Calling In the Troops on the Landfill

Someone passed along a message that has apparently been sent by one east Greensboro functionary seeking to drum up opposition to the landfill from districts 3, 4 and 5.  And the effort will probably succeed at least to some extent.  This is, after all, the Politically Virtuous City.

Here is the message:

Numerous neighborhood organizations in Greensboro have formed the Citizens for Economic and Environmental Justice (CEEJ) and they are concerned about the perception of the City Council members that the opposition to the reopening of the White Street Landfill is only from the residents of District 2. These neighborhoods are certain there are citizens in other neighborhoods of the city who are also opposed to the reopening of the landfill.

 

CEEJ would like to present petitions that are signed by citizens who live in Districts 3,4, and 5. These neighborhoods need support from all Greensboro neighbors and friends with petitions signed before the council meeting on June 7, 2011. The blank petitions can be downloaded at www.theceej.org and the signed and notarized petitions should be given to...

 

        After months of pleas by those in all areas of our city, the majority groups on the council urging this transgression have made no attempt to truly listen to the extent of this wrong. They have come across with indifference and a rigid demeanor suggesting no sensitivity or concern for those living in District 2.

 

·        As offensive as that is, it is even more disheartening that 20% of our citizens in this neighborhood are to be denied a clean and environmentally safe place to live.

 

·        The council majority caught up in the execution of this travesty, are selling the right of a prideful neighborhood for a - yet to be truly explained – savings so vaguely contended that the reported ranges is from 2 to 8 million dollars per year.  The average of that would be 1/10 of 1% of our annual city budget. 

 

·        In order to gain the savings contended; the council is bringing on the burden to us all of….

 

o       Racial division in Greensboro

 

o       The pain to our city that such a move brings.

 

o       A violation of NC law and the expense of the challenge that is bringing – in addition to the adverse and divisive publicity that it will generate.

 

o       Contractually obligating the city to agreement with a private company for multimillion dollar payments for  a fifteen year period.

 

Comments

[Hugh]

#1 item on their list: Racial division in Greensboro.

Racism and allegations of racism are Greensboro's legacy past, present and future.

[Joe Guarino]

That is an interesting observation, Hugh. They try to make it appear they are concerned over the prospect of racial division and a lawsuit against the city. But they are the ones stirring up the racial division, and planting the seeds for the lawsuit. If they did not do those things, there would be less of a problem.

[ched H]

Planting the seeds for a lawsuit? Joe that would likely be your city council members' responsibility. They move forward with actions that the people most affected by it resent. They get sued on whatever grounds the opposing party finds. If it were your neighborhood, and council wanted to do something you opposed, you'd fight it. Your disagreement and general ..... on all things dealing with black people aren't reasons they should sit quietly while council does things They oppose. Furthermore, stop beginning discussions around race in this blog that you have no legitimacy or real iNterest in. You are a forerunner of white supremacists and while I'm ok with that, it confuses your followers who need a leader that's about the issues.

[Joe Guarino]

Ched, I don't think racial identity politics is legitimate. That may be much of the basis for the east Greensboro political establishment's existence; but that does not mean others are required to acquiesce.

When landfill opponents speak in a racially divisive way, that is a choice. When they secure the help of a Durham outfit to bring a lawsuit, that is a choice. They are responsible for their choices, which have been made voluntarily.

[bubba]

"Furthermore, stop beginning discussions around race in this blog that you have no legitimacy or real interest in. You are a forerunner of white supremacists and while I'm ok with that, it confuses your followers who need a leader that's about the issues."

Almost every policy issue in this town turns on overt or covert racial identity and implications arising from such. It's done on purpose by several groups, including the outright race baiters, and certain "progressives" use of the "intolerable raaaaaaaaaaacism!" meme that we see in our media and on certain blogs. All this is complimented by assorted dirtbags who delight in describing people who object to these outrages with words like "racists" and "white supremists."

Fortunately, the rest of us have figured these things out, and are not intimidated by pushback from those who don't like the sunshine that's provided when these particular outrages and abuses of the public good are revealed.

[Brandon Burgess]

Bubba, I mostly agree with your final paragraph.

That being said, the way that claims of racism are dismissed around here as soon as they arise makes one think that many conservatives maybe feel that racism toward non-whites just isn't an issue anymore.

If that isn't true, conservatives certainly aren't addressing white racism on the blogs with the vigor that they pursue Nelson Johnson with.

All that being said, I don't think the city council wants to reopen the landfill just to be hateful toward black folks. One thing that would boost the credibility of the anti-crowd, in my eyes, would be if they offered alternative solutions. They are not sensitive at all to the concerns about the budget that the pro-crowd are attempting to address.

Is the anti-crowd in favor of continuing with the Charlotte solution? Maybe they have offered alternatives but I haven't noticed it over all the other noise.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

". . . your followers who need a leader that's about the issues."

Oh, that's just RICH, Ched, given how many issues the journalists and blogger-kings of Greensboro have determindedly, methodically misrepresented, glossed-over or flat-out-ignored . . . serving one special-interest agenda or another. If some of us didn't fit the PC "victim" profile and/or worship at the right local altars we were out-of-luck.

As for having "followers", you're confusing Joe with another-blogger-who-shall-remain-nameless-lest-we-who've-been-burned-be-chastised-for-tarnishing-his-hallowed-name.

[john galt]

Desperate mearsures by desperate people/groups that are used to getting their way by identity politics. Thus far it's not working. I am confident the Solid Four will not get wobbly

Your case is without merit but please do waste your money on lawyers.

[Joe Guarino]

John, here is the problem. I am not sure how much they have to waste their own money on lawyers. There is a Durham outfit called the Southern Coalition for Social Justice; and it appears determined to assist these residents in the process of satiating their condition of racial grievance in the courts. I am not sure if there will be any fees at all charged by the lawyers associated with this "public interest" organization.

[john galt]

Joe,

Well I trust that a threat of legal action by the East Side Mob will only steel the resolve of council members who want good government for ALL the citizens of Greensboro

Bring it on !

[Hugh]

" conservatives certainly aren't addressing white racism on the blogs with the vigor that they pursue Nelson Johnson with."

Brandon, I'd like to hear local examples of recent white racism in Greensboro (excluding the Klan turds wrapping their garbage inside of Rhinos).

[Brandon Burgess]

Thank you, Hugh, for perfectly illustrating my point.

[bubba]

"(excluding the Klan turds wrapping their garbage inside of Rhinos)."

....which was extensively covered in the Rhino itself regarding the incidents themselves, and other incidents elsewhere, as well as the Rhino's successful suit against the Klan group.

[Marshall]

Joe,
I place myself in the position of living anywhere near the landfill and therefore not wanting it reopened. Anyone disagree? If you don't mind...I bet there is some great investment property nearby. In the mid 70's the stench was horrible...nasty...pick your words.

"The council majority caught up in the execution of this travesty, are selling the right of a prideful neighborhood for a - yet to be truly explained – savings so vaguely contended that the reported ranges is from 2 to 8 million dollars per year. The average of that would be 1/10 of 1% of our annual city budget. "

If the above is accurate then why tarnish any part of Greensboro for this tiny amount. I wonder if the opening will impact development in NE Greensboro and what will be lost with the decision.

[Enough]

Marshall: If you want to see how a lanfill operates in todays time, go visit the one in Raleigh. It's on the east side. Plenty of development nearby and THERE IS NO SMELL!

The savings will benefit ALL OF GREENSBORO!

[bubba]

"The council majority caught up in the execution of this travesty, are selling the right of a prideful neighborhood for a - yet to be truly explained – savings so vaguely contended that the reported ranges is from 2 to 8 million dollars per year. The average of that would be 1/10 of 1% of our annual city budget. "

Sorry, the math doesn't work.

A savings of 5 million on the 2010-11 annual expenditure budget of 423 million is well in excess of 1 percent, a savings 0f 8 million approaches the 2 percent level.

By no stretch of the imagination does either figure qualify as "tiny".

http://www.greensboro-nc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/46DCD5D4-B98D-4974-8D4D-C452C6C0B5CF/0/2_totalbudgetexpenditures.pdf

[bubba]

One more thing: Economic development in that part of the rule will not improve until Painter Blvd is completely finished. The status of the landfill is not the driver of development.

[Brandon Burgess]

Marshall, there are ways the anti crowd can express their views respectfully without the ad hominem that the most vocal faction has engaged in from day one, not just at council meetings but around town.

I currently live off of E Cone and have lived within roughly one mile of the landfill all my life. I wish we didn't need landfills but we do. The Charlotte solution makes no sense when we have a potentially well-run landfill here.

And let us stop pretending that the landfill was ever closed. It was not. No one is discussing reopening the landfill, only what can be stored there with everything else that is being stored there.

