Guarino

The White Street Landfill

Tomorrow morning there will be an editorial in the News and Record likely advocating that the White Street Landfill remain closed to residential trash.  Much has been written about how this particular landfill was "environmental racism", and may have presented a health threat to area residents. 

I happen to have some experience with the subject of landfills.  I have related previously on this blog or elsewhere in the local blogosphere about my work a quarter century ago on the matter of the Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island, my home town.

Wikipedia has some interesting information about the Fresh Kills Landfill:

Opened in 1948, it became one of the largest refuse heaps in human history. The site is 12 square km (4.6 square miles) in area; and when operational twenty barges, each carrying 650 tons of garbage, were shipped in every day.^[2] Had Fresh Kills stayed open as long as originally planned it would have grown to be the highest point on the East Coast of the United States.^[2] It could be regarded as being the largest man-made structure on Earth,^[2] with the site's volume eventually exceeding the Great Wall of China.^[2]  In fact in 2001 its peak was 25 meters taller than the Statue of Liberty.^[2]   Under local pressure and with support of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the landfill site was closed on March 22, 2001. However, after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, the landfill was temporarily reopened in order to receive and process much of the debris from the destruction.

That was the issue on which I did some work-- a landfill, just a couple of miles from where I grew up, with more volume than China's Great Wall, layered taller than the Statue of Liberty, perhaps the largest man-made structure on earth, and previously characterized by the EPA as an "open dump" because of its inadequate environmental safeguards.

We worked to have it closed.  Its stench on some days was overpowering, and affected far beyond nearby neighborhoods.  Its trash floated away and contaminated New Jersey beaches.  The environment of adjacent waterways was abysmal because of its effects.

When I hear about how gravely important it was to close the White Street Landfill to residential trash, and to keep it that way, it seems almost laughable.  It almost appears foolish that so much could have been made of closing a facility the environmental impact of which had to be of a much lower order of magnitude than what we had at Fresh Kills.  Greensboro is a relatively small city; whereas Fresh Kills handled the trash for all of New York City-- 13,000 tons per day for a period of greater than fifty years.

White Street was a mere molehill compared to Fresh Kills' mountain of trash.

In recent days, Mike Barber had the temerity to call for the reopening of White Street.  I salute Councilman Barber for taking this public position.

In response to this call, we heard all the usual voices indicating the reasons this should not, or could not, happen.  The truth, however, is that reopening White Street to residential trash likely will be regarded as impermissible because of the pervasive local ground rules of identity group politics.  For instance, our illustrious mayor, Yvonne Johnson, made statements suggesting that instances of illness had been reported in the adjoining neighborhood.  We were even told in the News and Record that there were cases of cancer.

I have news for our mayor and for all those making these arguments.  Cancer is one of the top causes of death in the United States; and is extremely prevalent.  (Of course, it is not one disease, but rather a number of different diseases).  It would be very unusual if the residents in the adjoining neighborhood did NOT experience illness and cancer, because these are unfortunately part of the human condition.

It would be good to know whether there is solid epidemiological proof that illness arising from the White Street Landfill was truly afflicting area residents; but I suspect I know the answer.

In this week's Rhino (not yet posted), John Hammer exposes City Manager Mitchell Johnson's most recent obfuscation.  Johnson had indicated that the cost of trucking our garbage is $3 million per year.  But Hammer points out that the total cost to Greensboro taxpayers of not using the White Street Landfill is $13 million per year, not $3 million.  Brenda Bowers has had a couple of good posts.

The City Council did what was needed to assuage local racial sensitivities according to the peculiar demands of our local machine politics.  We are now hearing that it is necessary to continue to assuage these sensitivities.

Meanwhile,the northwestern part of town is fairly affluent, white and in close proximity to PTI airport, where FedEx will soon be operating its hub.  This group of northwest residents is disproportionately impacted; and it is interesting that in many other towns, airports are sited in a part of town where the economically disadvantaged reside.  This is not true in Greensboro.

It is considered undesirable to be exposed to the noise and other effects of airports.  Does this mean that neighbors should arise to have it shut down, and that city leaders should acquiesce?  Of course not; and of course, this will never happen in Greensboro. 

But the molehill at the White Street Landfill was made into a mountain, and our local politicians predictably bowed before the local pieties.

It is a striking spectacle to behold for someone like me.  I had observed progressive politicians from New York City perpetuate the use of Fresh Kills for many years, in contravention of applicable environmental practices, in spite of all its impacts. 

But in Greensboro, elected officials, who oft congratulate themselves over how progressive they are, found a way to keep our trash out of sight, and out of mind, at enormous expense-- when there was little need to do so.  Regardless of what the News and Record opines tomorrow, some of us know what happened, why it happened and what little justification there was with respect to the closing of White Street to residential trash.

McCain Best Choice for the Unborn

Rpbert George of Princeton University makes the case that John McCain, by far, is the best choice among the major presidential candidates from the standpoint of protecting the unborn. 

George says that "McCain's pro-life record as a whole is very strong".  He also explains the influence presidents have with respect to protecting innocent human life.

New Governor of New York in Jeopardy?

There is now talk of a possible upcoming need for a special election in New York State.   This discussion arises in the wake of additional concerns coming to light regarding the new governor, David Paterson.  There have been a number of revelations about Paterson in addition to those already known about his extramarital affairs. 

These revelations include past cocaine and marijuana use.  But they also include expending campaign funds for hotel rooms used for sexual liaisons, and for women with whom he was involved

And who is being discussed as a potential Republican candidate for governor in the event there is a need for a special election?  Rudy Giuliani.

Cops in Black and White, Part XLIX

Jerry Bledsoe resumes his series in the Rhino Times with an installment detailing the treatment of former Deputy Chief Randall Brady during the fall of 2005 and thereafter.  The following represents a summary.

The city legal office had completed its report, and RMA was called in to investigate the matter of the "secret police".  On November 16, 2005, Brady was called to speak with assistant city attorney Blair Carr, but when he arrived he was subjected to a highly confrontational interrogation by two RMA investigators in conjunction with Carr.   (Recall that Carr recently blew an astronomically high breath alcohol level and was charged with a mid-day DUI.)

They were aware he had been considering retirement, and delivered an implied threat that his "separations allowance" could be at risk depending on how he answered their questions.   Longmire pressured him to answer the questions "yes" or "no" only; but Brady felt stymied by this because some questions required more explanation.

It was clear to Brady that the city attorneys and RMA investigators "had embraced the claims that black officers had been unjustly investigated", and that the activities of Special Intelligence were "nefarious".  He felt they were trying to get him to acknowledge directly supervising Scott Sanders; and they believed Wray to have been involved directly also.  But they all seemed to be unaware that former Chief White had first given Sanders the assignment to investigate James Hinson.

Longmire from RMA asked about the "black book" and suggested it may have been shown to every prostitute and junkie in town in an attempt to entrap black officers.

Brady's interrogation, which was brutal, caused him to become confused at times when answering questions.  He became upset, frustrated, discouraged and flustered, feeling as if he was being prohibited from answering questions fully.  He felt that Longmire and Carr had already made up their minds.  He was subjected to polygraphs after the prolonged confrontational interview, even though this violates the standards for this discipline. 

Bledsoe noted that the polygraph professional had previously been convicted of shoplifting.

Brady was interviewed again on November 22.  Questioning elicited that he had secured the "black book" in the trunk of his car; but Brady indicates he never made an attempt to hide this, and in fact had shared Scott Sanders' memo regarding the line-up book with the city attorney's office two months earlier.  City Manager Mitchell Johnson was later to misrepresent this whole situation with the line-up book in statements to the public.

Brady's polygraphs on 11/16 were said to have indicated deception, but they were improperly administered after a prolonged confrontational interview.  Brady was not allowed to see the polygraph charts or report that had been prepared by the polygraph professional who had previously been convicted of shoplifting.

