Duck and cover?

From Letters-to-the-editor, Pacifica Tribune http://www.mercurynews.com/pacifica

I am both concerned and puzzled by Councilmember Vreeland not making decisions or voting on council issues that may involve the federal government, in particular, his reasoning in stepping down and not participating in discussions concerning the apartment buildings that are in jeopardy of collapse. This behavior presumably is caused by Mr. Vreeland working for the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I say presumably because Mr. Vreeland has not disclosed the terms under which he has to step back from decisions. The EPA gets involved in a lot of issues on the coastside. The rest of the federal government broadly gets involved in almost everything else in town. Neither the rest of council nor staff have said anything about this stepping back.

So, have we lost a councilmember on key issues? We now have only four dealing with critical issues and one, Vreeland, on the sideline? What about the EPA employees on the Planning Commission? Have these commissioners also taken themselves out of decisions, like all environmental impact reports, that may involve the federal government? At least one Pacifica Planning Commissioner is an EPA lawyer, so he should know the rules. Does he step back?

What about Vreeland's aggressive support of the now defunct biodiesel refinery? He supported that, even traveled to testify at the Coastal Commission and the federal government was deeply involved in that project. He didn't step down on that project. Is this a selective application of a "rule" we don't know about? So, what are the step down rules? Do they apply to planning commissions? How does the public feel about a councilmember no longer representing the voters on all issues before council?

Submitted by Dave Ahlquist