Thanks to the Papier Boy for highlighting the article in the Express-Times (
read it here) addressing the Easton Suburban Water Authority's warning system in his comment on the recent post (
read it here) on the boil water advisory.
While many non-customers have complained of receiving calls to boil water from a company that does not provide their water, as many customers have complained they were never called. I even got a note from a person with a well who was provided the advisory.
The Express-Times made a post addressing the call system that was apparently implemented one year ago and of which this was the first 'major' test.
Here is the quote from officials along with statistical information:
"In my opinion, it went OK, but it needs to be improved," said Roy White, authority manager. "It needs some tweaking, if you will."
Of 39,140 automated calls placed to warn consumers to boil their water before drinking it, 34,639 were delivered, according to White. The remainder went unanswered or a number had been disconnected.
It would appear from this information that something less than five thousand customers were reached.
The article also notes, however, that:
Authority officials said even though the system is imperfect, they believe it helped generate more awareness and word of mouth about the alert than they would have without it.
This is the section of interest. Without specifically stating that they called non-customers, they are acknowledging that the flaws in the system resulted in word of mouth awareness that would not have occurred without the calls.
Layman's terms - we called unaffected non-customers, who knew we shouldn't have called them, who called us, who hit our web site in huge numbers and shut it down, and then the story got picked up online, in print, and on TV and resulted in the customers we didn't call finding out - mostly.
First test. "OK result". Wrong.
This is a public utility providing a critical resource - water.
Not only did they fail to acknowledge any flaw in their system, they portrayed their flaw as a benefit.
And, in the call I received noting that the advisory was lifted, the call stated specifically that my phone number was affiliated with an Easton Suburban Water Authority customer. I called and asked which customer, but have not yet received a response.
The Express-Times indicated that Easton Suburban purchased this system in anticipation of State Law requiring such a system (
read the article here) and that they selected One Call Now as their provider.
One Call Now (
visit the site), provides:
The One Call Now™ phone message service delivers automated phone calls, within minutes, to any group, large or small. Schools, congregations, sports teams, businesses and municipalities throughout the country rely on us for routine reminders and emergency notifications. With One Call Now phone message service you talk, we deliver!
Under the item Emergency Services, it lists its service package, "One Call Now GEO is our map-based emergency notification for citizens and businesses."
This has nothing to do with customers, which explains calls made to non-customers and not made to customers during this situation.
It also indicates this feature: "Published and unpublished phone number database of residences and businesses."
This explains how they got your phone number - particularly for non-customers.
Under FAQs, however, it does note a 'wizard' for uploading content. It would appear a decision was made to go Geo instead of upload.
Obviously, I may be wrong, but it appears the evidence or comments at least point in this direction.
Easton made a mistake and ought to correct and acknowledge it.
There is an even bigger point. Why don't we have a government based emergency management system in place?
The Nazareth School District, and I'm sure many others have call and email systems. Nazareth Borough invested in its siren. Water companies and other utilities have some form of alert system. All of these are public entities contracting with private companies to serve the public. Our tax dollars are being spent over and over for the same service in various segments.
Why not one single email and phone alert system contracted centrally or at least regionally, and shared amongst users on a tax base tiered system (ie pay in proportion to revenue you receive locally)?
This would make sense, but I'm sure fiefdom's and allocations would be the devil in the details.
