Students appeared satisfied?
IN A POST two days ago, I looked at the administration’s webpage about the contamination issue, and noted that it did not even list the potential symptoms of exposure to dioxins or PCBs. This is called linguistic detoxification — say it’s safe and people think it is.
That same webpage mentions the following, about student involvement in a discussion over the summer:
“Early this summer, the college arranged for state and county health officials and PCB cleanup experts to meet with the concerned individuals to provide them with information about the cleanup and subsequent testing. At the conclusion of the two meetings, the group had no more questions and appeared to be satisfied with the information that the scientists and other administrators shared.”
This is not true. I realize it says, they “appeared satisfied,” but what are they talking about, the expressions on their faces? Generally in a discussion with state officials, people agree verbally or in writing, not by appearance.
No more questions? The last meeting had to end at some point. Students in fact had, and have, a lot of questions, such as how they are going to get any cooperation at all from a SUNY campus and a state health department that — from my conversations with them — are stonewalling on new testing, and have done so for years. To be clear, SUNY and the health department resist testing possible toxins sources at every turn, and if this issue has one recurring theme, this is it.
In actual fact, student leaders and their advocats are following a Student Senate resolution passed this past April 24, which says, in part:
“The Student Senate demands that the SUNY administration at New Paltz willingly participate in comprehensive split-sample PCB and dioxin testing of ventilation systems, heating units and electrical conduits in the four dormitories in question (Capen, Gage, Bliss & Scudder). Split-sampling will consist of simultaneous sampling by two separate New York State certified laboratories, one chosen by the SUNY administration at New Paltz and the other by the president of the Student Association.”
That is where it stands today. I’ll look more closely at this issue in an upcoming edition. But I will leave you with this idea: as you can see, this is a complex issue and it does not lend itself to quick summary except to say there is much test data that never existed because samples were never taken (of heat and vents, for example). This is an issue designed for an environmental consultant and several lawyers to fight — not young students.
Students need our help on this, standing up to administrators who know all too well how to mislead them.
Tomorrow, I’ll look at some of the strange things they tell reporters about the contamination issue.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply