Mark Templeton's new attempt to 'manage' E.Coli-Gate is raising eyebrows: he told Senate investigators the E. coli levels weren't a health risk, even though more than half of the areas tested exceeded federal standards. His defense? He says he thought recent rainfall had only temporarily elevated E. coli levels, and "E. coli bacteria typically die off in two to four days after a sample is taken."
There's only one explanation: Templeton is trying to make everyone think he is insane. The health threat was undeniable.
His argument is that by the time the DNR got done tripping over its bureaucratic shoelaces, the test results MIGHT have been outdated. That's a startling admission of incompetence, but it's just the beginning. The DNR had no way to know if rainfall was the sole cause, and it actively considered the possibility Templeton's theory was wrong. Susanne Medley gave Senate investigators a chilling account of one of her meetings with Templeton:
They must realize now how terrible this sounds. Some parts of the lake had higher E. coli levels than their equipment was capable of measuring - and their course of action is to maybe try to do something before they hit the five year mark? How many people would have gotten sick if E.Coli-Gate had never been uncovered?
Other evidence, which was certainly available to the DNR at the time, pointed to the conclusion that the health risk was sustained. E. coli exceeded safe levels 11 times in 2009. Compare that to 4 closures in the 5 preceding years. Does Templeton think that's all because of rainfall?
The story just doesn't add up.
-If they were certain there was no health threat, why didn't they just release the results?
-If they were certain there was no health threat, why did it take them a month to put together a report explaining why?
-Why did Bindbeutel, Jeff Mazur and Jack Cardetti all lie about who knew what?
-Why did Templeton go along with their lies, adding his own?
Templeton is either dangerously incompetent or he's lying to protect Jay Nixon. It's not hard to narrow down - he still has his job. Nixon will protect him, just like Cardetti, Mazur and Bindbeutel. At the end of the day they need to say "We knew, Nixon didn't."
There's only one explanation: Templeton is trying to make everyone think he is insane. The health threat was undeniable.
His argument is that by the time the DNR got done tripping over its bureaucratic shoelaces, the test results MIGHT have been outdated. That's a startling admission of incompetence, but it's just the beginning. The DNR had no way to know if rainfall was the sole cause, and it actively considered the possibility Templeton's theory was wrong. Susanne Medley gave Senate investigators a chilling account of one of her meetings with Templeton:
I mean, there really hadn’t been any action taken. It was just these numbers. But if they continued to be high over time, you know, well, maybe we should be proactive and actually try to do something before the end of the five years because maybe there’s a sewer system or something that’s causing it that we’re not aware of.
They must realize now how terrible this sounds. Some parts of the lake had higher E. coli levels than their equipment was capable of measuring - and their course of action is to maybe try to do something before they hit the five year mark? How many people would have gotten sick if E.Coli-Gate had never been uncovered?
Other evidence, which was certainly available to the DNR at the time, pointed to the conclusion that the health risk was sustained. E. coli exceeded safe levels 11 times in 2009. Compare that to 4 closures in the 5 preceding years. Does Templeton think that's all because of rainfall?
The story just doesn't add up.
-If they were certain there was no health threat, why didn't they just release the results?
-If they were certain there was no health threat, why did it take them a month to put together a report explaining why?
-Why did Bindbeutel, Jeff Mazur and Jack Cardetti all lie about who knew what?
-Why did Templeton go along with their lies, adding his own?
Templeton is either dangerously incompetent or he's lying to protect Jay Nixon. It's not hard to narrow down - he still has his job. Nixon will protect him, just like Cardetti, Mazur and Bindbeutel. At the end of the day they need to say "We knew, Nixon didn't."
Comments