Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Monday, February 21, 2005

New Meaning To Dump Hahn

trashThe Daily News reports that Sun Valley residents extracted a pledge from James Hahn in 2001 to put an end to their community being the dumping ground of the city but have yet seen little action. With the Mayor running for re-election, residents are hearing the words they want to hear, but are dubious if any action will be taken.

For some decades now, the Sun Valley community has been subject to sort of an environmental holocaust with nearly all the city's dumps, landfills and junkyards located in their midst. Citizens there and in neighboring communities are saying enough is enough.
The issue stirs passions in the North Valley, where residents have long endured the diesel fumes, scarred landscape, odors and blowing trash. But their problems don't inspire much emotion among voters elsewhere in the city who enjoy the benefits of lower-cost urban landfills and who experience none of the disadvantages.
Daily News
As the article says, its not something that is going to stir the passion of the City as a whole, but you have to have some sympathy for these folks' plight and hope that the candidates will addres and deal with the complex issue.

37 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

FROM MEAT:

So Bradley wants to increase the height of landfill, unfortunately mr cardenas is willing to let this happen as long as he gets an amenities fund so he can have some funny money to play with.

If we were to compare dumps, you can actually have a picnic at Sunshine as compared to Bradley. Personally i think both should go, but Bradley is an evironmental injustice. Hahn and Cardenas are to b lame is they let this expansion happen.

blog away

February 21, 2005 11:54 AM  

Anonymous 3rdFloorGuy said:

Meat,

Glad you agree. So when is Mr. Villaraigosa going to accept responsibility for CD14's share of the trash?

February 21, 2005 12:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

FROM MEAT:

3rd floor guy -- you want to debate trash policy let's go at it. Not often i get to debate public policy on here, so let's have some fun.

But before i debate, i'd like to give some context on this whole matter. Hahn 4 years ago while city attorny had a major opportunity to insert himself on sunshine and stop its passage. With the lawsuit funded in part by bernson and Korenstein there was legal precedent for Hahn to step in. He chose not to because he claimed he represented the city. But to the activists in Granada Hills, Hahn didn't even seem upset by Sunshine, he just let it go by. 4 years ago is when the city actually had some say over the entire issue, and the city council and Hahn let those folks down. That said, Deaton has actually put a good deal for the city -- its paying pennies on the dollar for Sunshine services. So instead of claiming defeat the folks in G Hills decided to make it very very expensive for BFI to continue operating on that site, so about a year in half ago they sued BFI to double layer the dump, which they won, which BFI appealed and lost. This will cost BFI an additional 20-25 million dollars to double line this dump.

All the candidates accept Parks have the same stance on the dumps in LA -- so 3rd floor guy i don't understand your question. But if we look at the reason LCV and the Sierra Club endorsed Antonio he plans on increasing recycling throughout the city, hence decreasing the amount of trash the city sends to dumps. Thus lowering the cost and saving joe taxpayer some money.

blog away

February 21, 2005 12:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This is just another example of the Mayor’s stupid campaign promises and poor planning on the City’s part under Hahn.
First of all, City residents generate 200 tons of trash per day. What do people think we should do with all this trash? Rail haul it out to the desert? Ha I don’t think so. If we do pull out of Sunshine Canyon landfill it will cost the City about 20 million per year. This cost will be passed along to everyone.
I think we need a Mayor that can think long term and look at other options. He should talk with CM Smith he has some good ideas.

February 21, 2005 12:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Mayor Sam: you misread this article.

February 21, 2005 12:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I understand you can talk about trash policy because you are obviously an expert on trash, MEAT? But I think you should look up the word "debate" in the dictionary before you use it. Your undertsanding of "debate" is either repeating the campaign spin of Villaraigosa or citing a particular newspaper article that supports Villaraigos's position. Debate is when you can think for yourself on your feet and articulate your thoughts. You haven't demonstrated any such ability since I have been reading your posts. Blog away with your poorly spelled, badly thought out spin , MEAT, that's all you are good for....

February 21, 2005 1:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No, he can drive, too, I have been told.

February 21, 2005 1:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Has MEAT ever delivered on his promise to list the 80 or so Neighborhood watches he reckons Villaraigosa set up? And what about the proof that bar owners, "sleazy" bar owners, he called them, were financing the recall. Did he ever post that proof? He's just a rubbish talker. What's that smell? Phew, it's BAD MEAT!

February 21, 2005 1:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

AV is smart--or at least Pacheco was--in that he gets a million dollars a year for trash processing fees that he can spend anywhere in the district. Cardenas should be so lucky. And Perry got screwed (her district is very close to the facility).

February 21, 2005 2:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yes, let's remember it was Pacheco's idea. Villaraigosa is too dumb to have such ideas.

