|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
October 2, 2005EditorialAloia deserves credit for putting public firstThe issue: Our view: See Related Story: Now he needs to follow through and make sure everyone else does, too. Aloia made it clear last week that every report on the collapse of the county's ill-fated septage plant will be made public. "There will be nothing that won't be made public," Aloia said. "You have to trust us on that one." Aloia's assertion directly contradicted comments from an attorney for the county who said he planned to use a claim of attorney-client privilege to keep some documents from taxpayers so the poor dears wouldn't get "thoroughly confused." A nice gesture, perhaps, but no thanks. Aloia deserves credit for stepping up to the plate on this one and affirming that the very best way to serve the public is to answer concerns clearly, openly and in public. Even the "confusing" bits. From the day some storage tanks at the month-old, $7.8 million plant ruptured, everyone involved has been running for cover in terms of deciding who did or didn't do what they were supposed to do. Obviously, rebuilding the plant will be costly and no one wants to be stuck with the tab. But the accountability problem runs deeper than that. The firm that designed and oversaw construction of the plant is a longtime county contractor with strong local ties. The situation was further muddied when multiple firms hired by insurance companies to investigate the implosion offered varying views of what happened - all in their clients' best interests, of course. The county's Board of Public Works waited months to hire an outside firm to determine what happened. And the BPW voted to absolve Gourdie-Fraser, the engineering firm, and Christman Co., the contractor, of excessive engineering costs related to the rebuilding project. That decision was later reversed. All of this maneuvering makes it essential that documents produced by the county's independent engineer are released to the public to ensure that any final determination of blame - or absolution - is backed by the facts. It's hard to understand why board attorney Michael Houlihan made his assertion that only a final report would be released to the public and the board in the first place. Houlihan claimed that because he was the one who hired NTH Consultants Ltd. and they report directly to him, he can declare the report attorney "work product" and confidential and thus exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests. That is, to put it politely, a lot of septage. Houlihan works for the Board of Public Works and the consultant is being paid by public money. The report was prepared for the board, not Houlihan, and any claim to the contrary is smoke. The effort smacks of a cover-up, or at least preparations for a cover-up, and that's the last thing this board and this process needs. Board members need to stand up and say clearly that they side with Aloia and that all the reports - the good, bad and ugly - will be released to the public. This isn't about making anyone look good or look bad or offering cover for someone. It's about finding out what happened to the plant, determining why it happened, fixing the problem and getting it rebuilt. And not on the taxpayers' dime.
|
|
