Other
transcripts
Transcripts
February 15, 2005
Host:
Michael Grant
Topics:
· Phoenix Water Investigation;
· Arizona Stories: Governor George Wylie Paul Hunt
In-Studio Guests:
· Phil Gordon, mayor of the City of Phoenix;
· Claude Mattox, Phoenix City Councilman and Chair, Phoenix
Natural Resources subcommittee
>> Michael Grant:
Tonight on "HORIZON", how did one of the largest cities
in America lose the ability to produce clean water? The city of
Phoenix releases results of an investigation into the events that
triggered a boil water advisory. That episode is just the latest
in a number of problems with the city's water department. Plus,
in honor of statehood week, we introduce you to Arizona's first
governor. George Hunt was considered a man of the people and is
perhaps one of the state's most colorful and effective leaders.
>> Announcer:
"HORIZON is made possible by the friends of Channel 8, members
who provide financial support to this Arizona PBS station. Thank
you.
>> Michael Grant:
Good evening, I'm Michael Grant. Welcome to "HORIZON."
Three weeks ago the city of Phoenix issued a "boil water"
advisory to residents. A preliminary report released today found
that while the water did have visible particles in it, the water
was safe to drink. The inquiry into the boil water advisory given
by the City of Phoenix Water Department found that other cities
were able to treat and use the same water that shut down a Phoenix
water treatment plant. In a presentation to the Phoenix City Council
Subcommittee, City Auditor Randy Spenla also noted that water
department employees either called the wrong numbers of county
health officials or called numbers that went unanswered in the
middle of the night.
>> Randy Spenla:
And I think what we learned is the time of night really complicated
our response. We weren't prepared to communicate to make a serious
decision in the middle of the night. And we are going to have
to be, we're going have to put processes and build things in to
take the time of day out of the equation because the next disaster,
the next situation it may not show up from 9 to 5 and we simply
weren't ready to communicate that evening.
>> Michael Grant:
This is video of the Val Vista water plant that was shut down
because of turbid water. The city of Phoenix has a total of five
plants, but two were already shut down for routine cleaning and
maintenance of canals that supply the plant's water. The city
auditor noted the closure of those two plants contributed to the
city's limited water supply.
>> Randy Spenla:
One possibility is that instead of taking both plants off-line
at the same time, it is possible to keep one plant on-line while
the other is in a dry area of the canal. And that's at least an
alternative or something that needs further consideration by the
experts when they get involved.
>> Michael Grant:
Joining me now is Phil Gordon. He is the mayor of the City of
Phoenix and City Councilman, Claude Mattox. Councilman Mattox
chairs the city's natural resources subcommittee. Gentlemen, welcome
back.
>> Claude Mattox:
Good evening, Michael.
>> Phil Gordon:
Good evening.
>> Michael Grant:
Mayor this was put together, this report was obviously put together
in just a couple of weeks. How confident or secure are you in
at least the tentative conclusions being reached here?
>> Phil Gordon:
I'm very confident. We committed that we would have an open, transparent
process. The auditors went and spent over 600 hours interviewing
nearly 70 individuals, outsiders and people involved in the whole
incident including myself and my colleagues, did a complete timeline,
reviewed all the documents and did a top to bottom research and
review and audit. Based on a lot of questions that our public
wanted answered and that we wanted answered. First and foremost
was the water safe? Answer was verified yes. Could the incident
have been prevented? The answer is yes. Number three was whether
the break down in communication internal and external to the public
and to our system could have been prevented and could have been
better. And the answer to that is yes.
>> Michael Grant:
Councilman Mattox, it seems to me that the fact that the water
was safe is a good news and bad news story. The good news is clearly
the water is safe. The bad news is was the right decision made
to issue the boil water advisory if the water was safe?
