Avon Lake Regional Water Purchased the Power Plant Coal Yard for $3.2 million

For nearly a century, an 800-yard stretch of coal sat uncovered at Avon Lake’s coal yard. Now, Avon Lake Regional Water (ALRW) has purchased this property for $3.2 million, and it’s clear that the environmental fallout of this purchase could have serious implications for our community's health.

Although the Avon Lake City Council approved the purchase in March 2024, there was one critical stipulation: a 90-day due diligence period during which ALRW was to present a detailed environmental evaluation of the property. Despite repeated requests from Council, ALRW never presented the environmental report as agreed. The report was released to Avon Lake City Council members ONLY AFTER the coal yard purchase was completed.

Once the report was finally revealed, it confirmed what many suspected: the coal yard’s soil samples revealed contaminants—ranging from cancer-causing chemicals like benzene and PAHs to heavy metals like lead. Avon Lake Regional Water’s decision to move forward with the purchase, without fully disclosing these environmental concerns to the city council, is alarming to say the least.

https://chroniclet.com/news/401721/councilman-continues-to-raise-concerns-over-avon-lake-regional-waters-purchase-of-coal-yard/

If coal is stored outside on the ground and uncovered what’s the big deal?

When uncovered coal is stored directly on soil, several processes can lead to contaminants entering the soil beneath it:

1. Leaching of Chemicals

Coal contains various heavy metals and toxic compounds, such as arsenic, lead, mercury, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and many others. When it rains, water passes through the coal pile, dissolving these chemicals and carrying them into the soil in a process known as leaching. Over time, rainwater or groundwater running through the coal, pulls these toxic substances deeper into the soil layers, contaminating the groundwater and nearby ecosystems​.

2. Erosion and Surface Runoff

Uncovered coal is also subject to wind erosion and surface runoff during rainstorms. As rainwater runs over the surface of the coal pile, it picks up contaminants and transports them away from the pile, often depositing them into nearby soils or waterways. Wind can pickup coal particulates called coal fines and carry them long distances. Wind and runoff can spread contamination beyond the immediate area of the coal yard, affecting larger soil and water systems.

3. Direct Contact with Soil

When coal sits directly on the ground without a protective barrier, physical contact alone can allow contaminants to transfer into the soil. Over time, the weight and pressure of the coal can also crush some particles, breaking them down into finer components that mix with the soil.

“If I just stay away from the coal yard it can’t hurt me.”

Even if you never set foot on the coal yard property, you can still be impacted by the contaminants due to several pathways through which pollutants can travel and spread. Let’s talk about how:

1. Airborne Dust and Vaporization

Contaminants such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) can become airborne. These hazardous compounds, including benzene and benzo(a)pyrene, can attach to dust particles and be carried by the wind. Inhaling these particles can lead to respiratory issues, and prolonged exposure increases the risk of cancer.

2. Water Contamination

Rainwater can wash contaminants like lead, mercury, arsenic, and other heavy metals into the groundwater or nearby water sources, eventually making its way into the local water supply. Even if Avon Lake's water treatment system catches most contaminants, residents using the lake could still be exposed. Additionally, pollutants that leach into Lake Erie could affect the broader ecosystem, impacting fish and other wildlife that residents might consume.

3. Runoff Soil Contamination

Heavy rains and storms can lead to localized flooding that transports contaminates from the coal yard onto the soil of surrounding properties. Once the contaminates are introduced into other areas, they can be tracked indoors by humans or pets increasing exposure.

4. Wildlife and Pets

Local wildlife, such as birds and small mammals, can ingest contaminated soil, plants, or water. These animals can spread contamination through their droppings or by becoming prey to domestic pets.

What contaminates were found in the Coal Yard soil samples?

This is a high level and very generalized overview of the information in the 1,500 page detailed Phase II environmental report on the coal yard property. The report does NOT include the power plant property north of Lake rd. If you would like to review the report I have made it available. You can also submit a public records request to the city of Avon Lake or Avon Lake Regional Water to obtain the report document.

Coal Yard Phase II Report Download

12 VOCs were detected in the soil samples:

These compounds are especially dangerous due to their volatility, persistence in the environment, and potential for bioaccumulation in humans, posing both short-term and long-term health risks.

1. Benzene: Benzene is classified as a known human carcinogen, primarily affecting the blood-forming organs, and is linked to leukemia. It poses significant risks even at relatively low exposure levels. Long-term exposure can cause bone marrow damage and decrease red blood cell production. Short-term exposure can lead to dizziness, headaches, and unconsciousness.
   Source: ATSDR

2. Toluene: Although not as carcinogenic as benzene, toluene poses significant neurological risks. Chronic exposure can cause lasting damage to the nervous system, leading to cognitive impairment, memory loss, and developmental issues in children. It can also cause liver and kidney damage with long-term exposure. Source: ATSDR

3. Trichloroethene (TCE): TCE is classified as a probable human carcinogen, and long-term exposure is linked to kidney cancer, liver cancer, and lymphoma. Short-term exposure can cause respiratory issues, dizziness, headaches, and confusion. Prolonged exposure to TCE vapors in the air can also affect the central nervous system.
   Source: ATSDR

4. 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene: This compound can cause eye, skin, and respiratory irritation. Prolonged exposure may affect the nervous system, leading to dizziness, nausea, and headaches.
   Source: CDC

5. Acetone: Widely used in products like nail polish remover, acetone exposure can irritate the eyes, nose, and throat. High concentrations may cause dizziness, headaches, and confusion, though it is generally considered less harmful than other VOCs.
   Source: ATSDR

6. n-Hexane: This solvent can cause long-term damage to the peripheral nervous system, leading to numbness or muscle weakness in the arms and legs after chronic exposure.
   Source: ATSDR

7. Ethylbenzene: Ethylbenzene can cause eye and throat irritation, and longer exposure can lead to dizziness and damage to the inner ear and hearing.
   Source: ATSDR

8. Xylenes (Total): Xylene exposure can irritate the skin, eyes, and lungs, and prolonged exposure can affect the liver and kidneys. It may also lead to headaches and dizziness.
   Source: ATSDR

9. 2-Butanone (MEK): This solvent can cause irritation to the eyes, nose, and throat. Chronic exposure may lead to damage to the nervous system, causing numbness in the extremities.
   Source: ATSDR

10. Carbon Disulfide: Exposure to carbon disulfide can lead to neurological effects, including headaches and confusion. Prolonged exposure may damage the nervous system and the cardiovascular system.
    Source: ATSDR

11. 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene: Similar to 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, this compound can cause respiratory irritation and affect the central nervous system, leading to dizziness, nausea, and headaches.
    Source: CDC

19 Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) were detected in the soil samples:

These PAHs are particularly hazardous because they are persistent in the environment, bioaccumulate in organisms, and pose long-term health risks, especially through inhalation or ingestion of contaminated soil or water. They are known to cause cancer and other serious health conditions due to their ability to cause genetic mutations and disrupt cellular processes.
Source: IARC

1. Benzo(a)pyrene: This is one of the most toxic and well-known PAHs. It is classified as a Group 1 human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Long-term exposure to benzo(a)pyrene is linked to lung, skin, and bladder cancers. It is also known to cause DNA damage.

2. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene: This PAH is also classified as a probable human carcinogen (Group 2A by IARC). It poses serious risks to human health, with links to cancers of the respiratory tract, skin, and other organs after long-term exposure.

3. Benzo(b)fluoranthene: Another potent carcinogen, benzo(b)fluoranthene is classified as a probable human carcinogen (Group 2A). Long-term exposure increases the risk of lung and skin cancers.

4. Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate: This is a phthalate commonly used as a plasticizer. Long-term exposure may affect the liver and reproductive system. It is suspected to be an endocrine disruptor.

5. 2-Methylnaphthalene: A PAH, 2-methylnaphthalene can cause respiratory and skin irritation, and long-term exposure could damage the liver.

6. Benzo(b)fluoranthene: This is a carcinogenic PAH. Exposure may lead to an increased risk of lung and skin cancers.

7. Chrysene: Chrysene is classified as a possible human carcinogen. Chronic exposure increases the risk of skin, lung, and bladder cancers.

8. Naphthalene: Exposure to naphthalene can cause respiratory issues, including damage to the lungs and kidneys. It is also a possible human carcinogen.

9. Phenanthrene: This PAH is less carcinogenic but can still cause skin and respiratory irritation. Long-term exposure may cause damage to the lungs.

10. Fluoranthene: Fluoranthene exposure can lead to skin and respiratory irritation. Chronic exposure may increase cancer risk.

11. Benzo(k)fluoranthene: A known carcinogen, this compound is linked to an increased risk of cancers, especially in the respiratory tract

12. Fluorene: Prolonged exposure may cause irritation to the skin and eyes, and it can potentially damage the liver and kidneys.

13. Anthracene: Generally considered less toxic, anthracene can still cause skin irritation and respiratory issues upon long-term exposure.

14. Acenaphthylene: This PAH can cause irritation to the eyes, skin, and respiratory system. Chronic exposure may lead to harmful effects on the lungs. Source: ATSDR

15. Acenaphthene: Acenaphthene is primarily a respiratory and skin irritant.A

16. Benzo(a)anthracene: This PAH is a probable human carcinogen, mainly affecting the lungs and skin.

17. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene: A potent carcinogen, long-term exposure significantly increases cancer risks, particularly lung cancer.

18. Pyrene: Exposure to pyrene can cause skin irritation and dermatitis. It is less carcinogenic than other PAHs but can contribute to respiratory problems.

19. Benzo(a)pyrene: One of the most carcinogenic PAHs, exposure can lead to lung, skin, and bladder cancers.

20. Benzo(a,h,i)perylene: Though less carcinogenic, long-term exposure to this PAH may cause respiratory irritation and contribute to lung cancer.

21. Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene: Another carcinogenic PAH, linked to an increased risk of skin and lung cancers with prolonged exposure.

22. 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene: This compound is an irritant to the eyes, skin, and respiratory system. Long-term exposure can affect the central nervous system.

One lnorganic was detected in the soil samples:

1. Cyanide: In soil Cyanide can pose significant environmental and health risks. Cyanide compounds are highly toxic, and even small amounts can be dangerous. Cyanide can prevent cells from using oxygen, which can lead to cell death. Acute exposure can cause headaches, dizziness, shortness of breath, and potentially fatal outcomes, including respiratory failure. Chronic exposure to lower levels can lead to long-term effects on the thyroid and central nervous system​. Cyanide is also harmful to aquatic life if it leaches into waterways, affecting ecosystems by reducing oxygen levels in water, which is detrimental to both plant and animal life.
   Source: ATSDR​

TPH ranges detected in soil samples:

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) refer to a broad family of chemical compounds derived from crude oil. These compounds are typically classified by their carbon chain length, with each range having different environmental behaviors and health risks.

1. TPH (C10-C20): This range is often referred to as "middle distillates" and includes lighter compounds such as diesel and kerosene. These compounds can volatilize and move through the soil, posing risks through inhalation of vapors and skin contact. Prolonged exposure can cause respiratory problems, skin irritation, and neurological effects.
   Source: ATSDR

2. TPH (C20-C34): This range represents heavier petroleum hydrocarbons, such as lubricating oils. These compounds tend to be less volatile but more persistent in the environment, and they can adhere to soil particles, leading to long-term contamination. While they pose a lower risk of inhalation due to their lower volatility, they can still cause skin irritation and other health issues if direct contact occurs over extended periods.
   Source: ATSDR

14 Metals detected in the soil samples:

These metals, depending on their concentrations and exposure routes, can pose varying degrees of risk to human health, particularly through ingestion, inhalation, or dermal contact.

1. Antimony: Chronic exposure to antimony can affect the lungs, causing respiratory issues, and may also cause heart problems. Long-term exposure has been linked to gastrointestinal issues and liver damage.
   Source: ATSDR

2. Chromium: Chromium comes in several forms, but hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) is the most harmful, classified as a carcinogen. Exposure can lead to respiratory issues, skin irritation, and a higher risk of lung cancer. Trivalent chromium (Cr(III)) is less harmful and is even an essential nutrient in small amounts. Source: ATSDR

3. Selenium: While selenium is essential in trace amounts, excessive exposure can lead to nausea, vomiting, hair and nail loss, and in extreme cases, neurological effects. Long-term exposure to high levels of selenium can damage the kidneys and liver.
   Source: ATSDR

4. Arsenic: A known carcinogen, arsenic exposure can lead to skin, lung, and bladder cancers. Chronic exposure can also cause skin lesions, cardiovascular disease, and damage to the nervous system.
   Source: ATSDR

5. Cobalt: While cobalt is necessary in small amounts for human health, excessive exposure can lead to lung and heart issues, as well as skin problems such as rashes. Chronic exposure to high levels may also affect the thyroid.
   Source: ATSDR

6. Thallium: Thallium is highly toxic, and exposure can lead to hair loss, nerve damage, and damage to vital organs such as the kidneys and liver. Long-term exposure may cause severe neurological effects.
   Source: ATSDR

7. Barium: High exposure to barium can cause gastrointestinal disturbances, muscle weakness, and effects on the nervous system, including paralysis. It can also affect the heart rhythm in severe cases.
   Source: ATSDR

8. Vanadium: Long-term exposure to high levels of vanadium may cause respiratory issues, such as coughing and bronchitis, as well as gastrointestinal problems. Chronic exposure can also affect the liver and kidneys.
   Source: ATSDR

9. Beryllium: Exposure to beryllium, especially in occupational settings, can lead to chronic beryllium disease (CBD), which affects the lungs. It is also classified as a human carcinogen.
   Source: ATSDR

10. Lead: Lead is highly toxic and can affect nearly every organ in the body. Chronic exposure is particularly dangerous to children, causing developmental and cognitive impairments, as well as kidney and nervous system damage in adults. Source: ATSDR

11. Zinc: Zinc is an essential nutrient, but too much can cause nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, and cramps. Prolonged exposure to high levels can also interfere with the body’s ability to absorb other essential minerals like copper.
    Source: ATSDR

12. Cadmium: A known carcinogen, cadmium exposure can lead to lung, kidney, and bone damage. It is also associated with an increased risk of lung cancer.
    Source: ATSDR

13. Nickel: Nickel exposure can cause allergic reactions, especially skin rashes. Chronic exposure has been linked to respiratory issues and, in severe cases, lung cancer. Source: ATSDR

TWO PCBs detected in the soil samples:

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a group of man-made organic chemicals that consist of carbon, hydrogen, and chlorine atoms. PCBs, including PCB-1248 and PCB-1262, have been banned in many countries but persist in the environment due to their chemical stability. Both PCB-1248 and PCB-1262 are classified as probable human carcinogens and can have significant long-term health effects, particularly through ingestion of contaminated food or water, inhalation of contaminated air, or skin contact.

1. PCB-1248: This is a commercial PCB mixture with approximately 48% chlorine by weight. Exposure to PCB-1248 can cause a range of health effects, including liver damage, skin conditions (like chloracne), and immunotoxicity. Long-term exposure may also increase the risk of cancer, particularly liver cancer. PCBs are known to be endocrine disruptors, which means they can interfere with hormone systems. Source: ATSDR

2. PCB-1262: PCB-1262 is a higher-chlorinated mixture, with around 62% chlorine by weight. It is more persistent in the environment due to its higher chlorine content, making it harder to degrade naturally. Similar to PCB-1248, PCB-1262 is associated with liver toxicity, cancer risks, and reproductive system disruption. Its high chlorine content makes it particularly resistant to breakdown, allowing it to bioaccumulate in food chains, leading to higher risks of exposure over time. Source: ATSDR

Now What?

As a resident, it’s crucial to stay informed, raise awareness, demand transparency, and take action. Your health and the future of Avon Lake depends on it.

