Waste Management Under Fire

Waste Management took some heat from citizens last night at the City Council meeting. Most notably was Louis Pandolfi, Landfill Expansion Task Force member and outspoken opponent of the expansion. He took on the issue of the recent press release from WM regarding their choice to longer participate in City discussions resulting from the lawsuit filed by the Task Force.

Mayor-elect Bob Huber spoke as well, identifying WM as a large Texas billion dollar corporation that produced a press release that he found offensive, standing up for Councilwoman Williamson’s right to free speech. Additional speakers suggested alternatives to the large landfill regarding waste disposal, like new state of the art facilities for disposal as well as rail transport to ship waste to landfills outside of Simi Valley.

The number of folks there to speak out in favor of Waste Management: ZERO!

During Council Comments, Barbra Williamson took a few minutes to recite a prepared presentation on her thoughts regarding Waste Management’s recent position. It was a strong, moving statement that I would like to share with you hear. I’m hoping to have a transcript of the presentation later this afternoon.

It’s a terrible position that we’re in as the approval deadline approaches for this landfill. From my observations, the landfill expansion has been surrounded by a mix-up of fear inducing statements and confusing, sometimes conflicting figures. Most people have taken either a firm pro or anti position against the landfill, but for those who want to study the facts and make an educated decision, it’s difficult. Every seemingly credible source is easily followed up by another just as credible source with conflicting data. With one side suing the other, and the other side now refusing to participate, clarity does not seem likely any time soon.

As an added note, Councilwoman Foster’s remarks regarding annexation seemed dead-on to me. Annexation cannot occur without willing participation from the land owner — Waste Management. With that said, as a City we should be laying the pressure on the County Board of Supervisors to ensure that we are represented.

50 thoughts on “Waste Management Under Fire

  1. So far I have not seen an explanation as to why Barbra Williamson signed the debate letter with both the City Council AND the Landfill Task force. Having both indicates that she is representing both, or at least claiming that she is. If she was writing just for the task force, then she should not have included that she was on the City Council.

    Then, if you listen to the discussions and the comments from other Council members, it seems clear that there is not the separation in which they want to claim. Barbra was allowed to make comments from the task force, which seems to me to be a conflict.

    Also, notice that she has yet to state a clear conflict of interest with her position on the task force and the council when landfill expansion issues are discussed. That also indicates the relationship between the two.

    As to the comments regarding shipping trash to other locations, that is quite hypocritical as then it is in someone else’s backyard, but it is ok because it is not in your backyard. I guess those people don’t like the desert and don’t care about that land.

    More effort should be put into reducing trash at the very start and people should be responsible for the trash that they create. I still think that charging people by the pound for their trash would be interesting, but then many people would illegally dump their trash.

    Like

  2. Mr. Sandberg,

    I too found it very interesting that neither Ms. Williamson or the rest of the Council discussed her ethical violations. And this is not about Wm or the Dump expansion. Polticians owe the public their honest services. Ethial rules were broken and their should be some consequences.

    Why didn’t the City Attorney say anything? Ms. Williamsn eitter did or didn’t break the ethical rules? It would have been nice to hear the answer.

    I was surprised that Mr. Huber would weigh in on this situation when he’s not even the Mayor yet. As a personal injury lawyer, I guess he has no problem with people picking and choosing the laws or rules that they follow.

    Like

  3. I would like to know why the police videos were removed. I see once again you have caved to the pressure of the people in power namely the police officers association.

    I don’t understand how Michelle Fosters annexation thoughts are right on. On that point I agree with Mr. Huber that annexation should have started years ago and if not then at least started when he brought it up before the election. And by the way Marty Bob Huber has every right to speak as a citizen of Simi valley.

    Like

  4. Wrong Ryan.

    “Annexation cannot occur without willing participation from the land owner — Waste Management.”

    No annexation could have started without WM buying in.

    Like

  5. Ryan,

    we are arguing different points. You’re focused on the dump expansion, I am focusing on politicians and good government. Simi does not have good government because many of these local polticians think we work for them. I found Huber to be very arrogant as if he owned the place.

    If you want the dump annexed then go the Board meetings and have your voice heard.

    For now, I want politicans to be honest and not break the rules whenever they feel liek it.

    Like

  6. Huber definitely thought his you know what didn’t stink. This is what we have to look forward to in the years to follow. The facts about annexation take a back seat to his campaign promise to get that happening and he will keep going down the futile path to try (and fail) to get it going.

    Like

  7. Bob Huber had every right to be there and I am glad that he was there as I feel he is the only one who truly represent Simi valley. How did he seem like he own the place he talked for 3 minutes like everyone else and well sorry but everything he said was right. Can you please enlighten us on how Bob Huber thinks we all work for him please???

    Like

  8. Marty: what politicians are breaking the rules? If you believe the rest of the Council believes Williamson supposedly broke the rules, then they would have said something last night. No one did.

    Her actions are as a taskforce member, not as a council member. That isn’t anything new.

    Like

  9. The letter from Barbra to WM regarding the debate had both Simi Valley City Council AND the Task Force under her name. That is a violation unless she is representing the City with the letter, which was not discussed in public, so it seems like a clear violation.

    As a Council Member, last night she spoke about her actions with the Task Force. We, the public, do not have the opportunity to discuss our personal interests/agendas other than for 3 minutes, but she did. This is a conflict and a violation. It was mentioned that the Council has received information from the task force, through her, which none of the rest of the public has that ability, yet another conflict.

    The Council seems more interested in protecting their own than doing the right thing. Barbra violated the Simi Valley Code of Conduct numerous times, but nothing was done about it. To be honest, the Code of Conduct needs to be enforced OR removed, otherwise it is just fraud.

    If you really think that the Council will do something when the rules are broken, you have a lot to learn. In the case of the Miller’s CUP, the whole Council violated the law by requiring that the Miller’s get HOA approval. Based on what I have seen, this was due to their personal and special interests, rather than a desire to follow the rules and the law.

    Like

  10. “How did he seem like he own the place he talked for 3 minutes like everyone else and well sorry but everything he said was right.”

    Wrong. Annexation will never occur because there in no willing participant to begin the process. And even if the landfill property is annexed into the city’s boundaries, the final authority on the current expansion proposal will remain the county Board of Supervisors. State waste regulations are involved and the county is the designated local authority.

    Like

  11. Mr. Colman you are absolutely right! However there are other land-owners that actually have more land than Waste…the other owner has I believe 2,600 acres. If he/she is willing to annex that may be all we need…Because if they annex LAFCO doesn’t like “islands” and WM would be considered an “Island”… Just a theory on my part, so don’t hold me to it yet. 

    Like

  12. Ms. Williamson,

    Happy Thanksgiving!

    Out of curiousity, can you please tell in your own words, how you feel you did not violate Simi’s ethical rules? I am very concerned about how elected officials conduct themselves and you have never answered this simple question.

    While I don’t know much about annexation, I have read the Constitution. Please tell me how as a Republican you can threaten any property owner against their will? I would expect this type of conduct in San Francisco or from Nancy Pelosi but here in Simi, it seems unfathomable.

    Like

  13. And Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.
    Just for the record, the only person saying I have violated Simi Valley’s ethical rules (aside from Mr. Sandberg) is Waste Management, and since they didn’t want to debate the issue of the expansion, they try to point a finger at me saying they question my code of conduct………Look, the way I see it, it is my responsibility to work for you, the public. Waste Management was trying to get this expansion approved by flying it under the radar because they knew this expansion was not necessary (according to the EIR, and this is factual, there is no need for the expansion at this time). How can this be a conflict or unethical? I am not getting any money, and I won’t need to vote on the expansion because that is the responsibility of the County Board of Supervisors, however, if it did come to a vote of the City Council, I would probably abstain from voting.
    So, if I violated some ethical rules, how did I do that? I’ve been out in the open with my concerns. And I have not spoken to any Council Member, regarding this project. I have however, spoken to the Mayor and the City Manager. When the Task Force met with the other Council Members, I was not present…and you can ask them yourself if I was there.
    I haven’t threatened the land owner with annexation…I HAVE requested that they consider it, because if and when Waste Management decided to build on the property surrounding the landfill, they may have to annex because they are in our sphere of influence and the property is in the City of Simi Valley’s General Plan…Besides, why wouldn’t they want to? The City of Simi Valley has ALWAYS been a good neighbor to Waste Management, and they in turn have been good to the City of Simi Valley. Just for the record, not ONE person has come up to me and said, Barbra we support the expansion, why are you doing this?…..NOT one. So again, Marty, I work for you. Do you support the expansion and if so, why? Being opposed to the expansion is not personal for me, its business…….
    Thanks for asking, and I appreciate the way you asked, rather than accusing.
    Happy Thanksgiving…

    Like

  14. Barbra, please explain why the debate letter included both the City Council AND the task force. That is a conflict, as you should know.

    I know you voted on the campaign donation limits, but then violated it and whined about it, so reality does not seem to concern you.

    The fact is that you danced around the question that was asked of you and did not answer it, but that is to be expected from you.

    Like

  15. Thank you for recognizing that you work for the public. After the Financial Meltdown of 2008, I have no trust in any politician from the local level (you) to the President. It seems as though that individuals who are attracted to politics are not the kind of people we actually need running our government.

    What is it about your personality that drives you to sit on that dais for that last 15 years?

    Are you really doing it for the public or is your drive much more self-indulgent?
    Do you love the attention and all the underground political strategizing and back stabbing?

    Huber is a case in point. Why did he run and how did he land so many notable endorsements? He seemingly came out of nowhere as I barely remember him.

    The answer is back-room politics of the good old boys club.

    There will be more to this story, the delay in investigation by the SVPD is probably just the tip of the iceberg.

    I am also not a fan of lawyers being politicians. Isn’t it enough that they rigged the entire game by writing all the laws.
    And, you did violate your ethical rules. Many people I know that live and work in Simi also think so. If you are so insulated and delusional to think you’re conduct is acceptable then you are too far gone and should step down. Let some new blood and normal people take over the Simi council.

    The Simi Ethics code requires you to state that your are acting on your own and not on behalf of the City. As Mr. Sandberg said in his prior post, in your debate letter you apparently signed as both a City Council member and as a Task Force member. This is a crystal clear violation. You also submitted documents (I read them on the Star website) to that Court as part of your lawsuit where you NEVER said that you were not acting on behalf of the City. Again, this is a crystal clear violation.

    For once, I would like a politician to set up and tell the truth. Admit you made a mistake and we will respect you far more.

    Like

  16. What is it about your personality that drives you to sit on that dais for that last 15 years?
    Well actually its 18, but who’s counting…? The best part about this job is helping people through the “red tape” of government. I can’t begin to tell you the number of people who call me on a daily basic about some problem they may have. One low income senior called because she had a leak in her roof (it was a mobile home and the City only had an ordinance for helping people who lived in a “structured” house. So I was able to get the Affordable Housing Committee to change the law and get her roof fixed. That is just one of many many examples of helping people in our community that I like. I co-chair the Homeless Task Force, and we have put 169 people into homes this year, that makes me feel really really good. Sure the recognition is nice, but it’s helping residents that make it all worthwhile.
    Do you love the attention and all the underground political strategizing and back stabbing? I try to ignore the political back stabbing. It happens and you can either get caught up in it or move on. I choose to move on.
    Huber is a case in point. Why did he run and how did he land so many notable endorsements? He seemingly came out of nowhere as I barely remember him. I can’t answer WHY Mr. Huber ran so you will have to ask him that question. I can, however tell you that Bob is very well liked in our community. He’s been in Rotary for, geez, 30 plus years. He’s a really good friend of Congressman Gallegly, (Huber was his treasurer) and they sat on the City Council together back in the 80’s. Bob is also an attorney; He has friendships with Totten, Brooks and many more high profile people in Ventura County. How long have you lived here Marty? Bob has been on the College Board for about 6 six years; I think…he’s been around here for quite some time…so he’s no new comer.
    There will be more to this story; the delay in investigation by the SVPD is probably just the tip of the iceberg. I hope you won’t pre-judge before you get all the facts. It’s in the hands of the DA now, so let’s give him the and the SVPD the benefit of the doubt…just like I am sure you would want if they were accusing you.
    I am also not a fan of lawyers being politicians. Isn’t it enough that they rigged the entire game by writing all the laws? What’s that old saying? Nobody likes a lawyer until they need one?

