Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Error by MEP?  County says environmental site assessment was conducted

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

Recently, Michael Earl Patton wrote this item about the site for the new jail, and the danger involved in accepting land without an environmental site assessment.  Today, The Beacon received the following letter, which purports that such an assumption is incorrect.

Dear Sirs:

Please accept the following information in response to a recently posted article on your site:

Recently an article appeared on the Beacon’s website which reported that an Environmental Site Assessment was not performed on the Sara Lee/Kahn’s site prior to Hamilton County taking ownership (Is the New Jail Site a Ticking Time Bomb, Sept. 10, 2007, Michael Earl Patton).  I am uncertain as to where the information for this article was obtained, but I can assure you it is in error.  In fact, a full Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed of the Sara Lee property prior to the County accepting ownership.

The Phase I assessment, submitted to the company on January 26, 2007, was conducted to professional industry standards, by a qualified third party environmental consulting firm, and was followed (again before transfer of ownership) by an additional baseline Phase II assessment which involved the analysis of multiple groundwater and soil samples.  In short, the County completed the appropriate environmental due diligence activities, and obtained the technical assistance of qualified, professional environmental consultants to interpret that data prior to accepting donation of the site.  I appreciate the opportunity to ensure that the public, and visitors to your site, are properly informed on this issue.

If there is another means by which this message should be posted to your site, to ensure its dissemination, please let me know.  Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey W. Aluotto

Assistant County Administrator - Public Services

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.

CincyCapell says:
25 Sep 2007  at  05:02 pm | #

What? MEP failed to check his facts??? Perish the tought!

He's nuts says:
25 Sep 2007  at  05:14 pm | #

MEP is spewing complete nonsense in almost every post. And then he exagerrates those claims with ridiculous rhetoric. And then others spread the misinformation.  His analysis of the sales tax per person issue is horrendously inaccurate as well.

If people had the time to respond to everything he wrote that was inaccurate, a book could be written.

says:
25 Sep 2007  at  06:10 pm | #

I just sent this email, which will shed light on MEP’s alleged “error.”

==
Mr. Aluotto,

You may wish to contact Michael Earl Patton directly, as he is the individual who wrote the article you reference.

Mr. Patton approached the receptionist at the County Administration building, asking for a copy of the Environmental Site Assessment.  It is my understanding that, after the receptionist made phone calls, she told Mr. Patton there was not an ESA to provide because one had not be conducted.  At that point, another aide gave Mr. Patton a copy of a motion which said the County would accept the land no matter what kind of contamination it might have contained.

If the ESA was conducted, please advise us how we may acquire a copy, and please tell us what concerned citizens should do when County Administration receptionists tell us that reports do not exist - only so we can find out later that they allegedly do exist.

Thanks,

The Dean of Cincinnati

JFD says:
25 Sep 2007  at  09:25 pm | #

What? The Boyz at the Beacon went off Half- Cucked?  Have you all ever heard about registered mail; addressed to the individual in charge?  You guys operate like a bunch of half-assed.....(what’s the word I’m looking for?)....oh yeah; douche-bags (some offense intended).

anon says:
25 Sep 2007  at  09:30 pm | #

MEP and The Beacon rock!

For decades I’ve been waiting for somebody to tie a can to Leis’s tail. Who’da thunk that Sheriff-for-Life would do the job himself?

Keep it up, you guys. I haven’t had this much fun since last November!

says:
26 Sep 2007  at  03:03 am | #

I just sent this:

Mr. Aluotto,

After further review of your message, and correspondence with some colleagues, I have some additional follow up questions.

You wrote that the results of the Phase I ESA were forwarded to the “company.” You did not write that they were forwarded to the “county.” Please specify if this is a typo, or if there is an unnamed company involved in this scenario.

Also, could you please identify who in the county was responsible for interpreting results and making sure they were acceptable?

Additionally, who, specifically, was the qualified third party who conducted this assessment?

Thank you, again, for your time and consideration.

Respectfully,

The Dean of Cincinnati

Jason Gloyd says:
26 Sep 2007  at  08:52 am | #

Michael asked at least two county employees for the environmental study and they both told him there was none done.  Don’t blame him and say he went off half cocked.  I applaud him for trying to investigate the matter further.

anon says:
26 Sep 2007  at  11:14 am | #

In what organization does the RECEPTIONIST know where every single document is? And who knows if the second aide had any better understanding of where to look for such documents? It’s not like the county is a small one-room operation.

One would think that if MEP were serious about writing a truly hard-hitting expose, he would have pursued some authoritative sources a little more vigorously, rather than just noting that the receptionist “made some calls”.

Of course, that would then assume that the good folks at the Beacon actually had some interest in the truth and some internal standards that they had to meet before publishing.

That would further assume that they were actually real journalists rather than hiding behind the safely nebulous term “media activist” that the dean likes to trot out whenever he or his minions can’t be bothered to do any sort of research.

Seriously, you went off the word of a secretary and an ‘aide’ who, for all we know, could be nothing more than a co-op or an intern?! I certainly hope you guys know a good libel defense lawyer, because if you keep presenting as fact this kind of half-assed tripe built off of less than authoritative sources, you’ll be needing one sooner rather than later.

JFD says:
26 Sep 2007  at  11:17 am | #

#7: “Michael asked at least two county employees for the environmental study and they both told him there was none done.”

Had he asked the janitor, that would have made it three; and they still wouldn’t have been the correct person to ask.

Gloyd is done says:
26 Sep 2007  at  11:40 am | #

Gloyd—you’ve chosen for yourself one heck of an impressive team.  Way to go.

says:
26 Sep 2007  at  01:01 pm | #

In what organization does the RECEPTIONIST know where every single document is?—from anon, #8

Part of the receptionist’s job is to direct people and inquiries to the proper person.  She also acts as a gatekeeper.  She is the one to whom I have first talked to have other requests fulfilled.  No one has ever said that I am following the wrong procedure.  She made at least one phone call and disappeared to talk to someone about my question.  Her answer was that no environmental site assessment (ESA) had been made.  Short of having the county administrator sit at the receptionist’s desk, what other procedure should be used?

Please also note that the county’s acceptance of the Kahn’s site contained no mention of any disclosure by Sara Lee’s.  Further, the response at this late date by the county is vague.  Mr. Aluotto claims that Phase I and II ESA’s were done, but did not provide any results or even a summary.  Nor did he offer to provide a copy of the ESA even though THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL REQUEST. 

As seen above, the Beacon has requested to know how we can request the ESA.  Another party has made a formal, direct request for the ESA.

formerly f says:
26 Sep 2007  at  03:50 pm | #

Had he asked the janitor, that would have made it three; and they still wouldn’t have been the correct person to ask.

that has to be the funniest thing i have read on the internet in years.

No one has ever said that I am following the wrong procedure. 

i will when you grow up to become a real journalist you will need to get past the receptionist and talk with someone that knows what they are doing.  practice saying this in the mirror “To whom should i speak to find out why an assessment wasn’t done” That way she will find you the correct person and they will tell you that one was done and give you the information you need.

anyone with any follow through at all would not have simply talked to the receptionist and left.

anon says:
26 Sep 2007  at  03:55 pm | #

MEP, Dean - Stay cool, stay focused, ignore the peanut gallery, and keep up the good work. Many people appreciate what you’re doing.

anon says:
26 Sep 2007  at  03:55 pm | #

Part of the receptionist’s job is to direct people and inquiries to the proper person.  She also acts as a gatekeeper.

That’s all nice and good, and certainly egalitarian of you to treat the receptionist as the mouthpiece of the County.

But it still doesn’t change the fact that you failed to insist to meet with—and get an authoritative answer directly from—an authorized and accountable representative of the County before spouting off. Of course, if you’d done that, you ran a very big risk of having your rant against the county defused before you could ever bluster.

Instead, you decided to go ahead with your insightful expose of how the man was trying to pull a fast one over on the good people of Hamilton County, only to have an apparently authorized representative of the county defuse your entire premise by saying “uh, we actually do have the proper documentation, and it’s all clear.”

So rather than having an authoritative voice on record with which to rebut that assertion, you are left with the always effective “uh, he must be lying; the receptionist told me otherwise” rhetorical gambit.

At least, that’s how I see real journalists—or even effective bloggers—approaching the situation. How ‘media activists’ approach it, I’m not sure, but based on what I’ve seen here, I think they must just make things up as they go along.

says:
26 Sep 2007  at  04:07 pm | #

Anon #14:

Don’t employees at Children’s Hospital have better things to do than troll blogs?

says:
26 Sep 2007  at  04:08 pm | #

At least, that’s how I see real journalists—or even effective bloggers—approaching the situation.

Oh, sorry, maybe you should stick to Brian Griffin’s blog for some original news you won’t find anywhere else.

Find another local blogger who does not make any money doing better work than we are.

Freedom Fighters says:
26 Sep 2007  at  05:07 pm | #

.

Since when should we take a government’s written response as fact ? The Beacon did an excellent job. The receptionist is probably the only individual in any organization that knows everything that is going on.

Why did the assessment not come attached to the response ?

What other volunteer, new media, group receives the attention that the hometown Cincinnati Beacon does ?

There are those in the community that appreciate the Beacon and their efforts, even when not in agreement.

What other media outlet questioned the site ?

When you ask tough question, you take the risk of getting things wrong; however, the Beacon is still right on this one.

Show us the study !

.

says:
26 Sep 2007  at  05:23 pm | #

anon, MEP can only operate on the information that he’s given from the County. It’s not his fault the county gave him bad information. The receptionist went and asked somebody (one would assume that would know the answer or try to find out if they didn’t, instead of just giving out bad information) and they gave him an answer that happened to be wrong.

The bottom line is that when given the correct information it was published right away. That’s more than can be said for many media outlets in this city.

If you guys can do better, we’d love to see it. If you would like to see better work then we’ll be happy to accept your contributions. If you don’t like our work then please move along a stop using up our bandwidth.

MEP, is a great citizen watchdog and has certainly out performed you all. Keep up the great work Michael, when you’ve got this many anonymous detractors you must be doing something right!

JFD says:
26 Sep 2007  at  11:09 pm | #

JJ#18: “Keep up the great work Michael, when you’ve got this many anonymous detractors you must be doing something right!”

Does that mean, because you also have so many anonymous supporters, you must be doing something wrong?

anon2000 says:
27 Sep 2007  at  01:14 am | #

I support the CSP, and I certainly don’t appreciate the low-ball tactics they’ve imployed of late (personally I think it’s a disgrace) but, MEP is right.

The law requires any government worker - even if it’s the janitor - to forward all public records requests to the proper personnel if they, themselves, are not trained to provide the information accurately and timely to the public.

You can NOT fault MEP for this miscommunication - the county worker should be reported for giving false information and “re-trained” - she subverted a public right and put an honest (though on the safety plan misguided lol) man up for ridicule ---- it could’ve been worse.

As to who to go to: the best practice is to go to the PR person as your second hit when the first provides you with info that looks juicy - like in this case.  It assures that your hard work and efforts aren’t wasted based on one, or two, incompetent employees.

By the way, I think these personal attacks (though I have slipped myself a few times) and the targeting of persons because of their position on this (or any issue) is getting really juvenile --- I mean geez, can’t ya hold someone’s feet to the fire without insulting him personally?

And Dean, I hold you responsible for the tone of this blog lately - you have led the antics with your ridiculous assaults on people, on issues that have nothing to do with anything.  Pull it together.

Can’t we just attack the relevant facts and stop attacking each other - I mean, a little twitch here and there is one thing, but geez....

Jason Gloyd says:
27 Sep 2007  at  01:13 pm | #

Michael wasn’t told by the receptionist, “I don’t know”, he was told “there is none.” Two completely different statements.  I don’t know who the employee was that was called to confirm that answer, but she did confirm, that there was none done.  If an environmental study has been completed prior to the county taking over ownership of the land, all the county has to do is hand it over and I’m sure Michael would report factually on it.

Anon says:
28 Sep 2007  at  11:17 am | #

Anon #14:

Don’t employees at Children’s Hospital have better things to do than troll blogs?

Oh no! The dean can look up the IP address based on where I posted! Next thing you know, he’ll be telling you I use a Mac and surf using Safari.

I can assure you, my posts did nothing to interfere with my duties or productivity this week. But If you’re going to be questioning the use of my time and the network location of the computer from which I am posting, be sure you advise all your other posters that they should only be posting from their home networks, on their own time, and on their own equipment when they sing your praises. You wouldn’t want to get a reputation for attacking a commentor’s posting habits instead of their positions unfairly, would you?

Now, as to the substance of my criticism of Mr. Patton’s attempt at research, my questions were legitimate, and for a site that proclaims it is the place where divergent views collide, I would have hoped you would have provided a better response than calling my questions and concerns with Mr. Patton’s methodology a ‘troll’.

As to Mr. Patton’s research, I would like some clarification. Did Mr. Patton actually file a written Public Records Request in order to ensure that his request was clearly understood, reviewed, and returned in kind? Or did he just ask the receptionist and watch her make a couple of calls? If it’s the former, Hamilton County would have been required by their own policy to respond to the request in kind, and again, this would have led to a more substantial story. Instead, the story becomes whether or not:

a) the receptionist understood the request
b) the receptionist answered the request to the best of her ability OR directed the request to the appropriate person
c) the receptionist received incorrect information intentionally or unintentionally
d) Mr. Patton cared how solid his information was, as long as he got to write an inflammatory piece here?

In any case, the story becomes one of rumor, innuendo, and assumption rather than one based on facts and public records.

I can appreciate that you guys don’t get paid to do this, but if that’s going to be your excuse whenever you get cuaght making simple mistakes like failing to conduct a records request in writing, well, don’t expect to be seen as anything more than the equivalent of the intarweb’s Bill Cunningham.

You may not view yourselves as journalists, but what you’re attempting to do here is journalism, and fair or not, that’s how you are being judged. And frankly, that’s why I’m being harsh here. I would LIKE for Cincinnati to have an independent source of commentary that would stand up to the same scrutiny that traditional media is held to, but until you guys figure out how to put verifiable substance and critical thinking behind your outrage and conspiracy theories, you are more like Griff than you’d like to believe.

says:
28 Sep 2007  at  02:49 pm | #

Falsehoods Unbound - was Patton referring to his work. He has gotten too close to Brinkman and apparently some of Brinkman’s sleaze has rubbed off on Patton. Very sloppy fact finding or alleged fact collecting in Patton’s case when you rely on the word of a receptionist. Should have asked the receptionist with whom she was speaking. Was the receptionist taking the word of Larry the filing clerk? Should have multiple sources. It appears Patton allows his hatred of others who take a different stance on a particular issue to stand in the way of sound and reasonable reporting. We have enough clowns on council who jump the gun and are continually making an ass out of themselves without adding another of Patton’s ilk. Of course, I am not too worried about Patton even sniffing victory, I will be amazed if he can top his last pitiful figures in his embarrassing failed run for council.

Anon says:
29 Sep 2007  at  05:29 pm | #

Michael told the story in an acurate way, including who he talked to. He opened the discussion and it will be interesting where it leads. The ones that throw stones from their corporate cubicals are a funny bunch. They have nothing to say so they say nothing. The difference is they use a lot of words to obfuscate another bad deal from our representatives. Good job Michael. Where is the report and what kind of “gift” did we get this time. Are we picking up another corporate tab?

Thisisgreat says:
08 Oct 2007  at  06:25 pm | #

MEP does not have a clue.  But that would be insulting the clueless.  If the Beacon in its journalistic integrity really cares, hire your own expert to refute the ESA.  Put up or shut up.