Here’s what you can do:

• Contact your city council representatives and demand transparency on the coal yard’s contamination, risk assessments, prioritization of the site clean-up, and verification.

• Attend the Avon Lake Environmental Affairs Advisory Board (EAAB) meetings, held on the first Wednesday of every month at the Avon Lake library.

• Stay informed and spread awareness about the health risks to friends and neighbors.

Leave a comment

100 residents attending city council. Is it enough?

In Avon Lake, during a recent city council meeting prior to the first power plant implosion, over 100 residents gathered to voice their concerns about the impact on their health, safety, and the environment. They demanded a delay, citing the dangers involved and the lack of transparency in decision-making. Yet, despite this considerable turnout, council members during the 09/09/2024 city council meeting, dismissed these concerns, reducing them to irrelevant noise because no official vote had occurred. The message was loud and clear: the voices of over 100 concerned citizens fell on deaf ears because procedural matters took precedence over the collective concerns of the community.

This incident is a stark reminder that even a substantial turnout at city council meetings does not guarantee immediate action. Still, it underscores the importance of showing up because when people stop attending, stop speaking, and stop standing together, those in power feel less accountable. The 100+ residents who showed up at that council meeting became a symbol of resilience, a reminder that civic participation is not a one-time event but an ongoing responsibility. Their unified voice may not have immediately changed the outcome, but it continues to echo through the community, spurring others to take action.

Flint Michigan

A powerful local environmental example comes from Flint, Michigan, where residents fought against the contamination of their drinking water. When Flint switched its water supply to the Flint River in 2014, residents began to experience severe water quality issues, including discoloration and foul odors. Despite initial assurances from government officials that the water was safe, residents continued to voice their concerns at city meetings, organized protests, and even collected their own water samples, which eventually revealed dangerous levels of lead contamination.

Flint residents’ persistence forced national attention on the crisis. Through continuous pressure, lawsuits, and widespread media coverage, residents were able to secure a federal emergency declaration, an agreement to switch the water source back, and a plan for the replacement of lead service lines. Without the relentless efforts of Flint’s citizens, this public health disaster might never have received the attention it deserved.

You can read more about the Flint water crisis and the role of community activism in bringing it to light:

Flint residents were the first to call for action on the water crisis.

Residents maintained the momentum for political accountability throughout the crisis.

Residents collected data to highlight their experiences with and perspectives on the water system.

How many voices does it take?

The answer is simple—there’s no magic number. Whether it's 100 or 1,000 residents, the true power lies in consistency, in showing up again and again until the issue is addressed. One might think their concerns are redundant if others have already spoken up, but the truth is that each additional voice strengthens the call for accountability.

Every person who shows up at a city council meeting represents not just themselves, but the countless others who cannot be there. When you attend, you are adding your voice to a growing chorus, each echo amplifying the message. When council members see a packed room, they are forced to reckon with the fact that their decisions affect real people—neighbors, families, children. And while immediate change may not happen, history has shown us that repeated efforts, consistent voices, and unwavering participation do eventually lead to progress.

In Avon Lake, the struggle for accountability in local government continues. The question of how many voices it takes to be heard remains unanswered, but one thing is certain: we must keep showing up, keep speaking out, and keep demanding the attention our concerns deserve. No matter how many times our concerns are dismissed, and no matter how many others have already spoken, our voices matter—because if we stop showing up, they win.

So the next time you wonder if attending a city council meeting is worth your time, remember this: every voice counts. Keep showing up. Keep speaking out. Democracy is not a spectator sport, and your participation could be the tipping point for real change.

If you are concerned about issues like the recent implosion in Avon Lake or other matters in your community, make your voice heard. Attend city council meetings, speak up, and be part of the change.

For decades, the Avon Lake power plant has been a cornerstone of our community’s industrial landscape. Now, with its rezoning and redevelopment in progress, the future of this site demands more attention than ever before. However, transparency in this process has been lacking, and that could have dire consequences for the health, safety, and property values of Avon Lake residents. The question isn’t whether redevelopment should happen, but rather how it should happen—and whether the City and ALERG (Avon Lake Environmental Redevelopment Group) are being honest and proactive in safeguarding our community.

The Real Issue: Lack of Oversight and Accountability

As it stands, the power plant parcels north of Lake Road are set to be rezoned, but without clear control or oversight, this process is already showing cracks. The only mechanism that can guarantee the proper environmental cleanup of the old power plant lies in the land use agreement pathway—a legal framework to ensure the site is remediated in a way that won’t harm our community in the long term. But instead of engaging in transparent discussions and setting clear, enforceable guidelines, both ALERG and the City Administration have adopted an “everything is fine, trust us” stance.

This dismissive approach is not only irresponsible—it’s dangerous. The environmental issues surrounding the power plant, including Mercury contamination and coal yard runoff, need to be fully addressed, not swept under the rug.

The History: A Century of Environmental Harm

The Avon Lake power plant started operations in 1926 and with its long history of coal-fired energy production, it has also been a source of environmental damage. Before the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972, the plant discharged millions of gallons of toxic wastewater directly into Lake Erie, contaminating the surrounding waters and sediment with heavy metals and hazardous chemicals. The long concrete conduit extending into the lake, Powder Maker Creek, was a key outlet for these pollutants, which included arsenic, mercury, cadmium, and other harmful byproducts.

Even after the implementation of the CWA, toxic waste water was still being discharged into Lake Erie but at a reduced rate and violations occurred where discharges exceeded the CWA limits. But the threat isn’t limited to the lake—the soil surrounding the power plant is also at risk of contamination.

Coal-fired power plants generate coal ash, a toxic byproduct filled with hazardous substances like lead, arsenic, and mercury. Over nearly a century of operations, it's highly likely that coal ash and other contaminants have seeped into the soil around the power plant. Coal ash ponds, where this waste is often stored, can leak into the surrounding ground, and runoff from the coal storage yard can spread pollutants across the site.

The soil near the power plant may now be laden with dangerous chemicals, presenting ongoing risks for groundwater contamination and impacting nearby ecosystems. This means that even after the plant is removed, the surrounding land could remain a toxic hazard unless properly remediated.

The potential contamination of both the soil and sediment in Lake Erie underscores the importance of thorough environmental cleanup efforts. Without transparency and clear action from both ALERG and the City, we risk leaving behind an environmental time bomb that could affect generations to come.

May 2023 Clean Water Act Violation

In May of 2023, ALERG (Avon Lake Environmental Redevelopment Group) violated the Clean Water Act by discharging excessive levels of mercury into Lake Erie. This violation wasn’t publicly disclosed by ALERG. I discovered the violation myself while reviewing the EPA website. According to Scott Cameron, eight samples were taken in May, and ALERG was unable to bring mercury levels into compliance throughout the entire month. This was not an isolated event, as ALERG has claimed, but an ongoing issue. ALERG was forced to stop the discharge of ash pond water into the lake because they were unable to bring the mercury levels into compliance.

This violation raises serious concerns about the transparency and accountability of both ALERG and the City of Avon Lake in managing the environmental risks at the site.

It’s important to understand that the coal ash ponds around the power plant hold a limited amount of water. During the following seven months, Avon Lake experienced substantial amounts of rainfall which created a serious problem for ALERG because the ash ponds were filling with water but ALERG was not able to discharge water into the lake because they hadn’t yet resolved the mercury level in the pond water. Where did all the pond water go?

Unmonitored Discharges into Lake Erie

ALERG has been discharging water from the ponds directly into Lake Erie without the proper Clean Water Act permit or monitoring. This contaminated water is flowing through the Avon Lake stormwater system unchecked. The risk of pollutants like mercury, coal ash byproducts, and heavy metals entering our lake—undetected and unregulated—poses a direct threat to the safety of our water and our community’s health.

How did this happen? After seven months of no discharge from the ponds, the ponds were full and ALERG desperately needed to discharge. The solution was to connect the ponds to the city storm water system and discharge the ponds into the lake. ALERG claimed that the coal yard was remediated according to “EPA standards”, the Ohio EPA Voluntary Action Program (VAP), and therefore by proxy the pond water was able to be discharged into the lake without a CWA permit. It’s obvious where this is all going. The coal yard VAP remediation ALERG claimed to have done was a lie. The Ohio EPA VAP docket has no record of ALERG ever registering the power plant for the VAP program.

According to Avon Lake ordinances only the city storm water manager is able to approve connections to the city storm water system. Chris Howard, the city storm water manager, claims that he did not approve ALERG connecting the ponds to the city storm water system. We have documentation that Avon Lake Regional Water (ALRW) Rob Monroe approved the pond connection to the storm water system without having the authority to do so. As a result, the ponds full of water with high mercury levels were discharged into the lake and continue to do so today. After repeated requests Mayor Spaetzel refuses to disconnect the ponds from the city storm water system.

Why Transparency Matters

Transparency in the redevelopment of the Avon Lake power plant site isn’t just about good governance—it’s about protecting the health and future of our community. Both ALERG and the City Administration have consistently downplayed the environmental concerns surrounding this project, leaving residents in the dark about the true risks.

What You Can Do Today

The time for passive acceptance is over. We, as a community, must demand transparency and accountability from both ALERG and the City Administration. This means staying informed, raising our voices, and holding those in charge to their promises.

Here’s how you can take action today:

1. Demand the root cause analysis of the May 2023 Clean Water Act violation.

2. Demand the risk assessment conducted before ALERG connected the coal yard runoff pond to the city’s stormwater system.

3. Demand An explanation of what happened to the coal yard runoff during the seven months it was shut down due to uncontrolled mercury levels. Where did this contaminated water go, and why wasn’t the public informed?

Worst-Case Scenario: Health Risks and Declining Property Values

The lack of transparency and oversight could have dire consequences. Without proper environmental remediation, we could see rising cancer rates and other health issues due to prolonged exposure to mercury, coal ash, and other toxins. Property values in Avon Lake are also at risk; no one wants to invest in or live near an environmentally compromised site.

This is not just about numbers on a page—it’s about the future of our community. If we continue to let ALERG and the City Administration operate without accountability, we may be facing the prospect of Avon Lake becoming a hazardous, undesirable place to live.

The Status of the Power Plant Redevelopment is Clear:

1. There has been no transparency from the City Administration or ALERG.

2. Neither party has fulfilled its commitments to safeguard our community.

3. The environmental impact could be severe, threatening both our health and our property values.

We must act now to secure a safe and healthy future for Avon Lake. Let’s demand the transparency and accountability we deserve.

If you don’t know me, I’m Malachi Witt and I have been an Avon Lake resident for over 15 years on Woodstock. I’m also an Avon Lake business owner. My business partner and wife, Erica Larson, and I own and operate Pixel Power LLC, a digital marketing firm.

Most of my time as a resident in Avon Lake has been heads down in the daily grind without any interest or concern about the goings on of Avon Lake city politics. That all changed when I became aware of the power plant redevelopment. Like most Avon Lake residents, I love this town and I want the best for it. The power plant redevelopment is an opportunity that occurs once every few hundred years but, with that opportunity comes serious environmental risks. Protecting the city I love and the health and welfare of everyone in it sparked my motivation and passion to become a vocal advocate for the best interests of the residents in Avon Lake. Since I started that journey, I’ve delved even deeper into serious issues and concerns regarding Avon Lake and how the city administration conducts its business.

The Storm

On August 6th, 2024 an EF-1 tornado ripped through Avon Lake leaving a devastating path of destruction. Multiple tornadoes touched down across Northeast Ohio leaving more than 350,000 people without power. In Avon Lake 40% of the 25,600+ residents were left without power for multiple days some as long as five days. Avon Lake was fortunate that of all the downed trees no one was injured as a result. The Chronical has documented more of the historical details. Technical information can be found on the National Weather Service website

I was with Erica Larson when she got an alert from the National Weather Service. She said “it’s telling us to take shelter and get into the basement”. At the time I thought “we don’t have tornadoes here what’s the big deal?” then it occurred to me that a few years ago one of the two giant oaks in our front yard came down in a storm and hit the house across the street. After considering the possibility of the second large oak tree coming down in a strong storm I agreed to gather the cats and go to the basement. As I walked through the house I looked out the window and saw debris and entire tree limbs flying past the window at a high rate of speed. I thought to myself “this is more serious then I thought” and hurried into the basement. The only way to describe the raw noise and sound was a freight train running through the house. The banging and thrashing sounded like an angry mob trying to break in through the doors and windows. It was deeply concerning.

Photo credit: Thomas Fetcenko/Chronicle

We loitered around in the basement for about 20 minutes until the storm and noise started to die down. After we emerged from the basement Erica says “Hey, I just got a notification from Avon Lake Alert to go into the basement.” We chuckled about how completely useless it was to receive the notification AFTER the storm had passed. We were without power, internet, and shortly after the cell network was down. We had zero access to electronic communications and we didn’t know if an actual tornado touched down or the extent of the damage. As it became dark we got out our battery operated lights and ate what we could of the melting ice cream in the freezer. We made plans to head out in the morning to search for a generator. I managed to purchase a $450 generator from Cabela’s the next morning to power our sump pump, refrigerator, fans, and charge our devices. We drove out to Elyria to find a city with power and restaurants to get a hot meal. As we spent the day out in other cities with power and a working cell network we were able to contact our family members and learn the extent of what occurred during the storm.

Photo credit: Thomas Fetcenko/Chronicle

The Aftermath

August 7th, 2024 was “Day 2” and I was concerned that neither the Mayor or any city administration member had made any public statements to the community. Sure, the city Facebook page was posting the standard “don’t be an idiot and touch downed powerlines” along with “Don’t worry we are hard at work cleaning up” and don’t misunderstand me that standard generic communication has a purpose. My concern was that this was the first time since 1969 that a tornado hit Avon Lake and the strongest storm since 1993 and we hadn’t personally heard from our city leadership. Without any electronic communications I was unable to contact EMS in the event of an emergency. How long will the power be out? Was the water safe to drink? Are there more storms or tornadoes coming? It all came to a head when I posted in the Avon Lake Community Facebook group “Where is the mayor? It’s been two days and we haven’t heard from him.”

About 40%—around 10,000 residents—in Avon Lake were completely cut off from electronic communications. We had to leave the city to get any kind of electronic communications which meant weaving in and out of the neighborhood to avoid all of the downed trees across the roads. Rumors started spreading that the power wasn’t estimated to be back up until August 12th which was five more days… In the minds of many residents, we were experiencing a major disaster. From a very young age we are taught to seek out police, fire, EMS, and authorities in the event of an emergency.

The system has failed us when we cannot contact emergency services or authorities.

The system has failed us when we cannot get information from emergency services or authorities about what to do next.

When the system fails us, the health and welfare of everyone is put at elevated risk when that risk could have been prevented with proper planning.

Photo credit: Thomas Fetcenko/Chronicle

Post Mortem: Criticisms and What Went Wrong?

The Facebook community group conversation about how the storm was handled continued after the power was restored and subsequently, the mayor was made aware of my criticisms and he invited me to meet with him. To make the best of the opportunity I asked the Facebook community group to send me their questions and concerns about the storm so that I could take them with me to the Mayor and be an advocate.

It’s important to understand the purpose of this article. The purpose of this article is to communicate the answers I tried to get based on the questions sent to me by people in the community. The purpose of this article is not a highlight reel of all the things the city did during the disaster event.

Here are the questions from the community that I presented to the Mayor:

Questions and Concerns Regarding Tornadoes and Disaster Planning in Avon Lake

1.  Alert System Efficiency

a.       Residents received messages from the Avon Lake alerts system after the storm occurred. In contrast, the National Weather Service sent out alerts provided ample notice of the approaching storm. What measures are being taken to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of the city’s alert system?

b.       Some residents were stuck in their cars because they didn't receive a warning from the city alert system in time to reach safety. How does the city plan to address this issue in future emergencies?

c.       Does Avon Lake have tornado sirens? If not, is there a plan to install them for better emergency warning coverage?

