[EarthResearcher333]

So here is the flip side.... By the article bringing up DWR referencing a FERC "security" regulation clause that, includes "attack", DWR now has another battle front to deal with. If DWR doesn't show any sign of action regarding such a "security" concern, the default assumption space becomes what Bill Connelly** stated:

"“I think there’s a history of deceit and a history of keeping us in the dark,” Connelly said. “DWR has been very careful not to let the locals know what actually what was going on it. ... Why be secretive about it?”

DWR is in a political Catch-22 situation. To gain trust they must act and respond honestly based on what they are saying to the public. They could dig themselves into a hole real quick as there is nowhere to hide in this intense public interest crisis (dam & spillway).

**Member - Butte County Board of Supervisors

[meyer]

Yes - credibility goes down the drain when people believe that they are being kept in the dark. Although government gets away with that to a certain extent, on a local level, it is much harder. Because unlike the distant DC, these “officials” are in the neighborhood. They’re local, near the people.

DWR has a tough job of maintaining the integrity of a public entity, of being truthful with the people, while simultaneously hiding things that are good targets for bad actors.

[EarthResearcher333]

btw- I'll predict: Youtube videos are going to go wild in speculation over this. Both from the FERC regulation quoted, AND from speculation on what the Mar 24 BOC report states. Even speculation of a "leak" from a purported insider can fuel a PR firestorm.

They better up the pay on that "We're Hiring" DWR PR person job.