February 21, 2005 2:28 PM  

Blogger The Civic-Minded Noodge said:

Good grief, it would be nice to have some actual policy debate here for a change instead of ad hominem attacks against the candidates and other bloggers/commenters.

Parks is the only honest broker on the landfill issue, as far as I'm concerned. Shipping trash outside the city limits is too expensive, there's nowhere to build a new major dump, and no recycling program is going to eliminate the need for significant solid waste disposal.

Whatever happened to Hahn's blue-ribbon commission on alternatives to Sunshine Canyon?

February 21, 2005 2:57 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

FROM MEAT:

Hmm wonder why only GOP activists received a recall villaraigosa e-mail this morning. Must mean that the recall folks are trying to broaden their appeal since their alcohol money is running out. I can list all the e-mails that were e-mailed this morning, the ironic thing is all the folks that received the e-mail don't live in the district. Odd that recall freaks would send out an e-mail to GOP activists that don't live in the district (which means they can't circulate petitions because they are not CD14 residents and they can't sign the petition either) this must only mean that the RECALL folks are merely a publicity stunt meant only to derail Antonio's campaign, and nothing else.

blog away dum-dums

February 21, 2005 3:04 PM  

Blogger SacramentoNighties said:

As long as the topic is dumping trash, I'm happy to say there's finally some evidence of an upcoming mayor's race in terms of lawn signs in CD14. "For rent" is still leading in the district in terms of visibility, but (glory be) there ARE now Attention-Deficit "VILLARAIGOSA" signs (wet, soggy, little signs) in a number of places - mostly freeway offramps, empty lots and public parkways, vacated buildings, and in front of boarded-over, closed businesses.

(But that's another topic, why ARE there so many empty lots and boarded up businesses in CD14, why did one local CofC in the Northeast give up and actually close its doors last year, doesn't CD14 have a full-time biz-dev person - little blond huera looks like she's 14 and scared of people?) But I digress...

Wasn't sure whether to mention the ADV® signs, since most of them are "technically" in illegal locations -- want him to lose, not get misled volunteers in trouble. But the symbolism was just too perfect.

CD14: Empty lots, vacated buildings, closed businesses. ADV®: Empty suit, vacated promises, council offices closed for any business but getting him elected somewhere else.

Note to lawn-signs staff -- take plastic bags with you next time and pick up some of the piles of trash at the base of all the ADV® signs -- the day-o-service people must've missed these. Field staff can probably arrange to have a photog follow you around, for motivation.

February 21, 2005 3:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"...merely a publicity stunt meant only to derail Antonio's campaign."

If this is true (probably not, considering the source), I'm SHOCKED. How DARE anyone by Tony V. stage publicity stunts to derail someone else's campaign without having facts and truth to back them up. Thought those were copyrighted somewhere by Antonio's campaign team. Is there NO honor among thieves? (Really, STEALing each others ideas, nasty business this politics!)

Geez, why even mention it, meat, it's just "five sleazy bar owners" right. Not even worth the time it takes you to type in the rambling, nearly incoherent sentences. Save your strength for making up fake approval numbers that you'll need even more in the next phase. If you really believe they're not reaching anyone, and that no one of importance reads this blog, let them waste their time on the recall. If you convince them they're useless this way, they might find something to do that actually hurts Antonio. There are SO many options there, considering his massive politikal baggage.

Sleazy Bar owner #854

February 21, 2005 3:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hold on now. If Bradley wants to increase the height of the landfill, it will (or did) require City Council approval. Who on the City Council is willing to pass this and send it to the Mayor to sign?

February 21, 2005 3:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey MEAT you have just promised us another list. Want to post it by say noon on Tuesday? Thanks, MEAT

February 21, 2005 5:11 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parks will approve any landfill expansion within City limits. Simple fact of the matter is that the San Fernando Valley doesn't need to remain the dumping ground for the rest of us. We need to expand our recycling efforts, multiply transfer stations, and invest in alternative methods of dumping trash. People in this state let along this country are behind the times. We continue to dig holes in neighborhing communities near reservoirs that serve millions of LA County residents.

You naysayers have no idea how these landfills impact our communities. I welcome the Mayor's pledge and those of the other candidates. There is not much we can do on Sunshine, but we need alternatives. Stop feeding us this Bernie Parks line about landfills. The extra cost is simple burden we all have to share.

February 21, 2005 5:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

MEAT has become ADV's worst nightmare, now. A candidate now best know to the Eastside as a promise-breaker being defended incessantly by a blogger who keep promising facts and figures and backing them up with mindless rants and character assassination of other candidates. Birds of a feather.

