Oh, now this thing has really gone off into the Crazy Weeds. On May 10, I posted a blog entry noting that the Regional Water Quality Control Board will be meeting here in SLOTown and item 14 on the agenda is a discussion/information item regarding the rescinding of the pointless CDOs that have been on The Los Osos 45 for years. And how Harvey Packard is weirdly recommending that the Board do nothing, keep the CDOs in place, because -- wait for it -- he thinks that somebody somewhere in the community might? may? could possibly? refuse to hook up to the sewer once the plant comes on line, even though he offers absolutely NO evidence for that belief, and so he thinks the 45 should continue to be held hostage just in case something like that might happen because he can't think of a single way to deal with such a possibility. Not a single idea.
Which means that his "reason" for recommending that the Board refuse any and all requests for dumping those ridiculous CDOs was seriously, jaw-droppingly lame, an embarrassment all 'round.
But, wait, it gets weirder. Seems it was Harvey who thought up the idea of asking the Board to remove those CDOs in the first place. (See email exchange below)
And with that, this whole thing slid off into the Crazy Weeds. Consider: Harvey Packard first asks, out of the blue, that CDO holder Bill Moylan contact the other CDOers and ask them to appeal to the Board to rescind those ridiculous CDOs since he thinks "this would be a good time" to do that, and Bill replies that contacting CDOers was Harvey's job (since it was his idea in the first place and he, not Bill, had all the contact information), and sure enough, Harvey lines up an agenda item, time carved out of the Board's busy schedule to hear the item, community members who heard about this (including Supervisor Gibson) sent in letters commenting on that agenda item, (including Bev Moylan's detailed letter to the Board, posted on this blog March 19, 2014).
And then comes Harvey's recommendation: Harvey asks the Board to deny Harvey's idea.
So, here's the question: Is Harvey Packard playing Lucy in a Peanuts cartoon? You know the bit, Lucy asks Charlie Brown to come kick the football, and Charlie says, Nuh-huh, I don't trust you, and Lucy promises that she'll hold the football steady, so Charlie runs at the ball and Lucy yanks it away so Charlie flies through the air and lands-- Splat! -- on his back and Lucy laughs -- HA-HA-HA-HA!
And here's another question: Do the Board members know that their staff Chief has been sadistically playing Lucy on the CDOers in this matter? And wasting their time as well?
Ah, yes. Your Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board's staff at work. A cartoon.
To firstname.lastname@example.org@email@example.com and 11 More...
May 18 at 11:23 AM
Thank you for your recent correspondence. Please find attached and pasted below my response to the packet you sent. Once again I have copied Mr. Michael Thomas in the hope that, as in the past, he can forward my comments to Water Board members.
Having ourselves on numerous occasions experienced involuntary exposure by the CCRWQCB of our personal contact and domicile information over the years, I am especially sensitive to community members who may not wish to have their personal contact information become public record. You will note that I have Bcc’d the few community members for whom we have contact information to protect their privacy.
Beverley De Witt-Moylan
**My attached correspondence is pasted herewith for your convenience:
Dear Mr. Packard,
Completely out of context and utterly spontaneously you suggested, on January 15, 2014, that my husband, William Moylan, rally our CDO cohorts to ask the Water Board to remove the CDO’s. With those words you deliberately implied a clear shift in your approach. We felt encouraged that the CCRWQCB had embarked on a new direction.
It was with considerable consternation that we read your proposal related to Agenda Item 14 for the May 2014 CCRWQCB meeting. Your recommendation directly contradicts what you told my husband to do in January. And so we require clarification.
You can, no doubt, appreciate our current confusion. My husband did not misunderstand you. After your January conversation he mentioned noting that you had specifically used the word, remove - and not rescind - the CDO’s.
When my husband contacted you to say that it was your responsibility, and not his, to ask the Board to remove the CDO’s, you agreed. You did not refute or correct his language. We had no reason to believe you had changed your position on encouraging the Board to remove the CDO’s. (For your convenience those emails appear at the bottom of this message.)
Given that you had unilaterally and unexpectedly raised the issue of CDO removal, your recent Board proposal was disconcerting, In January we truly believed that new Board members and new leadership provided you the opportunity to do the rational, right, and decent thing. Your recent incomprehensible CDO proposal demonstrates that nothing has changed. And so we now wonder at the point of the exercise.
We remain unclear about your motive in approaching my husband in January to suggest he ask the Water Board to remove the CDO’s. We will appreciate your clarification of this point of concern. We look forward to your prompt response.
Beverley De Witt-Moylan
From: william < Subject: Los Osos CDO's
Date: February 10, 2014 8:42:54 PM PST
Dear Mr. Packard,
Recently you spoke to me at the CCRWQCB office suggesting that my wife and I join forces with other CDO families to ask the Water Board “to remove” the Cease and Desist Orders they imposed on us in 2006 and 2007.
It is my understanding that the original individual enforcement proposal came from CCRWQCB staff. You were on staff at the time of those hearings that resulted in a 100% successful prosecution rate.
After carefully considering your suggestion, I concluded that the party who proposed individual enforcement is the appropriate party to request its removal. As CCRWQCB Enforcement Coordinator and Advisor to the Board you are in the proper position to ask the Board to remove the individual Cease and Desist Orders that resulted from the prosecution of the “Los Osos 45.”
I request that you submit that proposal as soon as possible.
On Feb 24, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Packard, Harvey@Waterboards wrote:
I agree that it is my job to make a recommendation to the Water Board about the CDOs, and I plan on doing so in a written report to the board for the May 2014 meeting. The board will not take any action at the meeting, but could provide direction to staff.
If you or anyone else interested in the situation would like to provide input toward my recommendation, please provide that information to me by March 31.
Harvey Packard Proposal Response