee,
I
have not received a response from you in regards to the information I have been
sending as to Caltrans actions in
Nick
Wilson of the San Luis Obispo Tribune asked “Why should Abel Maldonado or Blakeslee
get involved and how might they help/change the situation?” Your help
is needed as you and Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado have first hand
knowledge of why Caltrans is flooding State Highway 1 as seen in exhibit # 1789
presented to both of you!
www.lieutenantgovernorabelmaldonado.com
www.senatorsamblakeslee.com
www.governorjerrybrown.net
www.governormegwhitmancalifornia.com
www.assemblymankatchoachadjian.com
Nick
From: Wilson, Nick - SLO
[mailto:nwilson@thetribunenews.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 3:27 PM
To: Bill Bookout
Subject: RE:
Bill,
Several of us here have received your e-mails and
often we have similar thoughts about them. I think we’re confused about what
we’re seeing here and what the story should be. Those are two huge points of
concern for any news organization. If the judge has denied your request for a
trial, then what’s your next step? If the judge has said the evidence you
presented is not sufficient to show OCSD or
other agencies committed wrongdoings,
then what’s your next move? Why should Abel Maldonado or Blakeslee
get involved and how might they help/change the situation? I don’t think
anyone doubts flooding has gone on Highway 1, but if two judges have turned
down your request for a trial the news media can’t serve as a vehicle of
protest unless you have a formal protest (not just with us; with some official
body). I think we all have to know why we
should cover this story and have the information presented in a clear fashion
that makes immediate sense to us.
Nick Wilson
Tribune Staff Reporter
(805) 781-7922 (phone)
(805) 781-7905 (fax)
Senator Sam Blakeslee, The
The
public needs to know Why would a California Superior
Court Judge allow partial evidence, exhibit # 579 to be withheld from discovery
as stated in the Court Transcripts by Union Pacific Railroad and Judge
Tangeman? “And for the purpose of the exhibits we don’t need the photographs.” The Court States: “All Right”
Judge
Tangeman after his August 5, 2010 Inverse Condemnation Decision States
on P. 2117-2018 without acknowledging the photographs, regarding other
documents withheld from discovery. "I
accept Mr. Belsher's argument these questionnaires where not available at that
time. They weren't available until July 30th." "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."
From: Bill Bookout
[mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:28 PM
To: 'Teresa E. Sotelo'
Cc: 'Weber, Tad - SLO'; 'Wilson, Nick - SLO'; '
Subject: RE: Caltrans flooding our State Highways
September
21, 2010
All
News Media, State Senators and
Big News-------September 21, 2010, with Caltrans filing Opposition
for the Request for Depublication filed to the
This
is Caltrans Statement to Judge Martin J. Tangeman also seen in exhibit # 579
photos withheld from discovery by the
Answer: (P. 643) Yeah, I responded to a
communication that our maintenance engineer received from Bill Bookout,
that there was ponding, A ponding issue at the corners of 13th and Highway 1
and Paso Robles and Highway 1. And so it was in response to that
communication." Question: Do you know approximately which side of the State highway
this ponding occurred? Answer: "It was on the
Question:
(P 653 Cross-Examination by Caltrans-Exhibit photos 579) "And
when you--It was your understanding that the reason this job -- You were asked
to design this job was because the Plaintiff had complained about ponding on
the
The Court OVERRULED.
Question:
(P.. 658) “Mr. Mckinley, in that grinding crown removal project in
2003, do you recollect removing any portions of 13th Street or Paso
Robles street?” Answer: “That was – Yeah, we went up to do our conforms, yes.”
Question: Do you know
about how far up those streets you went, if you can recollect?” Answer: “From the
plans, I want – it seems to be around 70 –70 feet, I believe. Seventy
feet.” Page 659 “We did adjust crowns on adjust crowns on 13th and
Paso.”
Please
review Caltrans request above for California Case law “Bookout v. State of
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From: Bill Bookout
[mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 5:52 PM
To: 'Teresa E. Sotelo'
Cc: '
Subject: RE: Caltrans flooding our State Highways
Dear
Pacific legal Foundation,
Attached
above is Caltrans petition to the Second Appellate Court, that has made new
California Case Law Bookout v. State of
Do
we really want to loose our rights in
From: Bill Bookout [mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 4:44 PM
To: '
Cc: '
Subject: RE: Caltrans flooding our State Highways
September
21, 2010
Dear
Senator Sam Blakeslee,
Attached
above is the Caltrans request to make
Please
review the photo evidence that went with exhibit # 579 that San Luis Obispo
Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman felt was not needed of Caltrans
actions!