    The Simi Ethics code requires you to state that your are acting on your own and not on behalf of the City. As Mr. Sandberg said in his prior post, in your debate letter you apparently signed as both a City Council member and as a Task Force member. This is a crystal clear violation. You also submitted documents (I read them on the Star website) to that Court as part of your lawsuit where you NEVER said that you were not acting on behalf of the City. Again, this is a crystal clear violation. If you really want to be fair Marty, you will review all my correspondence to see that I always made a verbal declaration that I was acting as a personal citizen and not as a Council Member. Yes, I may have slipped up with the letter and signed “Council Member” but sometime things happen. It was an accident, nothing more and nothing less. If you read the demur from Waste Management, you will see that they even acknowledged that I was acting as a resident, and not a Council Member.. They knew all along that was where I was coming from. Look Marty, I don‘t walk on water, and I’ve never pretended that I do.
    Let some new blood and normal people take over the Simi council. Normal? What’s normal? You? Mr. Sandberg? …Take over? I never thought of it as “taking over”….As far as new blood is concerned, there is always a chance for new blood every two years.
    I will leave you with this one thought Marty, if I am doing such a terrible job, why have the residents of Simi Valley continue to vote for me?

    Like

  17. Posts are getting longer and longer. Sandberg and Marty both like to focus on the messenger rather than on the dump expansion and the multitude of harm that expansion will bring to Simi Valley residents with 100,000,000 tons of garbage coming through our community. I always wonder what really is in the minds and motivations of people who will shoot the messenger rather than debate the issues at hand. Fortunately for the Community, the City Council is not taking its eye off the game. We shall surely see decisive action over the next couple of weeks. Waste Mgt. PR made a big blunder at this crossroad by telling our Community to “go to hell”

    Like

  18. The big questions is WHY WON’T THEY DEBATE? They talk the talk but won’t walk the walk…Why are they so scared of the 5 man Task Force?

    Like

  19. Debate? Never! All they can do is deal with the public when they are in total control as with their web site or their “tours” of the dump. The expansion offers nothing beneficial to the Community. Waste Mgt. can never face the Community in an open forum. After all, isn’t that why no one from Waste Mgt. showed up at the Monday night City Council meeting, even after they filed the complaint against Ms. Williamson?

    Like

  20. Another question, is why aren’t people on this blog asking that same question? What can it possibly hurt to have a debate? Are these same people perhaps employees of the dump? Then that would be understandable….

    Like

  21. Why would anyone “debate” with a group that has shown themselves to resort to deception, lies and childish personal attacks.

    If the signing of the letter was simply a mistake, then Barbra should have stated that the second it was mentioned as an issue, but that is not what she has done. Only when it appears that it is going to perhaps cause her problems is she now claiming that it was just a simple mistake. Personally, I think that it was poor judgment on her part and now she has to say something to try to get out of it.

    The reason to question the messenger is that when the messenger makes deceptive statements and seems to have a hidden agenda, then people need to figure out what is really going on. If the messenger was honest and did not have a hidden agenda, then there would be no need to be deceptive.