February 21, 2005 5:35 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

MEAT....ADV's eastside campaign office is on top of one of the bars he closed down or rather Rocky closed down. I've heard he's not paying rent and set up shop illegally. Someone should investigate. Looks like ADV had alterior motives to shut them down. MEAT you said ADV didn't take money from CD14 Neighborhood Councils yet people have posted it's true. I believe its also documented on meeting minutes. So ADV took money while sitting on thousands. What do you have to say now MEAT?

February 21, 2005 7:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Swinging back around to the actual policy question here...under the most recent round of bids, shipping trash out of the area costs an additional $10 million. For the reduced health impacts, quality of life impacts, and (potential) traffic impacts, that seems worth it. Combined with improved recycling via price leveling at MRFs--but not the euphemistically named "waste to energy"--the cost could be dropped even lower. $10 million a year is a cheap price for ending landfilling inside the city, no?

YTVB

February 21, 2005 7:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Is that amatuer MEAT still posting. I thought he ran away to Antonio2005,- it's a little easier to act big and act as if you know something over there answering Antonio's groupies questions. But, anyway, I look forward to that list he's posting on Tuesday. And, MEAT, tell us where the email originates from, too. You sure it's not Antonio tapping his republican friends for more money?

February 21, 2005 7:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

LAT endorsement. "Vllaraigosa, the anti-wonk." Translation: "Villaraigosa, the dumb bastard."

February 21, 2005 8:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yes let us get back to the policy question at hand. $10 million is a bargain for reducing the impacts on communities. City leaders must get more aggressive on this issue before the BFI contract expires in 2006 or else its just typical political grandstanding. This is a real opportunity.

February 21, 2005 9:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

MEAT why is your boss ADv missing more days. He asked to be excused Feb. 28th, March 1,2,3, for personal reason. More time not doing his job. Is he going to WA DC again?

February 22, 2005 11:25 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Where is the list MEAT?

February 22, 2005 11:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Where is the backup for your claims of an ADV "81 percent approval rating" in CD14, Meat?

February 22, 2005 2:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Where's the KABC-TV tracking backup that shows Villaraigosa on top, and Hertzberg virtually unknown, MEAT?

February 22, 2005 2:24 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yeah, meat, where's the (now) top-secret internal tracking that shows AV 7 points ahead of Hahn?

Before you "deliver" the runoff the Antonio -- try delivering on even a few of the bogus numbers you past as FACTS here every damn day!

February 22, 2005 2:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That ABC7/Survey USA poll will today at 6:00 pm PST if I am not mistaken. Could be some surprises.

February 22, 2005 4:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'll go back to the policy question. Why do we have to put up with someone asking MEAT to produce an email list or listen to someone rant about wet Villaraigosa yard signs when the subject was landfills?

Ten million a year is definitely a cheap price to eliminate urban landfills. In fact, if every resident paid for their own trash pick up rather than have it paid from the general fund, it would not cost the city a thing.

The environmentalists, the residents around Bradley and Sunshine, small haulers, the recyclers and everybody would be happy.

It's hard to be a leader..and L.A. needs to be progressive in this arena.

February 22, 2005 4:08 PM  

Blogger The Civic-Minded Noodge said:

I don't disagree with the other comments that $10 million a year is worth it to ship trash away from L.A. proper, but I still say Parks is the only honest broker on this issue because he's at least willing to say that there's no easy answer here.

The other mayoral candidates' opposition to landfills is meaningless unless they actually demonstrate some leadership by acknowledging the tradeoffs and putting forth a specific plan. If you want to shut down the landfills, it will take more than increased recycling to make up the difference in solid waste disposal: it will cost money, either in fees to residents (yet another regressive tax), plundering some other budget in the general fund, or a combination of the two. And who wants to tell voters and Neighborhood Councils that if they want a "landfill-free city," they have to choose between losing services they value (road repair! green space! cops!) or paying more in fees/taxes. Not our mayoral frontrunners, that's for sure.

Recycling will cost money to expand, at least initially -- takes years for that to become economical -- which is not to say that it isn't worthwhile, especially in the long run.

Hahn is most disingenuous -- he's had four years to come up with a plan, but instead he's just got a slogan.

February 22, 2005 4:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Your absolutely right in your assessment Noodge. Bernie is talking common sense when it comes to trash. But we need better alternatives and most importantly, we need better leadership. We need visionary leadership on this costly issue. Not just political grandstanding for the folks out in the Valley or just giving up by saying the dump is here let's just use it till it fills up. Most if not all of the Valley NCs have taken some kind of position against the expansion of the landfill.

February 22, 2005 5:00 PM  

Blogger The Civic-Minded Noodge said:

Sure the Valley NCs oppose landfills, but have they developed or endorsed any practical, detailed strategies to wean the city off its landfill habit?

Now that would be interesting -- if some leader were to work something out so that the NCs and IAF/One LA would be out front on the issue and THEY could take the heat on costs and inconveniences.

The macro issue here that is troubling, however, is LA's pattern of exporting its undesirable environmental problems. We derive electricity from coal that pollutes Utah and Nevada, we derive water from the Owens Valley that chokes on toxic dust from the dry lakebed, and now we're going to fill up landfills in someone else's backyard or a fragile desert ecosystem? This doesn't bother the average LA voter, but it sure ought to bother people who consider themselves environmentalists or advocates for environmental justice.

February 22, 2005 5:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Oh yes, those in the valley who oppose the landfill are definitely bothered by many of L.A.'s environmental practices. Bradley and Sunshine landfills just happen to be one we are familiar with and have knowledge about.

Any detailed strategy would cost money and of course, real environmentalists would prefer they be implemented immediately. Conservation is the key.

Those alternatives are out there, and Greig Smith will soon be presenting detailed strategy because there is no easy answer. There are definitely other solutions and City Hall will be deluged with supporters and opposers soon. (they actually already have been)

February 22, 2005 7:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The communities that live near Valley dumps have been introducing options to the City and the County for over ten years and even though I do not support Mayor Hahn, he is the only one that has tried to implement some of those programs. It has not happened as quickly as we want, however, no other Mayor or County Supervisor has ever done much.
Hahn gave the mandate to those City departments to stop dumping our residential trash in the City and at least there is a definite move in the right direction.
The community does not want to send trash to other urban areas, we promote reduction and
alternatives so each region of LA would have to deal with its own trash using alternative technologies.
Hahn did assemble a committee and it has reviewed many choices the City has, however, these must be implemented now so the City can be out of dumps in LA. The problem is that it is moving slowly and after so many years of pushing progress it is hard to be patient.
Just a note, years ago the community lives near Sunshine helped shut Lopez Dump and keep another new dump in our County from opening. As a result Sunshine got all that trash. The community thought that residents near Lopez must be supported. They also feel that Bradley Dump is also horrible and have supported that communities effort to keep it from expanding. It was the right thing to do even if Sunhine got more trash.
These ideas and efforts do not always make the front page, however, us activists will continue to push forward no matter who becomes our new Mayor. Eventually, we hope LA will be a leader and not keep the archaic method of burying trash.

February 24, 2005 6:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The communities that live near Valley dumps have been introducing options to the City and the County for over ten years and even though I did not support Mayor Hahn in the last election, he is the only one that has tried to implement some of those programs. It has not happened as quickly as we want, however, no other Mayor or County Supervisor has ever done much.
Hahn gave the mandate to those City departments to stop dumping our residential trash in the City and at least there is a definite move in the right direction.
The community does not want to send trash to other urban areas, we promote reduction and
alternatives so each region of LA would have to deal with its own trash using alternative technologies.
Hahn did assemble a committee and it has reviewed many choices the City has, however, these must be implemented now so the City can be out of dumps in LA. The problem is that it is moving slowly and after so many years of pushing progress it is hard to be patient.
Just a note, years ago the community lives near Sunshine helped shut Lopez Dump and keep another new dump in our County from opening. As a result Sunshine got all that trash. The community thought that residents near Lopez must be supported. They also feel that Bradley Dump is also horrible and have supported that communities effort to keep it from expanding. It was the right thing to do even if Sunhine got more trash.
These ideas and efforts do not always make the front page, however, us activists will continue to push forward no matter who becomes our new Mayor. Eventually, we hope LA will be a leader and not keep the archaic method of burying trash.

February 24, 2005 6:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The communities that live near Valley dumps have been introducing options to the City and the County for over ten years and even though I do not support Mayor Hahn, he is the only one that has tried to implement some of those programs. It has not happened as quickly as we want, however, no other Mayor or County Supervisor has ever done much.
Hahn gave the mandate to those City departments to stop dumping our residential trash in the City and at least there is a definite move in the right direction.
The community does not want to send trash to other urban areas, we promote reduction and
alternatives so each region of LA would have to deal with its own trash using alternative technologies.
Hahn did assemble a committee and it has reviewed many choices the City has, however, these must be implemented now so the City can be out of dumps in LA. The problem is that it is moving slowly and after so many years of pushing progress it is hard to be patient.
Just a note, years ago the community lives near Sunshine helped shut Lopez Dump and keep another new dump in our County from opening. As a result Sunshine got all that trash. The community thought that residents near Lopez must be supported. They also feel that Bradley Dump is also horrible and have supported that communities effort to keep it from expanding. It was the right thing to do even if Sunhine got more trash.
These ideas and efforts do not always make the front page, however, us activists will continue to push forward no matter who becomes our new Mayor. Eventually, we hope LA will be a leader and not keep the archaic method of burying trash.

February 24, 2005 7:27 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement