Conflicted Nancy: Limousine Liberal?

The News and Record reports this morning the position taken by Gate City Waste Services on the prospect of Mayor Pro Dem Nancy Vaughan voting on the awarding of the landfill contract:

Gate City attorney Steven Levitas made an argument against Vaughan participating, writing a letter to Pollard, dated Aug. 24, that the city’s conflict of interest policy “prohibits council members from voting on the selection, award, or administration of contracts in which they have a direct or indirect financial interest, real or apparent.” 

This is a critical point about Vaughan's attempted reentry into the process.  It is not sufficient for an ethical public official to avoid a real conflict of interest.  It is also mandatory for the ethical public official to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.  This has been a problem for folks like Robbie Perkins and Skip Alston in the past; and now Nancy Vaughan joins their ranks.

She, of course, initially tried to make it appear that she was a conscientious, neutral observer seeking out the facts when she told Ed Cone that she did not know how she would vote.  But it became apparent within a period of 24 hours precisely how she would vote.

She continues to make righteous pronouncements from the comfort and security of her Irving Park home regarding how we should do public policy in the city of Greensboro.

Now, she is saying that the millions of dollars in saved taxpayer money are not sufficient to justify reopening the landfill.  This makes us recall her vote that required us to spend nearly $20 million in taxpayer dollars on the aquatic center.  The meaning of Nancy Vaughan's political career is now crystallizing.  She eagerly doles out taxpayer dollars to various interest groups at the table-- northeast Greensboro, the swim community, the hospitality industry, etc.  And in the process, she makes the local left and the local mainstream media quite happy. 

Indeed, the following video portrays Nancy Vaughan as the prototypical limousine liberal.  This is yet another way that she seems to be emulating Robbie: 

 

Comments

[Mick]

Joe,

Your snarkiness is hurting you and your argument and may be keeping away possible allies you might have on this issue. Might just be me though. Who knows.

[curious]

What has this woman done to you for you to persecute her this way?

[Tony Wilkins]

Joe, your obsession with Nancy is bordering on bizarre.

When you say you're an Indian following a self-appointed Chief you really mean it, huh?

FWIW, I think Pollard was completely wrong in his decision to allow Nancy back into the process. And I still believe he will reverse his decision.

[sensei]

“prohibits council members from voting on the selection, award, or administration of contracts in which they have a direct or indirect financial interest, real or apparent.”
That's crystal clear to ME!
It just boggles my mind that we have so many folks who just can't understand the English language!
"Snarkiness?" "Persecute?" Give me a break!
Thanks Joe, for keeping us up on what's REALLY happening.

[Abner Doon]

"I don't understand why the Vaughans are representing Waste Industries anyway. This is simply using a position of power in government to enrich their family. As a state senator and city council member they should not be taking these sorts of assignments. These conflicts of interest - especially on a huge issue like the landfill - are a slap in the face to the citizens. Those that have had to abstain from voting on a regular basis should step down from city council."

crowbackAugust 25, 2011 - 10:07 am EDT

http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/08/24/article/should_vaughan_vote_on_landfill

[Abner Doon]

http://www.app.sboe.state.nc.us/cf_pdf/2011/20110802_103605.pdf

Don just gave $15,500 to the NC Democratic Party.

$500 to Bev Perdue.

and $100 for an A.L.E.C. membership

http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/alec-exposed-koch-connection#sf

http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/15044.htm

http://alecwatch.org/

Me thinks this may be a Waste Industries inspired move.

[Abner Doon]

http://www.app.sboe.state.nc.us/cf_pdf/2010/20101028_96564.pdf

Amazing how many PACs have written Don checks.

This may be bigger than Greensboro.

I still don't get how Don could vote to close the landfill,
and then turn around and represent a co. looking to profit
from reopening the landfill.

They may be in essance, trying to do the same thing Robbie is.

Saying one thing to garner votes from one population,
while taking big checks for acting on the behalf
of big business.