Wray saw that Brady was distraught after 11/22, was concerned about his heart condition, and placed him on leave.  Brady informed the city of his intentions to file for retirement several days later.  He was told he could not retire, and was placed on leave without pay.   Brady obtained the assistance of a lawyer, and his application for retirement was then accepted; but the city would not recognize it.  Brady later sued for his retirement, and won in federal court. 

The City Council, however-- at Johnson's urging-- voted to appeal the judge's determination.  Brady still has not received his retirement. 

The city subsequently made a partial release of some of the transcripts and recordings of Brady's interviews in an apparent attempt to embarrass him.

Bledsoe provides yet more evidence that the city legal office and the city manager's office behaved in a shoddy manner; and of course, the City Council played along.

Praying for Obama

The News and Record reports regarding Barack Obama's visit to Greensboro today:

About 12:40 p.m., the Rev. Cardes Brown of New Light Baptist Church in Greensboro delivered an opening prayer invocation.

"We are those who believe there is hope," Brown told the audience. "We pray that we will fully understand unity."

He added: "I pray a special blessing, oh God a special blessing, on Barack Obama," which prompted cheers from the audience.

Ahem.

Meanwhile, Doug Clark reports about Obama's words on more mixing of faith and politics, as the esteemed wall of separation is breached once again on the left:

Maybe the most interesting segment was his response to a question about his personal religious faith. He described himself as a Christian who believes he will attain everlasting life because Jesus died for his sins. "I also believe in a gospel of not just words but deeds" This means caring for the poor, applying the Golden Rule, being a good steward of the earth, treating people with kindness. "I've tried to channel this into my politics."

Over the last couple of days, we also learned of how our mayor, Yvonne Johnson-- also known as Greensboro's Golden Girl-- was endorsing Obama and announcing his visit.  Some of us had a vague recollection that our elected officials in Greensboro city government were supposed to be non-partisan.  Or was she speaking as the titular head of the local Democratic party, or as the local chair of his campaign?  It was never made clear in what capacity she was speaking.  What particular standing did she have to make this announcement regarding his visit?

Church and state are supposed to be separate, except when they are intermingled to further progressive causes.  Our local politics is supposed to be non-partisan, except when it is partisan to further progressive causes.

As long as we understand and accept the ground rules, then we can all "fully understand unity", as the Rev. Cardes Brown suggests.

GPD Discipline Rumors

Last week, a number of rumors began swirling about regarding one of the high-profile GPD officers that has been under investigation internally.  The word is that this particular officer, who shall not be named, received a mere wrist-slap; and in spite of that, may be taking some type of appeal or counter-action against the city in response.  I have no way to verify or disprove these reports, and therefore cannot be certain whether they are true.

I would expect that, if the past is any indication, the city will maintain that this is a personnel matter; and therefore, that it cannot be reported openly.

Unfortunately, when there is little transparency in government-- and exceedingly slow internal investigative processes in the police department-- rumors will tend to fill the vacuum.

GOP Gubernatorial Race

A poll published last week demonstrated that Pat McCrory and Fred Smith are essentially tied in the race for the GOP gubernatorial nomination; and Bill Graham and Bob Orr lag far behind tied for second place.  I had the opportunity to watch the candidates in debate via a candidate website.

One criterion that is very important for me is, of course, the pro-life issue.  Only Fred Smith and Bill Graham mention this issue on their respective websites.

I happen to agree with Fred Smith on a lot of issues.  His manner of speech, however, may not serve him well in a statewide campaign.  (Be forewarned, however: I felt the same about the way Mike Easley communicates.)  Some have argued that he may be too conservative to be elected statewide in North Carolina.  We should remember, however, that this is a state that elected Jesse Helms many times over, so I am not sure whether this concern regarding Smith is valid.

