You decide.
The other candidate for alderman in the second ward claims on his web page that in September 2004, "we actually were drinking contaminated water." Let's take a closer look at the unadulterated facts.
In the May 20, 2005 Sanitary Survey, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation wrote as follows on this subject:
On 11 November 2004, the then-Director of the Water Department wrote the following memorandum to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen:
I apologize for the poor quality of the copy, but my copy is not good quality.
The substance of Mr. Woodard's memo is that immediately upon being notified of the presence of coliforms, the Water Department, working closely with TDEC, performed follow up and additional sampling. All follow up and additional samples tested negative for the presence of total coliforms. "Therefore," Mr. Woodard wrote, "staff is confident that the positive test results were not an indication of contaminated drinking water, but rather associated with testing procedures." As is obvious, TDEC did not shut down the water department or otherwise act to protect the public from the so-called contaminated drinking water.
Subsequently, working closely with TDEC, the city has discovered that some of the procedures previously used by our staff in collecting samples may have a tendency to contaminate the samples. The city staff has retrained on collection methodology and continues to work to improve in this area.
It is unfortunate that the city lost points on the sanitary survey for the contaminated samples and for the untimely notification of the customers of the system of the contamination. Neither of those unfortunate facts, however, supports the claim that "we actually were drinking contaminated water."
In short, it is highly unlikely that any citizen actually ever received contaminated drinking water.
In the May 20, 2005 Sanitary Survey, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation wrote as follows on this subject:
On 11 November 2004, the then-Director of the Water Department wrote the following memorandum to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen:
I apologize for the poor quality of the copy, but my copy is not good quality.
The substance of Mr. Woodard's memo is that immediately upon being notified of the presence of coliforms, the Water Department, working closely with TDEC, performed follow up and additional sampling. All follow up and additional samples tested negative for the presence of total coliforms. "Therefore," Mr. Woodard wrote, "staff is confident that the positive test results were not an indication of contaminated drinking water, but rather associated with testing procedures." As is obvious, TDEC did not shut down the water department or otherwise act to protect the public from the so-called contaminated drinking water.
Subsequently, working closely with TDEC, the city has discovered that some of the procedures previously used by our staff in collecting samples may have a tendency to contaminate the samples. The city staff has retrained on collection methodology and continues to work to improve in this area.
It is unfortunate that the city lost points on the sanitary survey for the contaminated samples and for the untimely notification of the customers of the system of the contamination. Neither of those unfortunate facts, however, supports the claim that "we actually were drinking contaminated water."
In short, it is highly unlikely that any citizen actually ever received contaminated drinking water.
posted by Alderman Dana McLendon at 10:21 AM
4 Comments:
Dana,
Thank you for "Just the facts, m'am, and nothing but the facts."
So far I have not sprouted an extra eye from the Franklin water.
The evidence of coliform is always dealt with as an emergency issue in the USA.
Thank you for the cold, hard truth.
My loyalty is to the facts.
Let's be clear about this. I'm not taking a hit for Mr. Johnson. Posts on this and other blogs have repeatedly accused Mr. Johnson of lying to the BOMA. I've seen no evidence that he lied to the BOMA. An accusation that someone lied is as serious an accusation as can be leveled against a person who holds a position of public trust. I am in a position to comment on whether I think Mr. Johnson lied to us, and I simply do not believe that he did. If you want to call that "taking a hit for Jay," fine. I think of it as telling the public that whatever problems we had and have, one problem I don't think we've had is deliberate deceit by Mr. Johnson.
Now, to answer the questions posed by Tom Turkey, I have the following:
1. If by "the problem" you mean the problems that led to the 28 score on the May 20, 2005 sanitary survey, Mr. Johnson has said that he learned of at least most of those problems by reading the May 20, 2005 sanitary survey. I believe him because neither I nor any of the other aldermen were aware of the scope of the problems identified in the sanitary survey. If any of us had known of the problems that led to the 28, the remedies would have been under way long before May 20, 2005. It defies logic to believe that anyone would rather attempt to conceal those problems than deal with them; this was never a problem that could be concealed. Ask yourself why no alderman raised the alarm; I hope all reasonable minds conclude that we did not know.
Let me be clear also about this: I place heavy blame on Mr. Johnson for his ignorance of the issues at the water department. It was and is his job to know about these problems and to advise the BOMA of them and to recommend action as necessary to solve the problems. He failed to do that. This has undermined my faith in Mr. Johnson, but not yet to the point that I believe he should be fired. I am measuring Mr. Johnson's performance over the nearly eight years that I have personally observed him in the job, and on balance I find him worthy of my trust and the job. Further erosion of my faith could, of course, change my position.
2. Mr. Johnson informed the BOMA by placing a copy of the sanitary survey in the mailbox of the BOMA members shortly after he had it. I believe I had it the day it arrived or the next day, but I'm at city hall almost every day. I feel sure all BOMA members had it within a day or two.
3. Obviously the necessary corrective steps were not taken in time to prevent the 28 score. However, since then, immediate and thorough corrective measures have been taken. Some of the corrective measures will take some time to implement (ordering equipment, upgrading training, etc.) and others have been resolved already. I have very, very high confidence in the acting director. TDEC has been favorably impressed by the remedial measures, as well. I think it fair to say that whatever atmosphere in the department permitted the 28 has been transformed into an atmosphere that will never tolerate that kind of result again.
To answer Fieldstone Family:
I appreciate the trust the people in the second ward have placed in me in two past elections. While this water department fiasco has been an embarassment and worse, I respectfully submit that I am the better candidate for election in October. I ask for your continued trust and your vote(s). Thanks for your consideration.
Coliform: A broad class of bacteria found in our environment, including the feces of man and other warm-blooded animals.
Post a Comment
<< Home