>> Claude Mattox:
We can't second guess that decision. We didn't know at the time
whether the water was in fact safe or not. We know now because
there were tests being done on the water at that time and subsequent
tests that were being done that gave us the information that we
know now. The circumstances that brought us to that point was
that the plant had been dumped and they didn't know the quality
of the water coming in. So when they released water into the system
and that was to maintain the pressure so that we didn't lose the
potential to fight fires and to keep the pressure in the system,
which would not have allowed air to get in the system which could
have complicated the matters even worse. At this time we now know
that the water was safe. But we were being cautious so we would
prevent any public safety concerns.
>> Michael Grant:
Were there any protocols or procedures in place to deal with that
kind of situation? Turbidity itself, the water doesn't look very
good, it's basically dirt in the water. And there is a federal
standard on it. On the other hand, it only indicates that there
may be a problem, it may provide a place for bacteria to grow.
What's your opinion on it? Was the trigger pulled prematurely
or should not have been pulled at all?
>> Phil Gordon:
First of all, we want to make sure that our employees, whether
it's in the water department, police department, whatever, do
what they feel is appropriate under the circumstances at the time.
>> Michael Grant:
What advice was the county giving on that?
>> Phil Gordon:
One of the things the audit, this is by the way the preliminary
audit, one of the things that the audit found was that unfortunately,
communication didn't exist between our city and the county because
we weren't able to get through. Probably as a result of the city
and not the county. That is being researched further. To make
sure one of the protocols that will be established is a 24 hour
communication process. The other thing that's very important,
you asked whether there are protocols, that notebook my colleague
has brought, those are the protocols. But what the audit also
determined was that you can have the best protocols, the best
plans, but if they are not researched, if they're not trained,
if they're not practiced, nobody knows how to use it. And that
was determined that we need to do that. A lot of things were learned
in this audit that are procedures to help prevent this from happening
in the future, that have already been implemented, communication
procedures both internally and externally so that we keep the
public updated in a more accurate and a more timely basis. Internally,
that we're informed, and a crisis management team is put together
quicker.
>> Michael Grant: Obviously the heavy rain that I think
led to a lot of this problem that occurred in late December, early
January, about three weeks before the problem came up. A lot of
people ask the question, okay, we understand it was 1:30 in the
morning before the problem was perceived and that poses communication
difficulties internally and externally with the public. But you're
sitting there scratching your head saying why was it 1:30 in the
morning three weeks after the situation that occurred that would
lead to the excess turbidity in the plant? Why wasn't it factored
in?
>> Claude Mattox:
Well, we had known there was issues and the plant was dealing
with these issues for several days. And what we have found is
that the design of the plant which was, it was built back in 1970,
the second plant was build in the '80s, that the plant was built
prior to some regulatory changes that changed the standard for
turbidity and also it changed the standards required for discharging
water into the canal. Historically, we had been able to discharge
water into the canal, we couldn't do that anymore which caused
water to be recycled through the plant. And what was happening
was that dirty water was being recycled and we were adding more
dirty water and it was being recycled, and it had gotten to the
point where it clogged the system up. We were back-flushing the
system and the system overflowed, it flooded one of the plants
and one of the plants went down. All of these things we have now
learned through the process.
>> Michael Grant:
I understood that a step that could have been taken would have
included dumping of the plant into the canal.
>> Claude Mattox:
That's what ultimately got the water quality back to the level
that it needed to be. We dumped the plant.
>> Michael Grant:
Was that a federal violation?
>> Claude Mattox:
We will find that out. There is a procedure that you have to go
through in order to get permission to do that. We will now have
to go through the process after the fact. And, ADEQ, the Department
of Environmental Quality will review that and tell us if we have
had a violation of the discharge. And we'll have to deal with
that as we go through this process.
>> Michael Grant:
Other cities were facing similar problems, the report points out
but still were able to successfully treat their water. I think
one of the issues was the City of Phoenix ran out of lime, which
would have been one of the things they could treat with. And again,
if you know there's a potential of a problem several days earlier,
why did we run out of lime?
>> Phil Gordon:
Again, this audit was to find out what went wrong and make sure
it doesn't happen again. My colleague and I are committed that
it doesn't happen again, and we have learned a lot. One of the
issues was, could we have been treating it differently? I think
what the audit at least preliminarily determined is that there
were a number of circumstances including the early warning signs
that had they been followed could have prevented the issue of
1:30 in the morning running out of alternatives short of doing
the running out of water. Lime could have been one possibility,
the other one again is dumping the water earlier, which under
certain circumstances is allowed. We learned that some of the
employees were recommending that earlier.
>> Michael Grant:
Right.
>> Phil Gordon:
It really is, and I think what my colleague and I are committed
to is from our perspective, we're not going to second guess that
decision at 1:30, whether that warning should have been issued
or not, we want to make sure to err on any side of caution as
opposed to being sorry later.
>> Michael Grant
: If these things are going to be further investigated in the
balance, why did you run out of the lime several days earlier,
why was it perceived at 1:30 in the morning instead of earlier,
etc?
>> Phil Gordon:
Michael, absolutely. Including the recommendation of the auditors
that we've already agreed to, let's get an independent outside
expert to look at the design of the plant, also to look at whether
we can use more wells, that hasn't worked with the city that isn't
involved in this type of construction with the city to analyze
the auditor's findings, we're going to make sure that it doesn't
happen again.
>> Claude Mattox:
Michael, to answer your question, also, Tempe, Chandler and Mesa
were warned about the water quality issue that we were having,
and they were able to basically divorce themselves from our system
and go to well water or ground water pumping which supplemented
their supply. When they did go back on our system, they were able
to keep their production low enough to where they could treat
the water and not have the same problems that we had, again being
supplemented by ground water. We didn't have that ability.
>> Michael Grant:
Does this report point a very strong finger at the Water Services
Director and fix much of the blame there?
>> Claude Mattox:
What it does is it identifies problems that were within the system.
I'm not going to blame any one person. I think overall, the Water
Services Department needs to look at their communications process.
They need to look at their emergency procedures. They need to
practice what's in this book when they have a problem and then
we as a city need to look at our overall process in communications
and emergency processes to make sure that we don't have a repeat
of this problem with other departments in the city of Phoenix.
>> Michael Grant:
Has he been relieved of his duties?
>> Phil Gordon:
He has been relieved of those duties, temporarily assigned on
special assignment in another area, not related to water.
>> Michael Grant:
An Arizona Republic investigation of the city records shows the
City of Phoenix Water Department received hundreds of state and
federal violations costing the city more than $1.6 million since
1988. The Republic found that top water officials gave inconsistent
responses to state and federal regulators, down played violations
by claiming there was no danger to public health over non-compliance
and gave incorrect and false information to city managers. The
Arizona Republic also reported that Phoenix Water Services Director
Mike Gritzuk was suspended for five days over the way he handled
an earlier audit. Councilman Mattox, I seem to recall talking
to you about the environmental group report about a year and a
half ago. Were you aware of the problems that the Republic discussed?
>> Claude Mattox:
I was not aware of all of the problems at that time. And when
we had the conversation, if I remember, we had the director of
ADEQ here with us, as well, having the same conversation on it
and we were talking about how the report from the natural resources
defense -- I can't -- defense committee or something to that effect
was basically a report about a report. They were talking about
how we weren't -
>> Michael Grant:
Reporting issues, different data sets. Those kind of things. This
seems to indicate that the problems were much more fundamental.
>> Claude Mattox:
Well, I'm not going to -- Now that I know what I know at this
point, that this was symptomatic of some of the issues that we
were dealing with, I was not aware of some of the infractions
prior to myself coming on the Council which was five years ago.
I was aware of some of the things identified in the republic after
the fact, which was the lab issue that Mr. Gritzuk got suspended
for five days on. We now know there was a history of things happening
in the department that ultimately, I would say, in this particular
case the events that occurred on January 24th and 25th brought
Frank Fairbanks the city manager to the point where he felt it
was necessary to reassign Mr. Gritzuk.
>> Michael Grant:
Was the city manager actively kept out of this loop? A million
six should have given some indications to somebody we may have
structural problems here.