Again,
your help is needed! The cost to abate this flooding problem is only
$43,295.00 per exhibits presented to
Sincerely
Bill
Bookout
www.governorarnoldschwarzenegger.net
www.lieutenantgovernorabelmaldonado.com
www.governorbrown.net
www.senatorsamblakeslee.com
www.governorjerrybrown.net
www.governormegwhitmancalifornia.com
www.assemblymankatchoachadjian.com
www.governorabelmaldonado.com
From: Bill Bookout
[mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 4:09 PM
To: '
Cc: '
Subject: RE: Caltrans flooding our State Highways
September
21, 2010
Dear
Senator Sam Blakeslee.
Your
help as a State Senator is needed with this
Please
review this website www.senatorsamblakeslee.com
to see Caltrans actions caught on video camera and now posted on
Youtube. Please review the videos of the Oceano Community Service
District discharging debris into this storm water drainage system from their
well # 8.
Oceano Community Service District Well # 8
January 13, 2007
Senator
Sam Blakeslee, I would appreciate a response to this e-mail and if you are able
to help?
Sincerely
Bill
Bookout
From: Bill Bookout
[mailto:Pismobeachdiveshop@charter.net]
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 3:01 PM
To: '
Cc: '
Subject: Caltrans flooding our State Highways
September 20, 2010
Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado
I would like to thank you for your help in the past as you stated in a letter
May 12, 2009 "I hope that you
continue to seek legal counsel and that this very difficult situation will be
resolved soon." Please again review the
Caltrans documents showing that this flooding could have been abated for
$43,295.00 before
Please review the following websites:
www.governorarnoldschwarzenegger.net
www.lieutenantgovernorabelmaldonado.com
www.governorbrown.net
www.senatorsamblakeslee.com
www.governorjerrybrown.net
www.governormegwhitmancalifornia.com
www.assemblymankatchoachadjian.com
www.governorabelmaldonado.com
www.inversecondemnation.net
www.californiasupremecourt.info
www.californiasupremecourts.com
www.supremecourtofcalifornia.com
www.supremecourtcalifornia.com
www.heritageoaksbankquestions.com
www.unitedstatessupremecourt.net
www.governormegwhitman.co
www.unitedstatessupremcourt.com
www.californiasupremecourt.co
It is unfortunate that
San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman would not allow in as
evidence Exhibit 1789.
This evidence tied in with the photos below, that went with exhibit # 579
that Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman chose also to not allow in as
evidence showing that the flooding of our
Bookout v. State Of California K... Bookout v. State of California Supreme Court Appeal...
Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado and all State
Senators Exhibit
# 1789 talks about what the photos show in exhibit # 579 that Judge Martin J.
Tangeman would not allow into evidence! Why
is Caltrans raising our
Exhibit # 1789 States September
15, 1987: “It
was believed that our proposed plan of installing a 36-inch pipe to replace an
existing 24- inch pipe would be acceptable to the property owners if it could
be shown that the project would only affect the downstream owners minimally.”
“And that even though there had been some light rainfall
years there is a good possibility of heavy flooding in this area in the future
of both the Highway areas and the County areas.”
“The State could raise the height of Highway one
approximately one foot and leave both the County and the Oceano Community
Services District the problem to solve on their own (P. Hom)” Cal_Trans_Documents.pdf
The Supreme Court Of California will need to review this video’s
presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman and the Second Appellate Court
Justices--Steven Z. Perren, Kenneth R, yegan and Arthur Gilbert. These
videos can now be seen on YOUTUBE1
1:16 The California Second
Appellate Court Justices--Steven Z. Perren Kenneth R. Yegan and Arthur Gilbert
Ignore California Case law as seen in this video presented
to them and Superior Court Judge Martin J. Tangeman, per Akins
v State (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1, Arreola v. County of Monterey (2002) 99
Cal.App.4th 722, Belair v. Riverside County Flood Control District (1988) 47 Cal.3d
550, Lee v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2003) 107
Cal.App.4th 848, Lyles v. State of California (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 281,
Pacific Bell v. City of San Diego (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 596, Skoumbas v City of
Orinda (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 783, Marin v. City of San Rafael, supra, 111 Cal.App.3d at pp.
595-596.)
Oceano Community Service District Well # 8
January 13, 2007
Video Presented to Judge Martin J. Tangeman now seen on
YOUTUBE for all California Residents knowledge of Inverse Condemnation! Skoumbas
v City of
