Friday, September 28, 2007

Assistant County Admin, Jeff Aluotto, Will Not Answer Simple Questions

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

A few days ago, we received a letter from Assistant County Administrator Jeff Aluotto, where he claimed an earlier article by Michael Earl Patton was in error concerning whether the County performed due diligence by conducting an Environmental Site Assessment prior to accepting the old Kahn’s site for the proposed new jail.  A closer look, however, at Aluotto’s letter reveals several discrepancies—and Aluotto himself has been unresponsive thus far to follow up questions. 

For example, in Patton’s original article, he wrote that “Hamilton County accepted the ‘gift’ of the old Kahn’s site without doing an Environmental Site Assessment (ESA).” Aluotto’s letter purports to refute this claim, but a careful analysis of the letter’s language shows a different story:

Firstly, you should notice the word “company” in the first line.  It looks like Aluotto is referring to an ESA that was contracted by Sara Lee several months before the transfer to Hamilton County.  That does not mean Hamilton County did an ESA, it means that Sara Lee did an ESA.

But read even more carefully as the passage continues:  Aluotto claims that samples were taken of soil and groundwater, but he does not say whether anything was found in those samples!

In follow up messages, we asked Aluotto for the name of the County employee responsible for analyzing the results of this alleged third party ESA.  No response. 

It is our understanding that a copy of this ESA has been acquired, and we hope to report to you on its actual scientific details in the next few days.  But wouldn’t it be something if Hamilton County’s jail plan was to house prisoners on toxic land?

Socializer!

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.

JFD says:
28 Sep 2007  at  07:44 am | #

"That does not mean Hamilton County did an ESA, it means that Sara Lee did an ESA.”

What’s your point?

To recap: 1) The receptionist was right; the County didn’t do an assessment.

2) Because Sara Lee had one done, the County completed their due diligence.

3) The Beacon still has egg on it’s face.

“In follow up messages, we asked Aluotto for the name of the County employee responsible for analyzing the results of this alleged third party ESA.  No response.”

Maybe it will speed their response if, you hold your breath and stamp your foot; or, try rolling around on the floor shrieking at the top of your lungs.  At any rate, I’m thinking they will get back to you within a legally defendable time frame.  Although, the thought has occurred to me that depending on how your request was worded, they might not be required to respond at all.

Freedom Fighters says:
28 Sep 2007  at  09:17 am | #

.
We can’t imagine how the property could not be contaminated after possibly a 100 years of pork barrel waste ?

The perfect spot ?

Anon says:
28 Sep 2007  at  11:27 am | #

Here, Dean. Try using this: http://www.hamilton-co.org/Personnel/publicrecords/PublicRecordReqCPD036.pdf

and be sure to read up on this: http://www.hamilton-co.org/Personnel/publicrecords/Sec2.13PublicRecordsPolicy.pdf

Further, a Google search on {"hamilton county” jail sara lee property} turns up this memo: http://www.hamilton-co.org/administrator/bsi/jail/AdminReport-Feb07.pdf and if you go to page 15, you will see that JFD’s reading of the memo is essentially correct: the memo states “An initial environmental assessment has been performed by the Sara Lee Corporation.” And if you read further, the memo states that “The County is conducting additional environmental studies of the site at the County’s expense.”

But wouldn’t it be something if Hamilton County’s jail plan was to house prisoners on toxic land?

And, wouldn’t it also be something if Hamilton County also prepared a baby-eating factory on the site as part of the jail plan?

says:
28 Sep 2007  at  02:54 pm | #

Did the county finish conducting those studies?  What are the results?

Vera Z says:
28 Sep 2007  at  05:36 pm | #

"But wouldn’t it be something if Hamilton County’s jail plan was to house prisoners on toxic land?”

I have a question; Was the toxic waste that was stored in Lower Price Hill for so many years ever cleaned up? 

As long as we, or as the “Powers that be” consider certain segments of the population to be “Throw-aways”.  These kinds of atrocities will exist.  I wouldn’t be at all surprised to discover that that was indeed the plan.  Vera Z

Jones says:
28 Sep 2007  at  11:42 pm | #

it means that Sara Lee did an ESA.

JFD, I attempted to tell this MEP that exact same thing at the get-go on this hysteria over the Kahn’s site.  As always, MEP & his cronies attempted to spin it in another direction with their histrionics.

That was a firm agreement set forth with the Camp Washington people. Sara Lee not only donated the whole shebang, they stated on record they would be responsible for any & all clean up at their expense.

But you know, we’re so full of beans & tomatoes.  This MEP, Dean & their mafia know it all, all the time.

Somebody give me one good, solid reason why I should cast a vote for Patton.  Just one, that’s all. Make sure it’s rock solid. I’m sick of clowns on Council & I’m not going to start voting the cycle. That goes for Jeffre, too.

Vera Z says:
29 Sep 2007  at  10:55 am | #

Hmmm. Let’s seee- One good reason to vote for Patton, Jeffre, and, personally I would include Brian Garry here:  These gentlemen actually care about what happens to Cincinnati, they care about justice and fairness for all its citizens, and they are not afraid to question the power brokers who have generally gone without being asked to account for their actions.  They will not be content to sit back and let BUSINESS AS USUAL continue in Cincinnati.  Vera Z.

formerly f says:
30 Sep 2007  at  12:32 pm | #

i find it amazing he wont take the time to answer questions for a group of wanna-bees who have already published one totally incorrect story that he had to deal with.  I am sure he just realizes you for the amatures you are and has better things to do with his time (at least i hope he does since I am paying his salary as a taxpayer)

says:
30 Sep 2007  at  10:02 pm | #

A few days ago I made a formal public records request for reports and correspondence pertaining to the environmental condition of the proposed jail site.  Mr. Aluotto got me everything I asked for and graciously agreed to answer whatever questions I have.  He struck me as professional and effective.  I never got the impression he was trying to jerk anyone around.

I PDF’ed everything Mr. Aluotto sent me.  I’ll forward it all to The Beacon under separate cover and encourage The Dean to post the whole massive lot (97.1 MB) so his readers can research it themselves.  I already shared the package with MEP.  He should be long with his comments any time.

I’m still reading through it all, but so far the County seems to have handled the land acquisition competently.  This was a pleasant surprise.  I was worried that we citizens would take ownership just in time for it to be named the next superfund site.  Of course the site is contaminated.  But several outside experts are saying the hazard levels are manageable.  Burgess and Niple’s guesstimate is $2.6 million in remediation costs.

There’s still a lot of work yet to do, the studies are nowhere near complete, and the costs will likely change dramatically.  But at least Hamilton County seems to be making environmental decisions based on expert advice rather than the reckless rush that has characterized so much of the rest of this jail tax debacle.

Anon says:
01 Oct 2007  at  09:46 am | #

Wait. So you mean there’s NOT a huge conspiracy theory?

Damn.

formerly f says:
01 Oct 2007  at  10:41 am | #

mark,

do you mean to tell me that when you asked the correct person a question they answered it in an efficient and correct manner.  it seems odd to me that this way of approaching someone was successful.

i would have thought for sure the real way to get answers is to ask the incorrect person.  not follow through to the correct person and then write an attack article suggesting that the office isn’t doing their job.

no wait sorry now your way makes sense i had fallen asleep and wound up in beaconland for a minute and the second way seemed better