I was not going to respond on here unless it became a series of personal attacks. That has happened, so I will respond.
First, here are the statements I made on the other bulletin boards:
I was contacted by Robert Hinderliter on 5/17/14 and asked by him to conduct an interview and write an article based on his answers so that he could share his side of the story. He wanted to respond somewhere other than the industry bulletin boards. The information in the piece was based solely on answers given in that interview (as I stated in the actual article) and was posted on our website. It is IMPORTANT to note that this piece was not requested, nor paid for by the PWNA. It was not paid for by Robert Hinderliter either.
I contacted OC representative Jenna Voss -- who is the representative that Robert Hinderliter worked with and who initially contacted the PWNA -- on the morning of May 21. We had a brief conversation, and the questions I asked were corroborated: Did OC contact the PWNA? (Yes.) Did the PWNA write Orange County's BMPs? (No.) What were they were looking for during the public comment period? (Primarily, to make sure they were clear and easy to understand.) On this question she elaborated, adding that sometimes in an attempt to get more specific, things actually get more complicated. I took this to mean that the BMPs that Robert posted were long, as some people had already commented online that they were hard to understand. She also emphasized that industry members needed to understand that they had little to no control over changing certain aspects of the BMPs that may be considered acceptable in other parts of the country because California fell under a different set of rules. She continued by explaining that if people made suggestions that had to do with the specific requirements and regulations, they likely could not do much about them.
Since the article was published, OC Stormwater Program Chief Richard Boon has said that the information presented by Robert Hinderlter has "badly misrepresented the intentions and actions of a local public agency." They also said they do not plan to change their BMPs, which are detailed in BMP Fact Sheet IC24. Richard Boon is Jenna Voss's boss and I have corroborated that he does not plan to change the original BMPs.
However, I now have a number of questions. Were Jenna and I inadvertently discussing different documents? Why did she simply not tell me there was no public comment period when I asked? Why did she elaborate about the document changes being long and harder to understand? And lastly, why would Robert contact me and ask me to write an article based on lies, especially knowing that the UAMCC leaders would be going through it with fine toothed comb?
I have made an official request using the Freedom of Information Act to try to figure out whether this was a blatant lie, a miscommunication, or perhaps a combination of both. The OC department has 30 days to get me the information, and I will also need some time to sift through it -- and possibly conduct follow up. Believe me, I want to know the truth in this situation as much or possibly more than all of you. I will not, however, commenting further at this time.
Next repsonse:
One thing I have tried to build my 20+ year career on is professional integrity. I believe in admitting when I'm wrong. In this case, while I accurately reported the information that was given to me, and while I did state that the article was based on the information provided by Robert Hinderliter, obviously the information was not the same as what was written by Richard Boon. Again, whether that was a blatant lie or a communication breakdown or a combination of both, I don't know, but I will work my damnedest to find out and do what I can to find the truth. One thing I hate ALMOST as much as being lied
about is being lied to, and if that's what it was, I
will report it. However, I'm not going to assume that it's a clear-cut case of being lied to until I see evidence.
As for Scott Stone, I want to publicly say I don't believe he did anything wrong by going to Richard Boon. Obviously, Boon had the final say on what was going on so he was the person who needed to be contacted. I went to the wrong rep and was given bad information. Scott did the right thing.
I personally think the best thing that could happen now is for both sides to stop flinging assumed accusations at each other and look to see what really happened here. I assumed the information I was given was authoritative, and I was wrong. I've had at least two false assumptions made about me on PWI, and they are wrong. As the saying goes, when we assume it only makes an ass out of you (u) and me.
Now to go through your points:
As for Las Vegas, I stand behind what I wrote in the article about the event. I have stated here publicly that I was disappointed that the cleaning did not happen, but it seemed to bother me more than anyone else I spoke with. Overall, the people I interviewed – and I interviewed whoever happened to respond to my emails – felt the event was worthwhile. I realize it’s not the article you wanted. It is my understanding – because Ron sent me a text in March with the cover of the new UAMCC newsletter – that you have your own communications outlet so I would suggest running the article there.
Did I report on what happened behind the scenes? No. Do I know? No. I have tried to make it clear that I do not want to be an investigative journalist, and I have every right to make that decision. I want
eClean to be a positive, practical resource that helps people build their businesses.
Before you start attacking me on the non-investigative journalism statement, let me be the first to say I realize now that I should not have interviewed Robert about the BMPs because it goes against my mission statement. Perhaps it’s because I’ve known and respected Robert for over 20 years, and I’ve seen how he fought for contractors back in the early 90’s when no one else would. Perhaps it’s because I’ve been on the receiving end of the lies and assumptions from the leaders of the UAMCC many times (several today) and I wanted to help him have a place besides PWI for his side of the story to be heard. Perhaps it’s because I’m tired of the reckless assumptions and incorrect allegations that have been made on countless industry members on this bulletin board, and with zero apologies. So when Robert called and asked me to interview him about the BMP situation, I did. Now it’s my obligation to figure out and report where the discrepancies occurred.
You asked why I haven’t talked to Robert since? Why I haven’t talked to the PWNA BOD? You are assuming I have not. Just because I haven’t reported it yet doesn’t mean I haven’t done it. I am not reporting anything until I have the facts. You can argue shouldn’t I have done that the first time? Yes, I should have. Hindsight = 20/20
Now, on to your many false accusations.
- The articles were not requested nor paid for by the PWNA. They were not paid for by Robert Hinderliter, or by anyone else for that matter.
- I did not put the document together and I had not seen it or heard about it before it was posted online last week. That is one of the big questions I have as well.
Those are the two regarding the BMP situation, but several other accusations and lies have been told in this thread, so I will tackle them as well.
- I did not “make up dialogue” in the document I put together on why I will not work with the UAMCC while Ron Musgraves is in charge. I did not make up the emails or screenshots I included in the document
- I have not posted anything about your family, other than when we were “friends” I would comment on Facebook about how beautiful your children are. I have a hard time believing I would say something ugly about your family, but if I did, please show me where and I will remove it. You continually send me a relentless barrage of texts accusing me of this, then you direct me to a post on another bulletin board that I do not own and a comment by someone that was not me. The comment was made on a thread that I started, but my thread and comments had nothing to do with your family. I have no power to remove those comments.
- I have never made up “blogs.” You sent me a batch of confusing texts earlier this year accusing me of things and I had no clue what you’re talking about. You said I wrote something for “Willie.” It took awhile, but I figured out it was a comment by someone that was made when the UAMCC document was posted on our site. I believe you are accusing me – again – of making up posts and using people’s names? I’m not even sure if that was what you meant – “false testimony” was the term you used – but I took the comments down out of courtesy because they were unprofessional. Then I received messages about the fact that I’m now hiding them.
- Next, you’re saying you “fired me?” From what? Offering you a free ad and article space, as long as it was provided by the UAMCC and I didn’t have to produce it?
Why will I not work with the UAMCC? See the above.
I would like to support the UAMCC, I really would. But as I’ve stated before, I’m not going to work with the organization while its current leader continuously harasses and lies about me and others.