    So “Not Force”, your statement “I always wonder what really is in the minds and motivations of people who will shoot the messenger rather than debate the issues at hand.” is quite interesting, since clearly you are resorting to personal attacks on me, rather than debating the issues at hand. That shows you as a dishonest, deceptive, unethical person, as well as a hypocrite.

    Like

  22. Barbara,

    I guess I’ll be the one person that’s coming to you and saying “Barbara, I support the project, why are you doing this?”.

    As a resident of Simi Valley, I value having Waste Management in our community. For being in such a dirty business, they do an excellent job at running a clean operation with reasonable rates. Their trucks are always spotless, they employ and train courteous drivers that I’ve seen on numerous occasions exit their trucks and pick up trash that falls from over-stuffed trash cans, and they host “free dump days” that are a few miles from any residents house.

    Further, most of their trucks now run on LNG, which helps reduce pollution, and they pull the methane from the landfill and generate green electricity to run their operation. Pretty cool.

    If residents still have any doubts, they should schedule a tour of WM. They really do put a lot of thought into how they can minimize the impact on the surrounding areas.

    As a business owner in Simi Valley for the past 15 years, I can only imagine what they’re going through right now. This last week I had public works come into one of our buildings, and ask for each business in the building to fill out a new 2-page application in order to obtain a mandatory waste water discharge permit. I explained to the public works guy that the building has nothing but toilets and a sink, but was told each tenant still needed to fill out the 30+ fields anyway to obtain this newly mandated permit. This is a bit off-topic, but it’s a tiny example of the nonsense businesses are asked to comply with. I often wonder who comes up with these things. Do they really expect someone that’s illegally dumping hazardous waste down the drain to note it on the permit application?

    I’ve seen businesses in Simi go bankrupt trying to move things through permitting/planning – things that should take hours or days, not weeks, months or years. I often wonder why planning doesn’t simply pre-design the buildings nowadays, as owners are basically forced to develop exactly what planning wants to see – regardless of whether it works for their business or not.

    WM has a great track record in the community. If they continue running their company the way they have been, shouldn’t the new business advocate be getting involved to help push this thing through, rather than a task force formed to try and intervene?

    -Mark

    Like

  23. The dump expansion is permitted through the County so using City employees to help with the permit doesn’t make sense. Clean green trucks don’t offset air quality, traffic, loss of jobs, visual impacts, odor, etc. that will be the result of this massive expansion. Using Mark’s argument, should our community strive to get nuclear power plans, petrochemical plans and casinos as well? When evaluating negative environmental impacts on a community, the good neighbor policy doesn’t apply. As for Public Works and discharge permits, it drove me crazy the way it handled our business as well.

    Like

  24. Mark,
    I think “Not Force” answered your question, but I would just like to add, yes, Waste Management is a very good corporate neighbor, and I have said that over and over, time after time…However, there would be no need for the expansion if they didn’t bring Los Angeles garbage to Simi Valley. Why would you want MORE Los Angeles garbage? More trucks on our already crowed freeway? Wouldn’t you, Mark, like to hear a debate? What’s Waste hiding from? Five Simi Valley Task Force residents? Allowing the residents to hear both sides of the proposal? So much for transparency that they are always talking about.
    It all boils down to money…lots and lots of it.

    Like

  25. $5,000,000,000.00 sucked out of the local economy to Texas. Wooooooooooosh! There it goes. It will create six new jobs, medium to low income, per year at a cost of the loss of the City’s West End Industrial Plan Area jobs estimated to be in the thousands. Sounds to me like a crappy development project for Simi Valley residents.

    Like

  26. Not Force, that’s just it, this is a county issue, so why not let them work with the county on it without interfering?

    The permit example I listed above is simply an example of ways the City makes things more difficult than they need to be, and I think that’s happening with WM. Whether it be WM or mom-and-pop shop, there’s agency after agency after agency regulating projects like this, I simply don’t think Simi should be one of them.

    I’m not recommending that the City go out and recruit nuclear/petrochemical companies; WM is an existing business that’s been here for 30+ years and is trying to plan for the future. The area isn’t usable for Parks, Housing, or anything of the sort for at least 50 years. If they can use the area they already own, add jobs (far more than 6 during the construction phase), add a new recycling center, an electronic recycling center, remove the facility/related traffic on Easy St, while paying increase property taxes for their improvements, then great. There’s definitely some good in the project as well.

    Barbara, I think you’re a very level-headed, common sense person – I’ve just seen far too much bureaucracy in government than is needed. It seems like a new committee, task force, or department is created every week, dreaming up new ways to make things more inconvenient and difficult than they already are (and it’s pretty bad now), and most of the times it’s done to justify someone’s job.

    I’m basing my feedback on the documentation they provided on their site. What exactly am I missing? What is the Task Force hoping to accomplish? Does it want to derail the entire project, or does the City have certain issues they want addressed, and if so, what are they?

    -Mark

    Like

  27. The City has certain issues it is seeking to have mitigated. Neither the City nor the Task Force oppose the project if that mitigation is provided. Waste Mgt. has put out its PR, but fails to address the facts. This doesn’t have to do with property rights, it has to do with normal mitigation of negative impacts on the existing community. Why do you think Waste Mgt. refuses to debate? If it can’t be in control of the “facts”, it will not participate. It has everything to hide and nothing to share. I suggest you sit down with the Task Force for a discussion, then join the effort.

    Like

  28. Who should WM debate? The task force? Who are they? It was said that Barbra is just a messenger, do you debate with messengers? Do you debate with known deceptive people?

    If the task force had a web page with their views and comments, then perhaps we could start to say that they have nothing to hide, but then you also have to deal with the deceptive comments.

    Then look at the recent statement that Mayor Miller said in the Acorn, “It would not be to their advantage for them to basically anger this city, believe me”. To me, that seems to be worded as a threat. Should WM not raise the issue of Barbra’s claim to represent both the City and the task force? Is it not right to question what is going on? The Council seems to be ignoring this and has been ignoring it since Barbra should state that she has a conflict of interest when it comes to the landfill expansion due to her activities.

    The Council needs to address the issue of why Barbra Williamson wrote a letter in which she put both the City Council and the task force under her name, which appears to be a serious problem. Her response on this forum was that it was just a mistake. She should know better and if not, she should be removed from the Council.

    Like

  29. Not Force, what exactly is wrong with you? You constantly refuse to discuss the issues and instead have to resort to childish personal attacks, again showing how dishonest you are.

    Do you really think that people will think you are something because of your childish personal attacks? Does it help your poor ego to try to put someone down? The fact that it is all based on lies does not seem to matter to you. I have never had any injuries to my head in a traffic accident or otherwise, so it is all just pathetic lies from you.

    I would strongly suggest that you get some professional medical help.

    Like

  30. Indeed, carefully selecting a psychiatrist is most important. Clipping a coupon for a free 30 minute consult just doesn’t work. Cutting corners when dealing with a major head trauma can result in what we are watching on this blog. Throw mud, throw more mud, don’t tell the truth and attack anyone who disagrees. Poor lad.

    Like

  31. Oh, so clever Barbra, but again you lie since I have never seen a psychiatrist, but you wouldn’t know that because you don’t know me. The truth just does not matter to you. I have heard from several people about Barbra’s drinking problem, that is real, care to talk about that? Perhaps that is why she acts the way she does. Not Force promotes illegal drug use, so perhaps that is the reason there.

    Not Force is such a joke. The ones who are throwing mud, not telling the truth and attacking those that disagree are Not Force, Barbra and the task force gang.

    So Not Force, please tell everyone about your delusional claims about my having had major head trauma, or is that just another one of those things where you are really talking about yourself? I suspect so.

    I would prefer to talk about the issues. I must admit that it would be interesting to see what the task force gang would do at a debate. It would be such a show, but I am sure that the lies and deceptions would be flying from them and such an event would need to be done so that the lies would be noted for all to see. A web page would do wonders in that regard, but the task force knows better than doing that since then they would be exposed.

    The bottom line is that the task force gang does not want to talk about the real issues, does not want the people to know the real story and only wants to promote their own agenda, no doubt for their own personal gain.

    Like

  32. Sandberg, a megadump suites your character just fine. No need to debate anything with you. Continue in your babbles in a black hole since you get the attention of no one. May you one day find meds that work and you get the happiness everyone deserves.

    Like

  33. The only thing mega around here is the mega-lies of Not Force, Barbra and the task force gang. Even if the expansion go through, the total size of the footprint does not come close to be mega in terms of landfills. But, the lies and deception in calling it a mega-dump helps to scare people and get the reaction that some unethical people want.

    Not Force is not able to debate a thing because the lies would become obvious and quite clearly there is a distinct lack of control, not to mention being very immature.

    Like

  34. Not Force,

    Why are you so obnoxious?

    Seriously, you have some major personality defects. In fact, you sound very much like Mr. Pandolfi. It certainly wouldn’t surprise me if you were one and the same.

    Other Alice Sterling, the Task Force is made up of a bunch of fringe crazies who have a record of misconduct and misdeeds. Just Google Wayne Fishback and you will see that crazy rich people can get away with a lot in this country.

    I want bother getting into the “debate” debate because it’s silly and unproductive but I will say that I am very concerned by Ms. Williamson’s glib comments about property ownership. I have also read many of your posts, which clearly demonstrate to me that you are a very intelligent man, certainly capable of understanding that the landfill expansion approval has not been decided by anyone.

    If you are against the project attend the County hearings and have your voice heard.

    As I have said in the past, while I was initially against the project, I have changed my mind because America needs infrastructure. In fact, my belief is that America is failing because of people like you and the Task Force members.

    You keep saying that you don’t want LA trash. All I can say is that who cares where the trash comes from. Ventura County doesn’t exist on an island. What business do you know is limited to taking customers only from their county? Personally, I am shocked that Republicans would take such an anti free enterprise stance.

    Like

  35. Yeah, this is the type of people we are dealing with and why Barbra needs to be removed from the Council, just childish personal attacks on anyone who disagrees.

    Barbra, can you explain why you did not know to not sign the letter with both the Council and the task force? Can you explain why you voted on the campaign finance, but could not follow it? Could you explain why you signed the Code of Conduct, but refuse to follow it?

    BTW, if you look at the way Not Force writes and another person, who actually uses their name, the style seems to be close to the same.

    Like

  36. Sandberg, see the following document. The local dump expansion project puts it in the mega, mega, mega landfill category.

    PERSPECTIVES ON INTERSTATE AND INTERNATIONAL SHIPMENTS OF MUNICIPAL
    SOLID WASTE

    ———-

    WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 1, 2001

    House of Representatives,
    Committee on Energy and Commerce,
    Subcommittee on Environment and
    Hazardous Materials,
    Washington, DC.

    Like

  37. Sucker for punishment I suppose. I’m continually in shock as to how he babbles his mantra in spite of the facts. My only salvation is thank goodness he came in a distant last place. Just imagine if a person of his caliber ever did get elected.

    Like

  38. It is only “mega” in your mind, it is not a technical term and is used for pure hype.

    I understand the issues, which is why I am sure that you have a problem with me.

    Barbra, why don’t you explain to the confused Not Force why you can not represent yourself as a City Council member when you are not acting in that role? Not Force thinks that you can do that in whatever you do.

    Like

  39. Wrong again. I can always say Iam a Councilmember. What I must add with respect to the Task Force is that Iam not acting in my capacity as a Councilmember. That has been done to the satifaction of the City and the Court. Waste Mgt. is full of hot air and so are you.

    Like

  40. You are only reading what you want to see. I said that you can not represent yourself as a Council member, do you know what that means? Or do I need to explain it to you just as the police did with homeless people and transients? I did not say that you can’t say that you are a Council member.

    You request to debate did not say that and was signed with both.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s