How is it that a "controlled burn" of a house on Ohio 101 by the trailer park gets nothing more than a photo in the Sunday paper? When I see a plume of smoke going up on a cloudy day, and it's so tall that you could look west and see it from the Kroger parking lot, that should qualify as news in this area.
I happened to take a drive by at 1 p.m. or so Saturday to see what was going on, and the house had flames shooting through all the windows. Traffic on the state highway was crawling while people watched the two fire departments were on hand. But was the public notified of this event in advance? Did anyone bother to think that inyl siding on the house created toxic fumes and pollution that hundreds of west-end Sanduskians breathed all afternoon (since the smoke plume turned due north once the winds got hold of it)? What about asbestos -- what kind of risk were we at when a 109-year-old house is burned to the ground? Did anyone confirm that we were under no risk of breathing in airborne asbestos fibers once the fire consumed the dwelling? That fire still had embers burning at 8:30 p.m. as I was on my way home from Castalia (as I didn't want to spend my afternoon breathing in all that pollution that was created).
When a fire emergency occurs, I can understand that these questions don't get asked because the concerns are not preventable once that fire starts. But when the fire departments plan an event like this, doesn't the public have a right to know about it and voice their concerns and have risks mitigated?