Letters, Newspapers, and Television stations:
Big cities need to stop pushing trash
|
|
|
There is little doubt we are a nation of trash makers.
We also are sorely lacking in recycling initiatives.
It is no wonder trash companies are continuously looking
for places to put our castoffs.
That is the situation in Avery, where a landowner backed
by big trash companies is seeking to establish a large landfill area near the
city limits.
Nearby residents are upset that the dump site could pose
many problems for them.
Among those problems are a possible decrease in the value
of nearby homes and land, the constant noise and danger from huge trash trucks
delivering their loads to the landfill, the occasional smells and dangerous
gases sometimes emitted from a landfill, and a general unsightly appearance to
the area.
But there is a far more dangerous issue at hand with the
development of a
The serious problem faced here is those who create the
trash would be dumping it on those who have little means to fight against it.
Those who sought to create the dump probably picked an
area they thought least likely to be able to carry on the battle in the courts
to prevent such a landfill from being developed.
In many small country areas they would be right. People
there would not be able to raise the funds to fight such an intrusion, but in
Avery, the people are standing up and raising the money to continue the battle
against the landfill.
Even though they have the Texas Attorney General’s office
also defending the state’s position in rejecting the landfill, opponents in Red
River County are taking nothing for granted and battling on to ensure the
landfill application stays rejected.
They are right in doing so.
It is time the big cities and larger populated areas find
trash dumps in their own areas and quit trying to push their trash on lesser
populated places.
It is time each entity take care of its own trash, or do a
better job of recycling it.
PAGE 1
http://www.clarksvillenews.net/MARCH-07/8/01%20Front%20Page.pdf
PAGE 2
http://www.clarksvillenews.net/MARCH-07/8/pg%202.pdf
Group raises money for landfill fight
|
|
|
AVERY — Concerned Citizens for Red River County, a
group formed to battle a proposed landfill near Avery, is keeping its irons in
the fire by continuing its fight to intervene in a lawsuit concerning a
challenge to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s denial of a permit for
the landfill.
The battle over the landfill began when Edwin B. Kelsoe of Avery applied for a permit for a proposed
TCEQ turned down the application, contending it was
incomplete and contained “administrative deficiencies.”
Kelsoe filed a lawsuit with the District Court of Travis County
challenging the decision.
TCEQ sought a dismissal of the lawsuit by the court, with
CCRRC filing a motion to intervene in the proceedings. The court denied the
motion for dismissal, ruling that the case could go before the court for trial.
A hearing has been set early in April to determine if the
CCRRC can be an intervener in the case.
Sunday, the CCRRC board held an emergency meeting to raise
funds to continue its battle to join in the case.
CCRRC President Ed Stephenson told the group: “It only
makes sense that we finish what they have started. If we do nothing, we won’t
be represented.”
Stephenson told the group of citizens meeting in Avery
High School cafetorium, “It will cost us about $6,000
to file our motion to continue to intervene in the case. If we are successful,
it will cost approximately $12,000 in attorney’s fees to let our attorney
prepare for the court case.”
If allowed to continue in the case, three sides can
produce information in the court trial. Kelsoe’s
attorney is seeking to have the TCEQ denial overturned and leave the permit
decision in the hands of the judge. The Texas Attorney General is defending the
TCEQ’s decision to deny the landfill, and the CCRRC
attorney will present the case for the people fighting the landfill.
“The reason these people come out to areas like ours to
develop landfills is they think we will not be able to raise the money to fight
this,” Stephenson said.
Approximately 60 residents attending the meeting agreed to
donate funds to the organization of $100 each to continue the battle against the
landfill. Many of them began handing CCRRC treasurer Jim Bain donations of
checks and cash to continue the effort.
If the group is successful in its efforts to continue in
the case, the suit will go to trial in late June.
ARTICLE
http://www.clarksvillenews.net/MARCH-07/01%20Front%20Page.pdf
MARCH
1, 2007 Letter to Editor Clarksville Times
http://www.clarksvillenews.net/MARCH-07/pg%207.pdf
February 14, 2007
Complaint
filed against CCRRC (Concerned Citizens of
Federal judge to rule on Avery landfill
|
|
|
AVERY — A
federal judge is expected to rule next week on Edwin B. Kelsoe's
lawsuit involving a permit application for a proposed municipal landfill.
Kelsoe, an
Avery resident, is seeking a judicial declaration regarding the administrative
completeness of the permit application.
The application requests a permit from Texas Commission of
Environmental Quality for a proposed Red River County Municipal Solid Waste
Facility on a 231-acre stretch of land, just eight-tenths of a mile from Avery.
The site was proposed to accept household Type 1; brush and
demolition, Type 4; and miscellaneous Type 5 waste, which might include tires,
incineration of medical waste and recycling, among other Type 5 municipal
waste.
A TCEQ ruling deemed the permit application incomplete, returning
it because of “significant administrative deficiencies.”
Kelsoe
filed a lawsuit in March challenging the decision.
On Nov. 27, U.S. District Judge Gisela D. Triana
is expected to rule on a motion filed by TCEQ to dismiss the lawsuit.
CCRRC holds landfill meeting Aug. 27.
|
|
|
CCRRC holds landfill meeting Aug. 27.
AVERY — Concerned Citizens for
The meeting is "to explain all citizens the ongoing
landfill fight," CCRRC organizers said.
CCRRC is a non-profit group of residents from Avery and
Homemade ice cream is to be served.
ARTICLE
http://www.clarksvillenews.net/New%20Folder/august/24/45386-01%20Front%20Page.pdf
Letters to Editor-Clarksville Times Aug 24, 2006
http://www.clarksvillenews.net/New%20Folder/august/24/78779-05%20Editorial.pdf
Meeting to focus on landfill permit
By Shalina Ramirez
The
Published August 23, 2006
AVERY — Concerned Citizens for Red
River County (CCRRC) hosts a meeting Sunday to discuss the status of a permit
application for a proposed municipal landfill.
The meeting takes place at 3 p.m. in the
"We're fixing to have a committee meeting to
inform the citizens on progress and where we are on the landfill," Mayor
Bill Trimm said.
CCRRC is a non-profit group of
The application submitted by Edwin B. Kelsoe requested a permit from Texas Commission of
Environmental Quality for a proposed Red River County Municipal Solid Waste
Facility on a 231-acre stretch of land, just 8/10 of a mile from Avery.
The proposed site was to accept waste classified as
household type one; brush and demolition, type four; and miscellaneous type
five waste, which might include tires, incineration of medical waste and
recycling among other type five municipal waste.
The permit application was deemed incomplete and
rejected earlier this year when it failed to meet TCEQ criteria.
"Kelsoe has filed a
lawsuit in
CCRRC, represented by attorney John Moore of
"I'm hopeful they'll go along with that and throw
the lawsuit out," Trimm said.
Tentative court dates are set for Sept. 5 and 6.
"I want to encourage all citizens of
"CCRRC is going to be there until the end,"
he said. "We'll represent them to the end."
TCEQ denies Avery landfill
|
|
|
AVERY — Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality has
denied a motion to overturn a decision returning a permit application for a
proposed landfill near Avery.
The motion, filed by Edwin B. Kelsoe
on Jan. 3, requested commission consideration regarding an executive director’s
decision to return an incomplete permit application for a proposed municipal
solid waste facility. The proposed site was to be located on U.S. 82 at
Citing “significant deficiencies,” TCEQ returned the
incomplete permit application for the proposed landfill in December 2005.
The application submitted by Kelsoe
requested a permit from TCEQ for a proposed Red River County Municipal Solid
Waste Facility on a 231-acre stretch of land.
The proposed site was to accept household Type 1; brush and
demolition Type 4; and miscellaneous Type 5 waste, which might include tires,
incineration of medical waste and recycling among other type five municipal waste.
“It was going to destroy our town,” Avery Mayor Bill Trimm said in a previous interview. “It was a mile from our
school and this wasn’t just your Coke can, milk carton dump. They were going to
put in medical waste and other toxic stuff.”
In a Sept. 19, 2005 news report,
“This is not a hazardous waste dump,” he said at that time.
“It is not a dump, it is a landfill that is highly
regulated. You won’t see it; and you won’t smell it; and it has no possibility
to contaminate the environment.”
Landfill application could be scrapped
By Mary Madewell
The
Published October 30, 2005
CLARKSVILLE
— The clock ticks on an application, and the battle
intensifies over a proposed municipal solid waste landfill near Avery.
Landowner Edwin B. Kelsoe has less than 20 days to
file a lengthy list of corrections to a landfill application with the
That application was originally filed Aug. 8 — eight days before
The county’s first ordinance prohibits waste disposal in some areas and the
second prohibits solid waste processing, also in defined areas.
“It doesn’t look like he’s been doing his homework,” Avery Mayor Bill Trimm said of Lescher and the
TCEQ application. “I understand if they don’t get all the corrections made the
whole application submit the entire application with revisions in lieu of submittal
of the replacement pages and additions described above,” the TCEQ letter
states. “Failure to submit the requested information within 30 days of the date
of receipt of this notice letter will cause the application to be removed from
the TCEQ list of pending projects and be returned to the applicant.”
If the application is returned, Kelsoe would lose the
position of having an application on file prior to the passage of a county
ordinance that could block the landfill.
The Aug. 16 ordinance prohibits solid waste disposal within one mile of a
residence, water well, stream or river and within five miles of any public
school.
Lescher said Friday he sees no problem in satisfying TCEQ’s requirements and in keeping the current application
alive. He also called the Aug. 16 ordinance passed by
“Just try to figure out a place in
Lescher said the letter from TCEQ is part of “the
process” involved in obtaining a solid waste disposal permit.
“We have a lot of work to do, but I’m optimistic we will pass the test,” Lescher said of his client’s application for a landfill
capable of handling waste classified as household, brush and demolition; and
miscellaneous (including medical.)
The county ordinance passed last week prohibits solid waste processing within
five miles of any public school or licensed day care facility or within two
miles of an airport.
The proposed landfill is located within a mile of the school on a 231-acre site
west of Avery at the corner of
“We are just trying to keep them away from schools and population centers,”
Peek said. “Neither ordinance prohibits them, but they list certain areas where
you can’t have them.”
The most recent ordinance also provides restrictions involving the TQEC
application process.
“The court therefore finds that no application for a permit should be
considered pending before any agency if that application does not provide a
full and complete explanation of all disposal and processing methodologies,
complete with all technical drawings, reports, engineering seals and supporting
documentation as would be necessary for a determination of approval of the
complete application for a complete permit.”
The Oct. 24 ordinance states that the use of current technology and science
with regard to the location, installation, operation and maintenance of solid
waste disposal sites and processing sites cannot ensure that such sites will
not contaminate, spoil and pollute areas surrounding the site.
Specifically contained in the newest ordinance is the wording that both the
Aug. 16 ordinance and the Oct. 24 ordinance “apply to all proposed solid waste
processing or disposal facilities that have not been constructed and for which
the facility proponent has not submitted a complete application to the Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality.”
Peek said Friday that he does not know how the latest ordinance might affect
the Kelsoe application.
“I’m not sure whether his original application covered the processing,” Peek
said. “If it did not, he could have some trouble.”
Peek expressed confidence in the legality of both ordinances.
“We studied both of these ordinances and our county attorney has been our guide
on this,” Peek said.
Lescher said he questions the court’s intent with
both ordinances and is certain that state statute would override a county
ordinance with regard to an application process.
“The application process has two parts, but it is one application,” Lescher said. “We plan to get parts one and two
administratively complete and then work through parts three and four.”
Lescher said parts one and two deal mainly with site
appropriateness as it deals with the possibility of contamination and nearby
land usage. Parts three and four deal with site operations.
September 18, 2005
Crowd voices ire over possible
landfill
|
|
|
|
By JAKE BECKWITH
"It was about what I expected. It was
a 47-minute meeting and it lasted about 40 minutes longer than I thought it
would last. I appreciate all the turnout. I know it
was hot and uncomfortable but that was part of their plan,"
An estimated 250 people, many of whom clutched signs reading,
"No toxic waste dump," attended the scheduled public meeting within
the town square.
Attorney Mark Lesher
and engineer George Neill joined Kelsoe in trying to
address some of the concerns from the people in the crowd.
Both Lesher and Neill made brief remarks
before handing the microphone over to the people in the audience.
|
|
The first person to speak in opposition to
the proposed landfill was the owner of
He incorporated the book of Job into his remarks, concluding with
a promise to the people in attendance: "You don't want this, ladies and
gentlemen. And we will help you in any way we can."
Lesher
tried to squelch the public's health and safety concerns at Sunday's meeting by
telling the audience the proposed landfill would adhere to the guidelines and
restrictions set forth by the Ark-Tex Council of Governments.
"The incinerators that burn the
medical waste are regulated. This soil (from landfill) has no possibility of
contaminating the ground water," Lesher said. " ...We have the safety of the community in mind big
time because, if we don't have the safety of the community in mind, we will be
shut down.
" ... You won't see it and you won't
smell it," he said about the landfill.
There was a deafening silence from the
crowd after Lesher asked if anyone wanted to speak in
favor of the proposed landfill.
It was the only time during the meeting no
one in the audience had anything to say.
A steady flow of people ranging from
preteen children to senior adults spoke out against the location of the
proposed landfill until Lesher abruptly ended the
meeting 47 minutes after it started.
A woman later identified as Edwin Kelsoe's aunt, Doris Cagle, approached the microphone and
was waiting for her turn to speak when Lesher
concluded the public meeting, saying the comments had dissolved into personal
attacks rather than statements of fact.
The dissatisfied
crowd began chanting, "Let him speak. Let him speak," presumably referring
to Kelsoe, who stood silent with his arms crossed in
front of his chest throughout the majority of the meeting.
Attention was diverted from the podium
about five minutes before the meeting ended when a member of the audience
fainted. With the heat index creeping up into triple digits Sunday, the
National Weather Service issued a heat advisory warning people to limit the
amount of time spent outdoors.
"Good meeting spot you picked out.
You kill all of us off, you won't have a problem putting it in," someone
in the crowd shouted at the podium.
The unidentified man in the audience was
not the first person to make a negative personal statement in reference to Kelsoe and his team.
"It appears this meeting is getting
very, very out of line. We don't need any confrontations or threats. This is a
public meeting," Lesher said at one point during
the public meeting.
He did concede to those in attendance
financial benefits were a consideration in the group's decision to pursue a
landfill permit.
Those in the audience did not sound
appreciative when Neill told the crowd the proposed landfill could offer some
economic benefits to the community via taxes and new jobs.
Release Date: 09.09.05
REP. MARK
HOMER REQUESTS PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS PROPOSED AVERY LANDFILL
"I know many people have reservations about this landfill coming into the
area," said Rep. Homer. "I don't feel that a project such as this
should be undertaken without an overwhelming voice of support, which is why I
have asked TCEQ for this public meeting. I want everyone who wants to speak for
or against the landfill to have their turn at the microphone."
Currently, there has been a public meeting called by the landfill applicants
set for September 18, 2005. This meeting is controlled by the applicant and it
is the understanding of Rep. Homer that the venue would be small and not
accommodating for a large public audience. He hopes that his request will allow
a better opportunity for the voices of the citizens affected by this landfill
to be heard.
"I anticipate getting a response very soon from TCEQ as to the time, date
and location of the meeting, and I plan to be in attendance," said Rep.
Homer. "This is an issue that will affect the entire region for years to
come, and it is my hope that many others from the community will also take this
opportunity to show up and make their concerns known."
For more information on this or any other issue, Rep. Homer encourages
interested individuals to contact his office at (512) 463-0650 or (903)
784-0977, e-mail him at mark.homer@house.state.tx.us,
visit the State of
August 26, 2005
ATCOG committee votes against nominee
after group protests
|
|
|
|
By JAKE BECKWITH
Representatives from the Ark-Tex Council of Government's Executive
Committee of the Board of Directors were greeted by members of the Concerned
Citizens for Red River County Thursday morning at the First National Bank in
Omaha, Texas.
Many of the estimated 35 to 40 CCRRC
members expressed displeasure with the nomination of George Neill from
"There is no way Neill could be unbiased toward Red River
County since he is the engineer of record of the (proposed landfill) job,"
Avery, Texas, Mayor Bill Trimm said.
After reviewing and discussing the facts,
the ATCOG Executive Committee voted not to appoint Neill to the Solid Waste
Advisory Committee.
|
|
"It just does not seem to be a wise
governmental move to me" to appoint him to the committee because
"Neill is the engineer working with (property owner) Mr. (Edwin) Kelsoe for the proposed landfill in Avery," she said.
"I would think he should have no say or sway in what comes
before our committee. It is nothing personal against Mr. Neill, but the
application for the landfill in Avery has been filed," she said.
"I would have been really
disappointed if the results were any different than they were," Trimm said.
Also, after the meeting, Diane Atkinson,
ATCOG Environmental Resource Planner with the Regional Planning &
Development Division, said the first two parts of the TCEQ application for the
proposed landfill just outside of Avery arrived on her desk last week. She said
members of the ATCOG Executive Committee could visit her office if interested
in viewing the document.
AUGUST 17, 2005
Officials approve landfill ordinance
|
|
|
|
New rules may be too late to stop project
By JAKE BECKWITH
CLARKSVILLE, Texas -Red River County Commissioners
unanimously passed an ordinance Tuesday prohibiting solid waste disposals in
the county within a mile of a residence or water well.
But it may be too late.
Mark Lesher, the
lawyer representing the party behind a proposed landfill on U.S. Highway 82 and
County Road 4325, told the Gazette he submitted part of the
He said it his understanding that by submitting the application
prior to the commissioner's court passing of the ordinance, his client would be
exempt from the new solid waste disposal restrictions.
|
|
At presstime,
TCEQ officials had not responded as to whether they had received the landfill
application.
A handful of Avery residents, including the city mayor, made the
trip to the
Though he asked if anyone in the audience
wanted to comment before the council took action, no one accepted his offer.
Most of them had already shared their viewpoints with the council during
Monday's public meeting.
"I move we adopt the motion,"
Precinct 4 Commissioner Josef Hausler said.
After Precinct 1 Commissioner Rufus Ward,
Jr., seconded the motion, Peek called for a debate. When none of the
commissioners posed an argument, the council moved to vote on the ordinance.
Less than five minutes into the meeting,
the council voted unanimously in favor of passing the ordinance, with the
endorsement of Precinct 3 Commissioner Elmer Caton,
Ward and Hausler. Precinct 2 Commissioner M.D. Whittle
was not present.
The ordinance makes it illegal for a solid
waste disposal to operate within one mile from any residence, water well,
stream or river. It is also illegal to operate a solid waste facility within
five miles of any public school.
Violation of the ordinance is punishable
by a Class C misdemeanor and a fine not to exceed $500 with each day in
violation constituting a separate offense. Civil penalties are also available,
with each day in violation punishable up to $10,000.
L.D. Williamson, executive director for
the Ark-Tex Council of Government (ATCOG), said Lesher
exercised his right not to send any portion of the TCEQ landfill application to
ATCOG, instead sending it directly to TCEQ without ATCOG's
recommendation.
"We can't make a recommendation
because we have not seen the plan. The only thing (Lesher's
group) submitted to us was a checklist of what they want to put in. Just a
simple check list that will guide us to know if (their proposed landfill) fits
into our plans," Williamson said.
ATCOG does not grant landfill permits,
Williamson said.
Instead, it sets environmental regulations
and reviews at least the first two portions of the TCEQ application to see
proposed projects follow the minimum standards set.
Williamson said ATCOG never suggested
building a solid waste disposal near Avery, instead saying the soil near the
proposed site was "compatible to building a landfill" because it was
not "too absorbent."
Peek told members of the audience they were
welcomed to stay for the council's budget workshop, but most of them declined
the county judge's invitation and excused themselves from the meeting.
August 16, 2005
Landfill ordinance meets no opposition
|
|
|
|
By JAKE BECKWITH
At least two dozen people stood before the
county judge and commissioner's court, stated their names and voiced their
support for the ordinance.
More than 50 people, many of them residents of
Whispers fluttered across the room during
the public meeting, indicating the group in favor of the proposed landfill had
already submitted the Ark-Tex Council of Government's (ATCOG) landfill
application to the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) prior to
the commissioner's court voting on the proposed ordinance.
Lawyer Mark Lesher, who represents the
landowner whose property may become the landfill, spoke to the Gazette Monday
afternoon.
|
|
He confirmed speculation the group
submitted the "land use" portion of the ATCOG application to TECQ on
Tuesday, Aug. 9.
He told the Gazette it was his understanding that by submitting
the land use portion of the ATCOG application before a decision was reached
regarding the county ordinance, the property in question would be exempted from
the ordinance's restrictions, should the ordinance get passed at an 8:30 a.m.
meeting today.
Once the application is submitted to the
Ark-Tex Council of Governments, the organization will forward its
recommendations to the
"This is not about being for or
against a proposed landfill in Avery. This is about being for or against an
ordinance as I described it," he said.
Despite the judge's reminder, some
speakers still slipped in comments about how they believe the proposed landfill
at
The potential landfill site is located
about a half mile from the Avery school building.
Dalton Jackson of Avery, Texas, was just
one of more than two dozen people who spoke out in support of the county
ordinance because he believes the proposed landfill would adversely affect the
city's two major industries: livestock and wildlife.
"The entire county is against (the
landfill). Did you hear anyone say anything for it? There is no one for it
except the people putting it in. There are lots of folks who come back to Avery
to retire. They are opposed to the landfill because that is not what they
remember," he said.
Greg King, an Avery, Texas, resident, also
expressed concerns regarding the proposed landfill just outside of Avery. He
worried about the future of his hometown.
"All this will do is push people away.
We don't need something like this pushing more people out of our community. We
have to have landfills, but there have to be much more desirable areas to put
this stuff, remote locations that won't affect our community," he said.
Not a single person at the meeting spoke
in opposition to the ordinance, except to recommend stiffer rules against solid
waste disposal facilities.
Commissioners Elmer Caton
of Precinct 3 and Josef Hausler of Precinct 4 went on
record supporting the ordinance and the audience rewarded them with a round of
applause.
The commissioners
court will make an official decision on the ordinance today.
"I hate to predict, but I feel good
about the ordinance (getting passed)," Hausler
said.
|
|
TEXARKANA GAZETTE AUGUST 2, 2005
County blocks proposed landfill
|
|
|
|
Ordinance prohibits disposal of solid
waste in or around Red River County
By JAKE BECKWITH
If eventually passed by the majority of the
The court designed the ordinance for the
purposes of "prevent[ing] a grave and immediate
threat to life and property," stating further development of landfills in
certain areas of the county would constitute "an unacceptable risk and
threat to the public health; safety and welfare."
The ordinance prohibits the disposal of solid waste in
|
|
"You cannot completely ban solid
municipal waste dumps, and I agree with that (belief). On the other hand, it is
not wise to put one close to wells, streams and schools. (You have to) weigh safety
versus rights of landowners. I think the ordinance put together is a fair
compromise," said
The
"It is part of the many steps we are
taking to prevent the landfill from coming to Avery," he said.
He said Peek and
"I know there are people strongly for
it and against it. We will listen to their reactions," Peek said.
He said the ordinance will be publicized
in the local papers for the next two weeks before a final decision is made on
it. He said a public meeting to discuss the proposed ordinance is tentatively
scheduled for Aug. 15.
The
According to the ordinance, any violation
could result in fines, with each day in violation counting as a separate
violation. Violations would be misdemeanors.
http://www.Clarksvillenews/july/28/front%20pg%20728.pdf
In Our View: Stay with it
|
|
|
|
Avery officials, residents
right to be watchful
Hang in there, Avery residents and officials. Don't let anyone
dump on you. And don't be persuaded by the backers of a proposed landfill to
back off your opposition until they submit their applications and formal
proposals.
Plans are afoot to submit an application
for a landfill to be located on a tract about a mile from the city limits.
Mayor Bill Trimm called a community
meeting when he got wind of the landfill plans-no pun intended. About 10
percent of Avery's 450 residents turned out, and they were not there to welcome
a landfill.
Yet the people pushing the paperwork-an
attorney for the landowner and the engineer working on the preliminary landfill
application-say Avery residents are premature in their objections and should
wait until the application is completed to voice their opinions on what might
happen to their city and their property values.
The landfill supporters say they don't know yet what kind of
landfill they will want to build. Yet they accuse opponents of only objecting
on the basis of innuendo.
|
|
Well, absent the facts about what kind of
landfill permit the landowner will seek, all Avery residents have to go on is
innuendo. When someone's flying under the radar, you have to guess where they're
going.
And if you wait, it may be too late. In some corners, silence is
seen as a lack of interest, or tacit support.
Supporters say opponents will have ample
time for public input on the landfill, once an application is filed with the
Ark-Tex Council of Governments, so they should just chill out until that time.
But that position is tantamount to giving
the landfill supporters a head start. The opponents ought not to be forced to
play catch up in the permitting process.
Maybe a landfill would be a good neighbor
and a source of jobs for the tiny
Then again, maybe not.
A lot of people in these parts don't have a good feeling about projects that
could affect not only their property values but the environment and the public
health.
At any
rate, the supporters of the landfill shouldn't expect people who will have to
live with it to take them at their word-unless, of course, the lawyers and
engineers are willing to move in next door to the dump.
|
The Copyright © 2005 The Residents smell trouble for solid
waste dump By Sara Stanglin Published July 28, 2005 AVERY
— A group of |
MT. PLEASANT DAILY TRIBUNE July 24, 2005
Letter to the Editor-Bill Trimm
Unwelcome neighbor
|
|
|
|
Avery residents examine, protest possibility
of landfill near town
By JAKE BECKWITH
AVERY, Texas-Residents here were on the
defensive earlier this week upon hearing that they may soon have a 250-acre
landfill for a neighbor.
Mayor Bill Trimm called an impromptu
meeting Tuesday afternoon to discuss grassroot
efforts to convince the State of
More than 45 people, approximately 10
percent of the population of Avery, attended the meeting.
Trimm
wrote a letter to all city residents informing them the city is "adamantly
opposed to the building of a landfill" at the private property on County
Road 4325 and U.S. Highway 82 West. The property, currently owned by Edwin Kelsoe, is located about a mile from the city limits.
|
|
George Neill, the engineer behind the
proposed landfill, and Mark Lesher, the lawyer
representing Kelsoe, said the city's reaction to the news
is premature since the landfill development team had yet to complete and submit
the required 75-page Ark-Tex Council of Governments application.
"It is a situation where folks don't know all the facts. They
are going off on innuendo. There were very many false assertions (during the
city hall meeting Monday night)," Lesher said.
In order for the state to approve the
proposed landfill, the application must be submitted to the Ark-Tex Council of Governments,
which would forward it with its recommendations to the
Both Neill and Lesher
said the landfill is in the beginning stages of development. They promised to
provide the citizens of Avery "ample" time to voice their opinions
after they complete the application. They said they will not finish the
application until after their research is concluded.
L.D. Williamson, an attorney representing
ATCOG, predicted it would take anywhere from three to five months for the party
representing the landfill to complete the application in question. Williamson
said Neill expressed interest in a variety of different classifications of
landfills, including the option of accepting medical waste, which may call for
the use of an incinerator.
"Medical waste disposal is considered
a possibility," Neill told the Gazette on Tuesday.
Lesher,
who said they would not know what classification they would pursue yet, said,
"We will sit down and decide what type we will ask for (after) our experts
complete their homework."
When the Gazette asked to speak to Lesher's "experts," Lesher
said he did not have immediate access to their names. Later, he said he did not
want to pay his experts for their time to talk to the Gazette about their
research. He then referred questions to Neill, who said he recognized how some
residents of Avery might not be supportive of a landfill. However, he
encouraged them to wait until the application was complete before making a
judgment.
"It is common for people to have
objections to landfills in general. In terms of specific objections, it is
premature," Neill said. "They need to see what we are planning before
they object. They will be given ample opportunity to object or ask questions.
We have not planned the landfill yet. It is the extremely early phase of
development. I know I have told the people of Avery this five
or six times already."
Some residents object to the location of
the proposed landfill. Their views are not likely to change unless the location
does.
Red River
Hausler
said the landfill would be located about 3,200 feet from the Avery school, based
on information provided during the ATCOG meeting on Thursday.
"I hate to see any of those
(landfills) put in anywhere, but there are much more desirable places to put it
than in the middle of our community. I'm concerned about [the health] of my
family and everyone in the surrounding community," Avery resident Greg
King said. "I'm scared to death it is going to contaminate the ground
water. That is something none of us in
"Our property values will plummet. We
couldn't sell our property for a fraction of what it is worth," he said.
Both sides expressed frustration due to
the lack of communication.
"I wish the people who were having a
meeting would ask us to come. We would be more than happy to try to explain the
process this will go through," Williamson said. "The first step is to
get an application. We won't decide anything until we see an application. We
don't expect an application for three, four or five months."
Those opposing the landfill effort have
already starting planning strategy to defeat it.