>> Phil Gordon:
You know, Michael, this report, what it does is create a time
line and it shows very clearly that not only the city manager
and deputy city manager, senior elected officials were not only
unaware of the protocols that should have been followed that the
plant had problems as early as Saturday, significant problems,
but that until after the process we didn't learn about some of
the problems or weren't notified. The city manager Frank Fairbanks,
under the charter is responsible for the personnel matters, we're
responsible to make sure that it gets fixed. The city manager
determined that in order to have a complete and open audit, seamless,
that he needed to reassign and relieve the director of his duties.
What happens at this point will be up to the city manage on that
and any other personnel. I think you asked a question that I would
like to address based on my review of the report. There was clearly
a culture within the water department that is unhealthy for the
safety of our community and that was --
>> Michael Grant:
How so?
>> Phil Gordon:
To keep information within the actual operation and not follow
the protocols that were established by the city manager and deputy
city manager. Again, not that at 1:30 in the morning somebody
should have issued a boil advisory alert or not, but whether city
management should have been brought in earlier, certainly whether
the elected officials should have been brought in earlier. And
also, after that issue was given to the public at 1:30 in the
morning, then to contact both the city management team and the
elected officials so that we could determine the actions at that
point.
>> Michael Grant:
Councilman Mattox, the problem here is that if these problems
were systemic, going on for a long time, apparently they date
back to at least 1988, okay, you have a problem in the Water Services
Department, but doesn't it speak to the level of supervision and
oversight that the city manager's office was giving to the water
services department? Which I would think would be one of the city's
key departments.
>> Claude Mattox:
Absolutely. It's probably, along with our solid waste people expect
when they turn the tap on, the water is there, and so to answer
your question, Frank Fairbanks is responsible for personnel. What
I understand is that when we ran into issues, Frank took corrective
actions on those issues. To my knowledge, it was a progression
of steps that ultimately ended up with Mr. Gritzuk being suspended
for five days. And I can't tell you what specific investigations
or reviews were done on Mr. Gritzuk because our charter prohibits
City Council getting involved in personnel issues so we have to
respect Frank Fairbanks' decision on that.
>> Michael Grant:
But you do have ability to hire and fire city managers?
>> Phil Gordon:
Mike, let me be clear. First off, we have the top city manager
in this country, I back the city manager and I know all my colleagues
do. The city manager thought he had taken the appropriate action
and that was based on all the information he got, you can only
make decisions based on what you have, he had corrected that.
We learned through this incident that was not the case. When he
learned about it, he immediately took the action of getting him
out of there.
>> Michael Grant:
Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon, we appreciate your being here, talking
to us about it. Councilman, Claude Mattox, our thanks to you as
well.
>> Michael Grant:
In recognition of statehood week, "Horizon" begins a
special series called "Arizona Stories" tonight. These
stories are about significant people, places and events in our
state's history. Tonight we start with someone who is considered
one of Arizona's most colorful politicians. George Hunt was looking
to make a name for himself when he arrived in Globe as a young
man in 1881. By the time he died in Phoenix more than 50 years
later, Hunt established himself as one of the state's most important
citizens ever elected to office.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Arizona's first governor may be the state's most memorable if
not the most recognizable.
>> Melanie Sturgeon:
He was bellicose, he had the big mustache, big physique, wears
the white suits, someone who really knows how to portray himself
politically to get the most mileage out of himself.
>> Paul Atkinson:
George Wylie Paul Hunt, born in 1859 in Huntsville, Missouri,
named after his grandfather. Still in his teens, he left home
seeking work and adventure in Colorado and New Mexico. Hunt made
his way to Arizona a few years later in 1881.
>> Phil McBride:
When he arrived in Globe, he came in like a prospector, wearing
overalls, driving a bull, got a job as a waiter.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Hunt later went to work for a local mercantile and bank called
the Old Dominion Commercial Company. Within 10 years he was its
president. It was in Globe that Hunt found his calling in politics.
>> Melanie Sturgeon:
He was a very friendly person, a very outgoing person. The perfect
politician, I think, so he decided to run for county office. And
that's how he launched his political career.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Hunt lost but in 1892 was elected as a Democrat to the territorial
House of Representatives. He served seven terms in both the House
and Council, what is now the Senate. Hunt was elected to preside
over the Arizona constitutional convention in 1910. At Hunt's
request, the constitution did not give women the right to vote.
>> Melanie Sturgeon:
He felt there was so much controversy in the state at that time
over women's suffrage, that if he championed that in the constitutional
convention, it would sidetrack a number of other issues that were
not more important, but that could have gotten the constitution
down, and he wanted to make sure that we became a state.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Women got the right to vote the year Arizona became a state and
George Wylie Paul Hunt its first governor.
>> Phil McBride:
He lived in the Ford Hotel, when Arizona became a state, and he
walked from downtown Phoenix to the Capitol for the inauguration.
He immediately then authorized the purchase of a car. That walk
was the last time that Hunt walked. The rest of the time he used
a car and a chauffeur.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Hunt used the car to travel the state, always bringing a camera,
pen and paper. He took thousands of pictures and wrote more personal
letters than any other governor.
>>Phil McBride:
He drove constantly. He would pick up hitchhikers. It was not
unusual to invite them to lunch. He identified with --
>> Paul Atkinson:
The poor treatment of prison inmates became a priority with Hunt.
>> Phil McBride:
He was interested in prison reform right down to how they lived.
When he would go down, he would go down frequently. In the night,
he slept in a cell. He would eat in the prison dining hall. He
started the honor system there at the prison.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Hunt used prison work crews to build some of Arizona's first highways.
Executions were even outlawed for a brief period thanks to Hunt's
sheer will and determination. His penchant for the common man
helped him get elected governor a total of seven times. But his
demanding style wore thin on some.
>> Phil McBride:
There were those who felt he was becoming virtually a dictator.
As he ran the later elections, Hunt the 5th, Hunt the 6th, Hunt
the 7th.
>> Paul Atkinson:
Hunt also served as the Ambassador to Siam, what is now Thailand.
While there, he continued his prolific writing, a passion that
proved its worth twenty years earlier. His letters to the daughter
of a Payson rancher helped rekindle a relationship that had broken
off because of the woman's duty to her family's ranch.
>> Female voice:
My dear George, can't you imagine how my heart is torn by this
conflict between my love and duty? My heart is entirely yours.
I must of my own accord send you from me for there is no hope
that I can see, nothing but hard, stern duty. Now and always,
Duet.
>> Male voice:
Miss Duet Ellison, I often wonder if this is to continue always
like this. Is there no sunshine and happiness in the future in
store for me? No whisper of hope, nothing but dreary, dreary blank
for the coming years. Like the hourglass, the sands of our life
are drifting away. And in a few short years, the bell will be
tolled and we pass away and forever. Yours forever, George WP
Hunt.
>> Paul Atkinson:
The legacy of George and Duet Hunt can still be seen today. When
Hunt died in 1934, he was laid to rest next to Duet in a white
pyramid at Phoenix Papago Park.
>> Melanie Sturgeon
: It's sort of a capstone to his life, that there he is as large
as life in his white, out in the middle of Papago Park. You can't
miss it, just like you can't miss him. He really had an indelible
effect on Arizona's early years of statehood. He was a very, very,
I think probably the most important figure as far as Arizona goes
and what ended up happening in our government.
>> Michael Grant:
Tomorrow night, our Arizona story will profile La Casa Vieja in
Tempe. We'll see how the childhood home of Carl Hayden has evolved
over the years into a landmark with a rich history.
>> Merry Lucero:
In honor of Black History Month, "HORIZON" profiles
an award winning black filmmaker and we discuss African-American
cinema. Plus, we tell you an Arizona story about an historic adobe
hacienda built at the edge of the Salt River. La Casa Vieja was
a ferry-house, residence and business and is now a well-known
landmark. Those stories Wednesday on "HORIZON."
>> Michael Grant:
Thanks very much for joining us on a Tuesday. I'm Michael Grant.
Have a great one. Good night.
Back to the top