Replies

Thank you so very much, Chair for this timeline.

Excellent work.

Thank you, too, Cboldt, for doing a bit of checking and being as sure as possible that this is correct. I, too, am somewhat concerned that there is something really screwy going on in that FEMA seemed to neglect N.O. environs, and why. NOT to say that the LA Gov. did everything well, but I did find some support that the Aug.27/28 came out on Aug.27
(about half-way down the page):
http://www.nola.com/newslogs/breakingtp/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_Times-Picayune/archives/2005_08_27.html

and the letter there does appear the same to me as was on the same page when cached by Google on Sep.10

There may be some very good reason that those few counties around N.O. was excluded by FEMA from their letter/declaration, including the possibility that they didn't get a proper request from the LA Gov., but I think there is a very good chance right now that they somehow just loused up - possibly mulling over whether to declare them an even HIGHER state of disaster than the other counties, and no one noticed they were missing from the FEMA list until well after the letter was sent - and no one realized why. I can certainly imagine some fool computer "check-off" program that didn't translate information correctly...

I ALSO WILL STATE, the interesting fact, that the "Press Release" from the LA Governor's office immediately preceding the press release that Cboldt linked is MISSING from the gov's office archives... Weird, at least. I'll send to you three info as to what I discovered about that - privately - until you get a chance to check me. Other FReepers can apply for that info to me, too... but I'm going to hold it close for now - though it is probably not of great import.

Again, great work.

... the "Press Release" from the LA Governor's office immediately preceding the press release that Cboldt linked is MISSING from the gov's office archives.

Just for fun, I checked http://gov.louisiana.gov/Press_Release.asp?m=8. The following "release numbers" are missing from August 2005:

957 - 8/18 or 8/19/2005
959 - 8/19/2005
965 - 8/23 or 8/24/2005
975 - the one you noticed
979 - 8/28/2005
981 - 8/28/2005
982 - 8/28/2005
984 - 8/28/2005
989 - 8/30 or 8/31/2005

Depending on the page viewed from, one can find lots of holes in the assignment of press release numbers. I figure she had something she wanted to release to the press, had her staff work up something, then changed her mind about consumating the release, i.e., actually releasing it. I'm sure that happens in most every active political office. I wouldn't read much into it, press releases tend to be fairly sterile anyway.

There may be some very good reason that those few counties around N.O. was excluded by FEMA from their letter/declaration, including the possibility that they didn't get a proper request from the LA Gov., but I think there is a very good chance right now that they somehow just loused up ...

I wouldn't read anything into the missing parish names. That FEMA release was based on Blanco request for 9 million bucks to evacuate people away from the danger zone and shelter them elsewhere. Meanwhile, look at what FEMA was directing as far as staging relief assets.

I think there is plenty of blame to go around too, but coordination is impossible to accomplish when one of the partners is a klutz.