Recall that, earlier this week, the political activists on the city of Greensboro's Human Relations Commission publicly called for a health study regarding the White Street Landfill.
Here is one interesting point. If there was reason to believe the landfill has caused health hazards, then it would have been most prudent to have begun evacuating nearby residents; to close the walking trail along Nealtown; and to terminate further development of Keely Park. Of course, none of those things have happened thus far.
I seem to recall opponents raising the issue of waste being hazardous at White Street. But remember that the city's hazardous waste has been handled at the facility on Patterson St.-- not at White Street. Hazardous waste is not allowed in the landfill.
Does anyone know whether a health study has been required for the landfills in Raleigh, Charlotte or Winston-Salem?
Greensboro residents owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to Mayor Bill Knight, and council members Danny Thompson, Mary Rakestraw and Trudy Wade. They have remained steadfast on this issue in the face of a withering barrage; and have resisted the temptation to lash back at citizens with whom they have disagreed. They have treated opposing citizens with all the respect and dignity they could possibly muster.
This is to be contrasted with the shabby manner in which Councilwoman Bellamy-Small treated Rob Jones earlier this week. She found a citizen who respectfully called into question one of her pet programs, and she pounced all over him.
Conservatives and Republicans need to show up for all the upcoming council meetings at which the landfill will be discussed. They need to support Knight, Thompson, Rakestraw and Wade.
A great letter appeared in the paper written by Ryan Routh, and I am taking the liberty of republishing it here. If the claims in his letter are true, then this is a remarkable persective:
In response to your “Mixing it up item, “Landfill and leadership,” (July 17): We can easily study the facts when calling for a rational debate. This is a 1,000-acre facility that has been in operation for more than 60 years. The landfill is more than 2 miles wide in any direction and the nearest White Street house is more than a mile from its gates.
The new dump site is more than a half a mile in from the gates and a great distance from the old dump site, which was closer to the perimeter and closer to homes.
Therefore, as far as odor is concerned, residents will be unlikely to smell much, if anything.
Factually, the mulch site has a worse odor and is easily noticed from Rankin Mill Road. If new entrances were installed, then neighbors would never know it was there.
Others such as myself live within walking distance of a hazardous waste site, chemical plants, Hilltop white goods, the transfer station and sewage treatment plants without complaint. These neighbors should visit the new site and realize they have nothing to worry about.
I celebrate our new leadership for having the strength to do what is right for our city.
Hear, hear..what the gentleman says!!
Posted by: Fred Gregory | July 23, 2011 at 07:57 PM
Roch on his blog takes exception to many of the statements of Routh regarding area and distance. But even if Roch is correct, Routh makes some points that remain valid.
Posted by: Ken Hill | July 25, 2011 at 12:24 PM
I agree, Ken. The numbers may not be precisely correct, but most of the principles Routh relates still apply.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 25, 2011 at 12:54 PM
Clearly, Ryan Routh has offered up dedicates time and energy to research and report.
I'm with you, Ryan and Joe---we do owe a great deal of gratitude to Knight, Thompson, Wade and Rackstraw. The heavy lifting to correct this financially reckless error comes with significant personal attacks.
Those Council members who insist on spinning this into campaign rhetoric need to be exposed for their fiscal incompetence. Those Council members who have bailed out for reasons of conflict of interest, we are still waiting to hear your position on the re-opening---not who may win the contract. So, where do you stand---please tell us.
Posted by: Jim lewis | July 27, 2011 at 09:38 PM
Great question, Jim. And I otherwise agree (as I almost always do in your case).:)
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 27, 2011 at 09:55 PM
Like I said before, if it were a health concern then landfill workers would be a far more risk than nearby residents. Thousands of landfills operate nationwide with millions of landfill workers and yet not one lawyer has ever suggested landfill workers join together in class action law suits against landfills based on these sorts of health risks.
As a matter of fact: while we learn of and study for all sorts of dangers in working in the waste industries, the certification classes that myself and millions of other waste industry workers complete make no mention of the types of illnesses opponents complain of.
Posted by: Billy Jones | July 28, 2011 at 11:31 AM
I agree, Billy. As a matter of fact, as an occupational medicine specialist, landfill workers is not a category of occupation I have necessarily seen cited to be associated with particular work hazards due to exposures from waste.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 28, 2011 at 11:45 AM
If the job is done correctly there is little chance of exposure and if landfill workers are exposed then the generator of the toxins is suspect. Transfer station workers bear most of the risks. Yes, some people put things in garbage that don't belong there but the risk is taken at the transfer station where wastes are sorted and not at the landfill.
Because of the high values of many recyclables, the days of burying everything are gone. Every truck is sorted through before the load is land filled.
And in this case, the transfer station is 15 or so miles away from the landfill.
Posted by: Billy Jones | July 29, 2011 at 03:20 PM