Same thing only different.

[Timur]

Mick & Curious,

Joe has presented a bill of particullars justifying the public pilioring of Nancy Vaughn and her chameleon like stances. What pact did the city make with certain residents, Mrs Vaughn ? It is enough to make one retch when you trivialize the savings to the taxpayers that could be achieved by opening the already permitted White St. landfill. Millions ain't hay, lady !

There was no legal barrier against you speaking on this issue for the last 18 months as you claim. Who put those words in your mouth ? You could have said NO to the idea regardless of which companies were bidding for the contract and dropped your phony pretense of neutrality.

Simply disgusting doubletalk by a robotic Perkinette.

[Joe Guarino]

Tony, the Wiki entry to which I linked says that the "limousine liberal" term originated during the 1969 mayoral campaign in New York City. Liberal Republican mayor John Lindsay was being challenged by populist Democrat Mario Procaccino.

I remember the campaign, even though I was only 9 years old at the time. In any case, Procaccino called Lindsay a limousine liberal, and he was absolutely right.

This is what the Wiki entry says: "One Procaccino campaign memo attacked 'rich super-assimilated people who live on Fifth Avenue and maintain some choice mansions outside the city and have no feeling for the small middle class shopkeeper, home owner, etc. They preach the politics of confrontation and condone violent upheaval in society because they are not touched by it and are protected by their courtiers'."

I can definitely see the parallels to Nancy and Robbie.

[Mick]

Sensei,

You dont think this is snark?...

"She continues to make righteous pronouncements from the comfort and security of her Irving Park home regarding how we should do public policy in the city of Greensboro"

I dont care where she lives or how comfortable she is and public policy is her JOB as a member of council!

FYI ... I support the use of the landfill. Joe, just seems to be dropping himself to new lows with insults, stereotyping, personal attacks and snark of late. He is better than this or at least at one time I thought he was. That is all.

[Joe Guarino]

Nancy Vaughan is obviously unhappy that Gate City was chosen. She is somehow suggesting something is inappropriate about that. Could it be that she is unhappy Waste Industries was not selected? If so, the problems associated with her reentering the process are even more compelling:

"This group keeps managing to choose Gate City and, as Vaughan noted, that is not an accident."

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-c-2011-08-24-209338.112113-Politics-Rears-Head-at-Briefing.html

[bubba]

"Joe, your obsession with Nancy is bordering on bizarre."

No, your defense of her in a situation which raises serious ethical questions is what's bizarre.

As we've come to find out since the beginning of the year, your judgement is questionable, particularly in your selective criteria over matters surrounding ethics.

[Sadie]

"What has this woman done to you for you to persecute her this way?"

"curious" question coming from someone who is willing to publically "persecute" others who have done nothing to her

[Mick]

All you people trying to figure out who is who and who people "really are" is just a stupid waste of time and energy. Brandishing real names like badges of honor and such. Everyone just needs to get over themselves. Gee willikers folks. Grow up.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Mick, HONESTLY, Joe is presenting information and asking questions that we really cannot expect the Editors of our local newspapers - or more progressive bloggers (who would LOVE to dump Greensboro's trash on east Asheboro, and just keep walking their dogs through their beautiful downtown neighborhoods) to do.

It "might" be just you? No. But speaking of persecution, there are a number of folks out there who'd love to shut Joe up, and shut him down. You're on these boards nearly every day trashing Joe and twisting twirling nearly every word he puts up - without signing your own last name.

Gee willikers. Grow a set.

These are SERIOUS ethical questions. Too many politicians in our state have skated by for years without them being asked by North Carolina's fawning, cheer-leading press (evidence: Jim Black, Mike Sleazely, John Edwards).

And so I must ask. SO FRICKING WHAT if Joe - OR I - or anyone else - is a tad "snarky" when it comes to this wink-&-nod, par-for-the-course, agenda-driven, pandering garbage . . . after the sorry bill-of-goods we've been sold for so long . . . or after what some of us have been through because no one could see past their own backyards (in places like Irving Park)?

Nancy Vaughn is a big girl and an elected official - and when she took this job she submitted to the microscope. In terms of public commentary, she can comment all she likes (that's her right). But in terms of voting, she has massively conflicted interests here - even if the current city attorney is too stupid to recognize it.

Get over it (there, I said it). And if you don't like what Joe is saying, go start your own blog and rant away.

At least that's what Cone-of-the-Cones/Roch/the rest told the rest of us (as they de-linked and banned away).

We did and THEY CANNOT STAND IT.

[curious]

Just so you all know Nancy Barakat Vaughan donated funds to several of our current city council member camapains the last election cycle PERSONALLY. Trudy Wade-R, for one

[Mick]

Doc Mary,
It is my opinion that Joe could and would be more effective (and has been in the past) without all the snark. His recent commentaries have brought him to what I see as a new low. And, I did not complain in the least about Joe presenting information now did I? His snarky manner was my observation.

As far as my last name... I personally consider it not smart to put one's full name on the internet. Though I do not care one iota if you or anyone else does or not. Nor do I care if people prefer to remain anonymous. It is their personal choice. I think all the trying to figure out who is who, using diff names to post diff comments, waving ones full name like a battle flag or badge of honor and all that crap is just stupid. Always have, still do and always will.

Joe pretty much insulted me, my wife, my kids and my friends with his GAC BS commentary. So what would you have me do... let it go? I wont.

And please for once... just once... write a post that doesnt somehow come back to you, your troubles, your various histories, your battles with whomever. There I said it.

I will state again... I am for use of the landfill. I do think NV had and still has a conflict of interest.

BTW, Joe is a big boy who blogs by choice. I know for a fact he can handle himself. I just continue to lose respect for him as he continues down this current path. But his path is his to choose.

[sensei]

Get Over It!

[Tony Wilkins]

I didn't defend her, bubba. I disagree with Pollard's decision and am disappointed in Nancy's stance on this issue.

But don't let facts get in the way of your head-up-your-ass comments directed toward my ethics.

[Meno]

Is it true that Councilwoman Trudy Wade has a direct family tie to the president of one of the companies that have been under consideration for this RFP contract?

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Mick, I agree. Based on what I've been through in this ether (sorry, Bud, but you walked into it), I'd say it's very smart indeed not to sign your last name.

But I do it because I'm in this blogosphere for a reason (you could call it a "path" I've chosen), and if you don't like it, maybe you should take it up with the so-called "journalists" (including a blogging one named Cone) who invited me here. It's been six years and I'm still waiting on them to do what they said they'd do - and to be what they say they are.

In terms of paths, answering their invitation was getting on a yellow-brick-road-to-nowhere.

Re: being insulted and LIBELED online, been there, done that, have the Randolph County DA's shoe-prints on my head. Comparatively speaking, being lectured on the good Dr. Guarion's "new lows" would be funny if it were not so LAME and pathetic.

To coin a phrase, "What would you have me do . . . let it go? I WON'T." Sorry.

DO YOU GET ME NOW? Or are you the only poor pitiful insulted fella who is allowed to have a grievance in this blogosphere?

So please, FOR ONCE, if you wanna rag on somebody about Dr. Mary Johnson and her cause (I expect it would be a righteous one if it had been one of your kids's lives that I got fired for saving), RAG ON THE LOCAL BLOGGING "JOURNALISTS" WHO'VE PLAYED DEAF/DUMB/BLIND/OBTUSE and let their big advertisers LIE to the public/skate. That entire progressive bunch at the N&R's cracked glass palace is a gang of wholesale liars and hypocrites . . . and their fawning/slobbering over local & state politicians/leaders over the years (I know, it's all Bush's fault) serves as the very foundation of a good portion of our current problems.

The press was NEVER there except to gobble up last of the right people's leavings when the ordurbs were served - after the press releases were passed out. This landfill business is turning out to be no different. Ed Cone's postings on the matter have demonstrated regional snobbery at it's most disgusting.

Moreover, save the "it's all about me" meme (it's old, it's tired, it's a damned dodge) for someone like, I dunno, YOU.

I personally consider and observe it to be fairly cowardly/spineless to pummel someone with the courage to put his name/reputation behind his opinions (particularly a practicing physician in our increasingly Big-Brother's-gonna-get-you world) from the comfort of your pseudo-anonymous status (as no one is really anonymous on the net). Sometimes using your name IS a battle-flag. And it IS far more honorable/courageous to use it than not.

I don't agree with Joe about everysinglething, but I found a lot of his GAC commentary to be fairly spot-on with regards to the proper use & abuse of taxpayers' money . . . AND the way GSO city leaders routinely flip the race card whichever way it suits them - or pander to the lowe$t common ethical denominator. EVERY SINGLE TIME. A shining example now is Nancy Vaughn's attempts to present herself as having no conflicted interests with regards to the landfill.

It's shameful. And if you agree with that, it would be nice if you'd cut Joe some slack on what you call "snark".

And yes, Joe can handle himself. But I'm sure he's glad when the anonymous ankle-knippers kick in and start playing dirty (I have ZERO respect for that), that other local bloggers have and will take his back.

He's not on his path alone. Indeed, I think the ankle-knippers are here because, as a conservative blogger, he is very effective . . . these days, far more so than some of the more liberal bloggers in our ether who've acted like they own the place for so long - simply because they've been here longer.

[GreensboroObserver]

Joe, as you pointed out in the Rhino Times article, John hammer writes "this group keeps managing to choose Gate City and, as Vaughan noted, that 's not an accident". Sounds like John agrees with her. Read it in context. Hammer's closing statement is "This group keeps managing to choose Gate City ...". He cites her in agreement that "that is not an accident."

[conservativewatcher]

Joe, your obsession with Nancy is bordering on bizarre.

When you say you're an Indian following a self-appointed Chief you really mean it, huh?

Tony, you running to protect Poor Little Nancy everytime she is called to task for her unethical behavior does nothing but expose you for the Closet Liberal that you really are. It would be alot easier to understand your mindset if you would go ahead and switch to the Demorat party. But then again they probably don't want you in thier party either.

[Grayson]

I read your definition of a Limousine Liberal and you have never been more wrong. The Nancy Vaughan that I know spends many hours doing hands on volunteer work, including working with the "dirty, smelly" homeless. She engages all people regardless of their station in life. She gives generously and is active in many non-profits. She gives her time, money and passion to many worthwhile causes. She has one quality that you lack - compassion.

[Joe Guarino]

Meno, first cousin relationships are not regarded as first degree relationships; and I can see why they are not regarded as rising to the level of a conflict. But if it was a conflict for Trudy, then we should also be discussing whether there was a conflict when TDBS was supporting Tim Bellamy, who was reported to be her cousin.

Thanks, Mary; and I do appreciate when other commenters "have my back". :)

Observer, I had already read that particular passage in context. And I found it curious that neither Hammer nor Vaughan explained precisely what they thought was going on; nor did either of them explain which prospective vendor should have been chosen instead of Gate City, and why. It appears to me, at least on the surface, that each of the vendors had their pluses and minuses; but the city's solid waste consultant felt that the top three all were qualified.

Grayson, the label of limousine liberal has nothing to do with what a person does in his or her private life. It is a political term applied to political figures describing their political stance. I frankly think it is grotesque that Vaughan repairs to her Irving Park home and diminishes the value of saving taxpayers' money. For those in the working class and the lower middle class, small amounts of tax savings can make a big difference. But that matters little when you have favors to dole out to interest groups.

"Let them eat cake."-- Marie Antoinette.

[Brian Clarey]

http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article-12622-vendor-selection-in-landfill-decision-questioned.html

follow the money...

[Joe Guarino]

Yes, Brian, I had seen the article.

Now what is it that you are saying?

Specifically who did what, and for what reason?

Which vendor should have been chosen, and why?

[bubba]

"But don't let facts get in the way of your head-up-your-ass comments directed toward my ethics."

Your head is so far up your ass that even CP can't help you.

And your ethics lapses are notorious. Shall we detail them?

[bubba]

"Now what is it that you are saying?"

Would we actually expect him to be able to flesh out whatever point he wanted to make?

[Brian Clarey]

"Councilwoman Trudy Wade received a total of $4,500 in campaign contributions from DH Griffin and his wife Marylene to help finance Wade’s NC Senate campaign last year. The councilwoman recently transferred $1,789 left over from her unsuccessful Senate campaign into a campaign account for her city council reelection effort this year.

Mayor Bill Knight received a total of $1,000 from DH Griffin Sr. and DH Griffin Jr. in campaign contributions in 2009, while Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw received a $500 campaign contribution from Marylene Griffin during the same campaign cycle.

Not all the Griffin family’s political expenditures have gone to landfill supporters.

At-large Councilman Robbie Perkins, who is challenging Knight for mayor this year, received a campaign contribution of $2,500 from DH Griffin Sr. in June."

[Mick]

Doc Mary,

So I'll take that as a "NO". You wont write a post that isnt about you?

[bubba]

I was right. Clary can't make his point.

[Joe Guarino]

Again, Brian, I ask regarding the vendor selection:

Specifically who did what, and for what reason?

Which vendor should have been chosen, and why?

If you are unprepared to answer the first question (which would be understandable), perhaps you can at least answer the second.

[Wendy S. Raines]

Let me preface this by saying that I am a registered Republican who is fiscally conservative. However, I recently told someone that I was thinking about becoming a Democrat. Their response was "on the local level you should be." Many of you have probably not ridden through Greensboro's worst neighborhoods where the poverty and blight is disheartening. If the figures are correct and for $12.50 a year per taxpayer we can keep the landfill closed, then I say leave it closed. Truck it to Randleman if Randleman wants to make a deal. Nancy Vaughan is one of three city council members who consistently responds and listens when I contact them. I think she is listening to her constituents, some of who may not live in east Greensboro.

[Joe Guarino]

Wendy, I don't think it is $12.50 per year per taxpayer. I think it is per certain amount of assessed valuation, if I am not mistaken. And that can be a lot of money for people who don't have much.

I know that Nancy supported you on the matter of pay for reserve police officers, and even voted against the budget in part because of that issue.

The way to fix the blight and poverty in our worst neighborhoods is threefold; restore the family, fight crime better than we do, and lift all boats by making the local economic environment more conducive to job growth.

As I mentioned previously, I grew up in a community with the largest landfill in the world, and there were solid middle class neighborhoods adjacent to it. In fact, many predominantly Jewish neighborhoods.

[Wendy S. Raines]

Joe, please do not infer that I support Nancy on issue as inflammatory as the landfill because of Reserve pay. I can show you my tax returns if you like. I made $6745 all of 2010 working as a Reserve. For me that is a separate issue. You say one of the ways to fix blight is to "fight crime better than we do." This City Council has accepted a budget the past two fiscal years that has cut our police and fire department budgets. Currently the GPD's outside training budget is nill, instructors are not going to be paid to instruct (instead they are going to trade "duty" time which means when they could be answering a call or working an important case they will be pulled to instruct our rookie class and In-Service training), and we barely have enough vehicles for people to drive when they are on duty. Whether anyone wants to acknowledge it or not, good officers are constantly looking at other departments due to pay, benefits, and training.

As a taxpaying citizen of Greensboro I want the council members who ran on "public safety" to actually back that up with money. Whatever they save with the landfill I would like a commitment on how they are going to spend it. The story you posted from FOX 8 stated that none of the council members who want to reopen the landfill responded to the request for comment. Maybe one of them could come out and say they would spend the savings on police and fire and they would like for more officers to be placed in the lower economic areas. If any council member would like to do a ride along I will gladly put on my uniform (FOR FREE) and take them to any area of town they would like to go. I support Nancy Vaughan because she listens to her constituents. We may not always agree but she listens, seeks out information, and provides an educated answer if you ask a question. That is all I ask of a council member.

[cheripickr]

Bubba, I must decline to comment on Tony's anatomical anomalies for reasons of confidentiality, although I appreciate the vote of almost-confidence, and I can assure you I gave it my best shot ;)

[Ken Hill]

How is closing the landfill going to relieve local poverty? Some local people might get jobs at the landfill. And some local businesses would be suppliers to the operation of the landfill- equipment, part and repairs to the equipment, etc.

[Joe Guarino]

Wendy, I ask more of a council member than listening, learning and communicating. I want them to vote the right way, and to take the right positions.

We must acknowledge that conservatives do not have a majority on the city council; and that the current city manager was selected under Yvonne Johnson. The council is under intense pressure to go along with city staff on all things. I have been very concerned about his enthusiasm for cutting the police department while increasing other departments, but again, he is Yvonne Johnson's guy. I would have liked to see the city council develop its own budget, but again the conservatives only have 4 votes. We probably need to fund other departments less in order to strike the right balance at the GPD.

BTW, I have heard Bill Knight say that he would like to use landfill savings to be able to pay for more police officers.

[sensei]

I believe the $12.50 is per 100K of property value, but that should in no way be associated with the landfill.
I send e-mails to council members on a fairly regular basis. Haven't received a response from Vaughan; probably because she doesn't agree with my positions. But, she did give my e-mail address to her husband which resulted in my receipt of a bunch of unwanted junk mail until I opted out.
I totally agree with Wendy regarding the GPD budget. It's a travesty that so much money has been spent on things that we don't need; money that could have been used by our PD.
However, since the issue of GPD vehicles has been put forth, I'd like to know why I see so many large gas guzzling SUVs and why I see so many police cruisers and officers at a single fender-bender? Unless I'm missing something, I see no reason why GPD can't use mostly small fuel-efficient vehicles and also use those vehicles and the officers therein more efficiently in investigation of minor auto accidents. Please enlighten me.

[Joe Guarino]

Sensei, it should also be pointed out that the $12.50 per 100K of property value is based on savings from using the landfill that incorporate the costs of later closing it. City staff subtracted from the true savings associated with using the landfill the cost of closing it. This was a ploy to make the savings seems smaller. There is no other objective reason to "amortize" the cost of closing the landfill over its seven remaining years of life. If they had not done this, I think the $12.50 figure would be larger.

[Brian Clarey]

As it stands, White Street has between 4-7 (roughly) years of life left in it, depending on what kind of waste it gets (C&D, MSW, recycling, etc) and how much it is getting — lots of moving parts to the garbage equation.
I do not advocate re-opening the landfill, because the proposed cost savings — another moving target — do not outweigh the reaction of the people who live near it and others who perceive that their quality of life will be affected.
But I think it makes sense to get our long-term, regional solution (an inevitability) in line without re-opening White Street, saving those few years of use as a hedge for negotiation.
As to which vendor gets the deal... aren't we supposed to go with the one with the lowest cost?
Bubba: Try to spell the name right next time.

[Joe Guarino]

Brian, we are not necessarily required to go with the one with the lowest cost. One can choose based on the whole picture, not just cost.

But in fact, I think the intention of the city council is to limit the landfill to Greensboro-only waste, extending the life to 7 years. This would make Gate City price-competitive with Advanced Disposal (at that volume of waste).

But I am glad you have clarified that you do not want any vendor at all.

[Brian Clarey]

Me and a lot of other people.
But it's interesting that we started this whole thing because of cost savings, and we weigh these cost savings against the will of many people, but that "we are not necessarily required to go with the one with the lowest cost."
Is this not all about saving money?

[Joe Guarino]

Yes, but once again, when selecting a vendor, there might be reasons to look at other factors. And once again, Gate City is competitive with Advanced Disposal at the lower levels of trash handling associated with disposing of Greensboro-only trash.

But Brian, is it more your motive to select the most cost-efficient vendor; or is it more your motive to oppose the council members because of their decision to reopen the landfill?

[KeepYourHandOutOfMyPocket]

This blog is better than a $100.00 per hour therapist. It all comes down to ethics and many on the City Council and County Commissioners lack integrity. Who fault is it?, it’s the voters fault for putting them in office. We may not understand the person on the first vote but after that we should make corrections to our mistakes. I voted for the conservatives to take over the council to bring some balance to the process and I think that they have done that. Nancy talks about the amount saved as being negligible but where do we start. It all has to start somewhere and the landfill is a good place to begin. I think the saving listed are very conservative and in the long run the tax payer will save much more than the $12.00 per 100K. Nancy should stay out of the process and keep her hand out of my pocket!

[blah blah blah]

Saying the savings are neglible is the equivilant of a family that is going under from debt saying "well we could save $20.00 if we eat lunch at home, but its only $20.00". The savings have to start somewhere, why not here? I unlike 99% of those on this blog have been to the landfill myself since it closed, to dispose of waste. I really dont understand what the difference would be to the area around it. The biggest difference to the landfill will be rather than dumping garbage into big containers and having them hauled off after they have sat in the hot sun smelling rosey, the garbage will hit the ground and get covered up. Negliglbe difference of heavy truck traffic for the most part I bet.

[sensei]

I keep hearing that there are a lot of people who oppose using the landfill for MSW. Where are they? If this is true, there should have been thousands of citizens in the streets during council meetings. I've heard that 150 show up. That sure isn't a lot considering 270k live in Greensboro.
With all the info out there, why is there still talk of "lowest cost?" Listen to what Joe is saying about that.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Wendy, you're mixing up the Dam with the landfill. That's okay, most folks in Greensboro are blissfully unaware of - and beyond caring about - anyone past their city limits.

As has been pointed out here and at Cone's, the Randolph County Manager (Dick Wells) is laboring to fly in his "deal" for a regional landfill under the radar of public scrutiny. When I've spoken to people back home about it - they've mostly looked at me and said, "What the hell?".

Moreover, they're not intersted in making any kind of deal.

(It goes without saying that I've insulted Mick by even mentioning personal conversations I've had with citizens of Asheboro about the landfill.)

Meanwhile, the GSO TV and print press will do their part to aide and abet Wells if it gets your trash trucked out of Guilford County.

Nice.

Happy Hurricane, you-all. I'm out and battening down.

[Brian Clarey]

Pretty sure the council doesn't give a crap what I think, but yes, I am opposed to the council's decision to oppose a previous council's decision to close the landfill.
But that really doesn't matter when we are examining the RFPs to see which is the best, which is what we are doing, no?
Gate City offers a fixed cost per ton, and is the lowest bid if we process 5,000-10,000 tons per month. Greensboro MSW alone is 11,600 tons a month, about half from residences, the rest commercial. IF we lose several commercial customers we can get our waste down under the 10,000-ton mark, but why would we want to do that? They pay for it.
After arguing that Gate City had the lowest bid, Thompson checked his math and then said that the key difference between Gate City and Advanced Disposal was that GC was local, which, of course they are due to involvement by DH Griffin.
But this whole thing was pitched as a cost-savings maneuver, Joe, was it not? And instead of answering my questions with more questions, why do you not make your case as to why we should not save as much money as we can?
Like blah blah says, "the savings have to start somewhere."
Or is there actually some other reason for this procedure?