Pat McCrory presents himself very well, and is very good on the stump.  He already has cut an effective TV commercial for the campaign.  Some conservatives have expressed concerns regarding his record on governmental spending, especially with regard to local transportation funding.  Other observers have suggested his moderation may make him more electable in a state like North Carolina.  He was wise to seize and highlight the crime issue recently.

Bob Orr has some excellent judicial experience, and seems likely to have a good temperament for governing.  He also appears to be very conscientious.  Orr likely is more "moderate" than Smith.   I am not sure, however, if running repeatedly statewide as a judge gives Orr a natural  "base" of supporters upon which to build.

It seems clear, instead, that Smith and McCrory likely DO have a natural base of supporters by virtue of their previous political experience; but Orr and Graham do not to a comparable extent. 

Bill Graham has some good positions; and is an appealing candidate in some ways.  However, his lack of a base-- and lack of experience-- make him less competitive.

If, as I suspect, this is shaping up as a race between Smith and McCrory, there will be an obvious tension between small town/rural North Carolina values vs. big city values.  These two candidates likely will have more resources to do more television advertising than the others.  I want to hear more on McCrory's positions, and his website is a bit sketchy in this regard right now.

I am not sure for whom I will be voting.  Feel free to weigh in.

My First Encounter with Skybus Airlines

I had the opportunity to use Skybus Airlines for the first time this weekend.   It was for a brief overnight trip.

The experience was overall positive.  You simply cannot beat the price; and many were willing to withstand some of the downsides to save money on the fare.  The flights were fairly full.

A deep-discount airline like this makes flying possible for more people, and that is good in many ways.   They employ a number of strategies to keep costs down, many of which have been reported elsewhere previously.

The downsides?  First, my flights were 30 minutes and 60 minutes late, respectively.  This is not, by any means, a catastrophic delay for most people, and many likely will accept it for the lower fare; but the on-time performance was less than stellar.  In addition, the staff did not make any effort to advise waiting customers what was happening, or what the revised departure time would be. 

Second, there is very little legroom.  Their seats are spaced to maximize the number that can be placed on a given plane.  I think a tall person might have had some real problems.

Third, there is no assigned seating; so there is no guarantee you will be able to sit next to your travel companion(s).

Fourth, the airline flies into small airports as part of its business strategy.  These airports may not have any connections to mass transit; and they may have limited options for, say, rental cars.  I had to scramble a bit to get a rental car at my destination airport.

It was interesting to see the airline stewardesses hawking consumer items on the flight as part of the business strategy to increase sales per unit passenger.   What were they selling?   A large package of beef jerky; perfume; jewelry and watches; children's items; etc.  It was very different.  They represented that the airline was doing this to enable it to continue operating, and to be able to serve more cities.  I saw very few passengers purchasing these items, and I wonder whether this is a sound business strategy.

Already it has been reported that the airline may be facing financial pressures-- for instance, the rising cost of jet fuel, and the potential impending unionization of its staff.

Henry Isaacson, PTI chairman and local attorney, has opined in the local press that discount airlines like Skybus are the future of the industry.  I hope he is right; and that would be great for consumers.

But the reality is that these airlines must charge enough to cover their expenses, remain viable, and ultimately demonstrate some value to shareholders.  And running an airline is not inexpensive.

My advice to locals: enjoy it while it lasts, however long that may be.

Addendum 03/25: I wrote this post before seeing the N&R article this AM regarding the resignation of Skybus' CEO. 

Another observation, however, is with regard to the process of boarding and exiting the plane with Skybus.  You have to walk, old-fashioned style, onto the tarmac and ascend upward into the plane.   They place a rolling stairway at the plane's rear door; and an interesting ramp apparatus rolls up to the front door, presumably to achieve access for the disabled.

The rolling ramp apparatus, however, is apparently difficult for Skybus staff to push and steer.  So you have to sit, wait patiently and watch them make multiple attempts to have it align properly with the front door before passengers can enter or leave the plane.  My advice: if you are able, use the back door, and sit in the rear of the plane.