|
The headline in the Daily News reads:
"Delay in shutting toxic Bronx school sparks
outrage; city sat on shocking test results for 6 months"
The article doesn't describe what triggered the
measurement that led to the initial discovery in January, but that subsequent
sub-grade testing was conducted in March suggests the City was not brushing the
matter under the carpet. If a mistake was made, it was the City choosing
not to be more forthcoming about the process being undertaken.
Was their decision to wait until a more
comprehensive diagnosis was available nefarious in intent? Judging from
the follow-on examination, probably not.
I don't know the backstory. Perhaps the News
thought the NYC schools administration needed to be called out. My
struggle with the article comes from the gratuitous use of scary words and the
rhetorical manipulation of scientific data. And at the end of the day -
was the closing of the school appropriate? Or was it made inevitable by
the press? Perhaps another, less disruptive, means of mitigating the
condition might have been available.
Lesson learned for the administration,
perhaps. But at what cost?
Markus B. Niebanck, P. G.
Principal
Amicus - Strategic Environmental Consulting
580 Second Street
Suite
260
Oakland, CA 94607
510.693.1241 (c)
510.465.4472 (f)
|