2. Disaster Preparedness and Response

a.       Is there an existing disaster plan for Avon Lake? If so, can it be shared with the public to ensure residents are informed about the city's preparedness?

b.       Residents have expressed concern about the city administration's reactive nature to the storm and the apparent lack of proactive planning. How does the city plan to shift towards a more proactive approach to disaster management?

c.       Following the storm, there was no communication from the city administration for two days. What is the city’s plan to ensure more timely and consistent communication during future emergencies?

d.       A charging station was not made available until day two. Given that cell phones and devices would have died by the end of day one, how does the city plan to address the need for immediate access to charging and communication resources?

e.       Internet access was down, and the cell network was overloaded. What steps is the city taking to improve communication capabilities in the event of widespread service outages?

3. Community Resources and Infrastructure

a.       The library could serve as a vital community resource for information, heating/cooling, device charging, and other essential needs if equipped with generators and independent internet access. Is there a plan to upgrade the library's infrastructure to support these needs in emergencies?

b.       In response to residents' concerns, will the city develop a disaster response plan that is executed within hours of an event, rather than days?

4. Lessons from the Past

a.       Hurricane Sandy should have served as a lesson, where the 45s were without power for 5-7 days. What steps has the city taken to learn from past disasters, and how are these lessons being applied to current disaster planning?

b.       Does the city have generators for municipal buildings? Which buildings are equipped with them?

c.       Does the city have mobile generators? How many are available, and how are they allocated during emergencies?

5. Communication and Coordination

a.       City communication during the recent storm was primarily through social media and the AL Alert system, yet many residents lacked internet or cell service. What is the city’s communication plan for long-term outages, especially for residents without access to these services?

b.       Are there designated staging areas in the event of widespread structural damage? What plans are in place for tents, food, healthcare, and other supplies? Are local schools involved in these plans?

c.       What proactive efforts are being made by the city to remove trees that pose a threat to power lines and other critical infrastructure?

6.       Disaster Declaration and Resource Allocation

a.       Ohio Governor DeWine declared Lorain County a disaster area. What resources or funds will Avon Lake receive as a result of this declaration?

b.       Who will decide how these resources and funds are allocated, and how will the residents be informed about their distribution?

c.       Are residents eligible for reimbursement for food, generators, or other emergency expenses incurred due to the disaster? If so, what is the process for obtaining reimbursement?

My conversation with the Mayor, Mark Spaetzel

My conversation with the mayor was interesting and eye opening to say the least. Ted Esborn was present and made a few comments but, the majority of the conversation was held between the Mayor and I for about 1 hour and 45 minutes.

There was a good amount of cordial conversation and I believe the Mayor did genuinely listen. However, I believe his ego prevented him from being able to see the red flags and obvious flaws in how the situation was handled. There were multiple times when the Mayor raised his voice and was visibly agitated. At those points during the conversation the Mayor was either accusing me of spreading false information or didn’t like how I was characterizing his position.

Unfortunately, it was a deeply disappointing conversation.
I went into the meeting with a cordial and open mind hoping for the opportunity to lay the ground work for actual change and improvement. The mayor entered the conversation holding the position that the city did everything right which made conversation about change or improvement a non-starter. At times during the conversation, the mayor directly challenged me in a very egotistical manner,

Spaetzel was willing to have a conversation about change or improvement when I was able to meet his challenge and convince him that he had missed something.

Out of the entire 1 hour and 45 minute conversation Spaetzel was only willing to admit two items could be improved public education and physical communication. Otherwise, much of the conversation was spent with the mayor trying to persuade me that the question or concern I presented was not valid. Spaetzel made a concerted effort to try and convince me to bring his narrative back to the community when I felt we could have spent the time discussing solutions.

Addressing Your Questions and Concerns

The Avon Lake Alert System

I tried to address the issues with the Avon Lake Alert system and the mayor’s position was shocking. The mayor admitted that the Avon Lake Alert system takes a least 10 minutes (20 minutes or more in my experience) to send out text messages to all 9,000 numbers on the list and that is AFTER the city paid to have the speed tripled by the company who wrote the system, EMERGE Inc.

When I tried to address the fact that the Avon Lake Alert system is too slow he blamed the National Weather Service.

Spaetzel tried to convince me to tell the community that the National Weather Service was to blame for the residents receiving Avon Lake Alert system notifications after the storm arrived.

Of course, I refused to accept his narrative. I interrupted him and I directly responded with

Shockingly, the Mayor responded with

The mayor was willing to spend tax payer dollars to “triple the speed” only to be left with a system that has the technological speed of a sloth. Yet, when I tried to discuss finding a better and more robust alert solution Spaetzel objected because it would cost money. It was a very puzzling and confusing response because a better alert system obviously wouldn’t be free.

I was unwilling to let it go at that point because the entire purpose of the conversation was to get answers and find solutions. I pressed Spaetzel saying:

Of course the mayor didn’t appreciate my characterization of his position and became defensive. In the end the Mayor half heartedly said “we can investigate” which didn’t mean anything to me. I anticipate zero investigation until I or someone else takes that cross to bear and continues to pressure the mayor for a better alert system solution.

Tornado Sirens

I did not have time to discuss tornado sirens with the Mayor. However, during one of the August city council meetings one of the residents asked about tornado sirens. Council person Jennifer Fenderbosch responded to the question saying that tornado sirens are antiquated technology. Fenderbosch went on to claim that studies have been done proving that the sirens can’t be heard in buildings, houses, or cars and false alarms cause residents to ignore the sirens when tornadoes actually occur. I 100% disagree with Fenderbosch. I believe tornado sirens are a critical part of safety infrastructure that needs to be added to Avon Lake.

Disaster Preparedness and Response

Avon Lake does have a disaster plan but it’s not published. However, You can read the copy I requested from the city Avon Lake Disaster Plan 2019 Rev. 3

The disaster plan was last updated in 2019 which is a strong indication of the historical importance of disaster preparedness.

In regards to my conversation with the Mayor he admitted that the plan was very old and they are working on updating it. I made multiple attempts to discuss the disaster plan specifically but the conversation was repeatedly redirected to other topics.

Yes, the Mayor actually said this was not a disaster. Spaetzel actually said this was a small weather event... If I could have seen the look on my own face, it would have been priceless. I just sat there as I received an education in the ways of 'disasters.'

It became crystal clear to me in that moment that the Mayor was trying to create the narrative “this wasn’t a real disaster” so we didn’t need to use a disaster plan which creates the justification for lack of action. Again, I was sitting in shock listening to the leader of our city “educate” me on how this wasn’t a disaster but a “small weather event”. I refused to accept the narrative he was trying to push and it upset me that he was minimizing the struggles and economic hit 10,000 residents just experienced.

At this point the mayor wasn’t willing to have a direct conversation and answer the questions. He was continually trying to divert the conversation instead of discussing the specific concern.

The mayor’s response speaks for itself.

Multiple times I tried to drive home the point that the library is one of many pillars in our community that could be utilized during these disaster events as information centers. When all communications are out there must be areas in the community with radio communications to allow residents to get information and contact EMS.

These information stations can function with one or two portable generators and provide simple basic services and resources for residents such as charging stations and bottled water.

Repeatedly, I was met with ridiculous rebuttals from the Mayor:

Community Resources and Infrastructure

The mayor claimed that if this was in the middle of winter it would have been a much different situation with the need for heating but he didn’t go into the specific ways the city has prepared for that scenario…

There was no discussion or perceivable interest to provide charging stations or communication resources to the public during wise spread outages.

There was no discussion or willingness to be more responsive to the needs of the residents in these types of scenarios. In fact, the mayor was committed to the exact opposite. Providing resources to residents is the last step. It was shocking to me that the mayor laid it out like the city is only capable of doing one thing at a time. There is no concept of running multiple simultaneous operations during this type of scenario.

The mayor’s own words made it clear that the city will deploy its resources to “clean up” before providing any resources for the residents. I repeatedly tried to discuss organizing partnerships with Avon Lake businesses to build a network of partners that could provide access to some basic resources but the Mayor was not interested.

Lessons from Past Events

We did not discuss anything specific that was learned from past events. The mayor wouldn’t discuss any specifics about changes to the disaster plan. He only said that they were already working on it.

The city does have some portable generators. We didn’t discuss how many or what they are specifically used for. The mayor did say that the city assisted the Library with portable generators to operate sump pumps in the elevator well. The city didn’t provide generators to the library for residents to charge devices. We didn’t discuss which specific city buildings were equipped with permanent generators.

Communication and Coordination

Throughout the conversation I repeated reiterated that all the electronic communication the city puts out is not effective when all electronic communications are out. It was very frustrating that this concept wasn’t getting through. I continued to make the case that the city needs physical locations where the residents can get physical communication. Eventually, the mayor admitted that physical communication locations “It’s not a bad idea”. It was one of two things the mayor wrote down during the discussion. He didn’t discuss any specifics about how a physical location would be implemented.

In the event of widespread structural damage the Mayor said using the schools for shelter was in the plan. If you read the disaster plan I linked it does list the schools as shelter but the plan has no details regarding the logistics of how 20,000 residents would be sheltered in the specified buildings.

As for trees, there is no program to evaluate and remove trees that pose a threat to power lines and critical infrastructure. The mayor talked about the power company using their easement to trim trees away from the power lines and they do have the ability to remove trees that are an imminent threat to the power lines but it’s very rare. The conclusion of the tree discussion is that the trees are on private property so the city can’t do anything and it’s the property owner’s responsibility to take down trees on their property.

Disaster Declaration and Resource Allocation

I asked the mayor about the disaster declaration from Governor DeWine and his response was eye opening.

Based on population there is a threshold of uninsured loss that must be met before any kind of reimbursement will be available. For Lorain county the threshold is $1.15 Million of uninsured loss. Statewide the threshold is $22 Million to get FEMA aid and according to the mayor we are not going to come close to hitting either threshold.

The Mayor repeated “personal preparedness” and believes that “neighbors helping neighbors” is the answer. Relying on the government is an unrealistic expectation.

As I said at the start, this was a deeply disappointing conversation and I’m sorry if I didn’t bring back information and answers everyone was looking for. Hopefully at this point as the reader you can understand it was a difficult conversation to direct or control. I seriously doubt after this the mayor will entertain any future conversations with me because this one certainly didn’t go his way.

It’s important to understand the purpose of this article. The purpose of this article is to communicate the answers I tried to get based on the questions sent to me by people in the community. The purpose of this article is not a highlight reel of all the things the city did during the disaster event.

In conclusion, will leave you with this final quote from the mayor.

Subscribe now