Let us cut the environmental racism bit as well. I may be mistaken but as I recall, it was Mayor Johnson who first brought up the notion of allowing household waste at White st. again while utilizing technology that would turn our trash to gold.

[Marshall]

I visited the landfill the other day and noted no odor...no idea how it will be with home garbage placed there.

With no one challenging the statement Joe posted from someone else...I made the false assumption that it was accurate.

I virtually do not blog due to all BS about race or politics or money..etc. The discussion frequently is lost.

Thanks,

[nealove]

It’s a conspiracy the four members are going to get paid from the company. People love to make comment when it doesn’t affect them. I live here so shut up if you don’t really no what is going on.

[Bubba]

"It’s a conspiracy the four members are going to get paid from the company."

Really?

How do you "no" that? The same way you "no" what is going on because you "live there"?

"People love to make comment when it doesn’t affect them."

Oh, of course it doesn't affect me. The money that pays my property tax must come out of my chump change jar, right?

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

"nealove", as I understand it, the landfill issue has the potential to affect me/other residents of Randolph County - particularly those on the northeastern side of Asheboro.

As I understand it, if the White Street landfill is not "re-opened" for expanded use in Greensboro, Greensboro trash has to potential to come to Randolph County.

The county manager here (who happens to be white) wants to turn Greensboro's trash to gold - without really giving citizens here a say in the matter - and while the local newspapers provide him support and cover.

Things in Randolph County work a whole lot differently than in Guilford - in large part because our local newspaper does nothing if not live in the pockets of the phat cats here.

I'm wondering how the race cards factor-in when the the citizens of East Greensboro dump the garbage on the citizen of East Asheboro?

Out of site, out of mind, eh?

[Brandon Burgess]

Nealove, you are right that I don't know what's going on as it pertains to four councilmembers getting paid to allow MSW at White St.

Are you able to elaborate on your claim? I'm open-minded enough to give consideration to such a claim as long as you can provide evidence.

Are you willing to engage in a good-faith discussion regarding the claim you made? Who knows, you might change some minds.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Brandon, I am compelled to note that your comment amuses me inasmuch as engaging in this blogosphere in good faith and having/providing solid evidence hasn't counted for very much at all in furthering my own cause . . . which involves criminal conduct on the part of those charged with the public good.

Minds that were so enamoured of the now-convicted-or-soon-to-be-convicted-felons representing our state in some of it highest offices could not . . . and still cannot . . . be clouded with any facts.

So, assuming he/she has "facts" to fight with, I cannot really give "nealove" any good reason to engage.

[Brandon Burgess]

Well, for what it is worth Dr. J, you have changed some minds.

I know you are officially on break but I still check Housecalls daily, just in case.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Brandon, I don't for one second believe that I ever actually had to change minds.

I just had to induce people to be what they said they were - to take their jobs as seriously as I take mine.

Tall order in these parts.

[michele]

Joe, do you remember during the last Council meeting when TDBS asked the city manager if the city attorney could discuss a general statute, and he said their discussion was covered by attorney client privilege but a Council member could break it, and she said she didn't want to go to jail and then she went on to another topic? (Happens at 05:07:00 of the Council meeting: http://bit.ly/kUSnVd

I looked up the statute: http://bit.ly/j8cM8K

It begins with "The governing board of a city shall consider alternative sites and socioeconomic and demographic data..." The message you posted includes the wording "a violation of NC law," and I'm wondering if GS 160A-325 is what they're referring to. Council apparently got a legal opinion on this statute from the city attorney and it must have been in their favor because they voted to move forward, so I didn't understand why they didn't discuss it when TDBS brought it up. I wish they had because I'd like to have an understanding of how it would apply (or not) in this situation.

[Joe Guarino]

Michele, I might be wrong about this; but my interpretation is that the city's use within the current boundaries of the landfill would be entirely legal, and would not require any new permits.

If there is an effort to expand to landfill to another "phase", it is possible the state would interpret that as requiring a new permit in accordance with the statute to which you linked. There apparently may be some disagreement on that point, however. If a new permit is required with the new phase, the city would have to make certain demonstrations to the state in order to gain a new permit, and I suppose it might prove tricky.

I would be surprised if the SCSJ has a legitimate case that would prevent the city from using the currently permitted landfill. But when the city has to move on to its next phase in the future, the SCSJ might be able to use that law to oppose any new permit being issued by the state.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong.