| Author |
 Topic  |
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2008 : 5:11:07 PM
|
I had Tails send me the attachments via e-mail. I tried to come up with a way to share these files with everyone. The best alternative that I could come up with was to load the the files to Rapidshare. It's not the best solution. Unless you have a paid Rapidshare account, the amount of downloads that you can do in a period of time is limited, you can only download one file at a time and you may be forced to wait for a download to begin. But it's better than nothing. You can use the links below to download the four attachments. Just click on the free download button when it comes up if you don't have a Rapidshare account. This will take you to a second screen where you may have to wait to get a download button. But once you click that download button, the file will download. If you want to save a copy of the file, do it in Adobe.
You must be logged in to see this link.
You must be logged in to see this link.
You must be logged in to see this link.
You must be logged in to see this link. |
 |
|
|
tetris
Moderator
2040 Posts |
Posted - 12/07/2008 : 8:18:44 PM
|
| One more thing about Rapidshare is that it won't keep the files forever; it will automatically delete after so many days (90, I think) without a download. So if you do want a copy to keep, save one after you download it. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
 Posted - 12/08/2008 : 12:13:26 PM
|
I say it's time for Wood Waste to leave Everett.
I have a copy of this "agreement" and anything that had any teeth to it, in the best interest of Newburyport, was scratched off. Typical.
Published: December 08, 2008 03:56 am
Time for New Ventures to leave city
To the editor:
Councilor Derrivan is correct (Daily News, Dec. 2). We have done enough "negotiating" with New Ventures.
It is important to remember that the original agreement called for mixing C&D debris with soil on a one-to-one basis to mitigate the chemical reaction (smell) of the decomposing gypsum. For at least the first year, if not longer, New Ventures ignored this requirement and profited tremendously.
NV has made plenty of money and caused Newburyport enough grief and expense; it is time for them to leave town.
Regarding the "new agreement," I have two questions:
One. How did the mayor arrive at $10,000 as a yearly maintenance figure? "Mowing" was mentioned; what about flare fuel, health department oversight, repairing rips, pumping leachate, etc.?
Two. The mayor mentioned putting a cell tower or a windmill on the site as revenue generators. A cell tower is already being installed a couple of hundred yards upriver; has more thoughtful research been done regarding placing a windmill on the site?
Questions aside, my primary concern is the manner in which the agreement was created and the focus for resolution.
It is disturbing that the mayor tossed this "backroom-brokered deal" on the table without City Council or Landfill Committee collaboration and with a warning to the council that "with renegotiations come consequences."
This is a negotiated instrument which, if they choose to do so, City Council must renegotiate with NV.
Again we have done enough ineffective negotiating; all future efforts must focus on the fact that the fight is with the Commonwealth.
Consider:
The Legislature approved C&D for landfills.
The DEP blew the oversight.
The AG only recently showed interest.
The governor and the secretary of Environmental Affairs have demonstrated a complete lack of concern or interest.
Rep. Mike Costello has done nothing but pay lip service.
Sen. Steve Baddour, ended his last conversation with me (as I pleaded for help) with, "Look, what do you expect, we are only legislators."
Somewhere along the line, in an act of complete irresponsibility, Newburyport got named in a 21E action, giving NV incredible leverage in its ensuing negotiations.
It is time for the three councilors with ties to the Statehouse (Cameron, Connell and McCavitt) to make use of their extensive knowledge of Beacon Hill and lead the charge.
The rest of City Council and the mayor need to take to the phone every day and call everyone mentioned above to remind them we are still here and still in trouble.
The Landfill Committee, the City Council and the mayor need to gather a few busloads of our good citizens and make a trip to the Statehouse to say hello to the governor, et al.
The sight of 50, 100, 200 or more Newburyporters walking the halls of the Statehouse asking some very pointed questions would make an interesting news story.
It goes with out saying, the City Council should just say no to the "new agreement."
Bruce Vogel
Newburyport
You must be logged in to see this link. |
Edited by - Tails on 12/08/2008 12:27:11 PM |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2008 : 2:01:27 PM
|
| Isn't Newburyport's voting tonight on this "new agreement?" Even if they approve it, I can't see Thibeault sticking to it. His history proves he doesn't care about the rules or who sets them. Thibeault does only what Thibeault wants to do. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/08/2008 : 2:34:48 PM
|
It's on the Newburyport agenda to vote tonight. I cant believe what both cities have been going through. Politics and money, that's what it's all about. It's a shame that Newburyport's mayor sends a warning to the council that "with renegotiations come consequences."
The state has just woken up, it's time for both cities to also. The man is breaking the law and if I break the law at my house, code enforcement will be all over me. Why don't the same rules apply to Thiebault. I pay taxes in this city, and Thibeualt's a known tax delinquent.
If they agree, and he does not follow what he's suppose to, they will be in a worse situation. It will take too long to fight him and the courts will say.........."well, you agreed Newburyport", and that is what Everett will go through only much worse if he's allowed to have two sites.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2008 : 07:49:00 AM
|
| Any news on how the vote on the "new agreement" went in Newburyport last night? |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2008 : 08:17:43 AM
|
This is from Dec 5,2008
Landfill owner flagrantly ignores court
By Barbara Taormina
Fri Dec 05, 2008, 07:54 AM EST
Newburyport -
The state Department of Environmental Protection this week hit New Ventures, the owner of the Crow Lane Landfill, with another round of violations. The Attorney General's office wants to meet New Ventures in court as soon as possible, and the City Council has been reviewing a possible settlement agreement that would allow the company to restart the work of capping the area.
After a lull of activity at Crow Lane - when the loudest talk about the landfill seemed to come from the residents who were once again swamped by the ugly stench that has dominated the area since New Ventures began capping the site - state and city officials seem poised to start fighting back again to protect the neighborhood.
For some, the most encouraging sign has been DEP's sudden or renewed commitment to make New Venture follow the rules.
At this point, with all these things happening, I don't know exactly what to think, says Ron Klodenski a Wildwood Drive resident who has been leading the neighborhood opposition to the landfill. I'm hoping that the DEP is starting to come to life, and that they'll find a solution without causing us more pain and suffering.
The DEP's latest move is a letter to New Ventures that cites a dozen violations of a 2006 court order that requires New Ventures to maintain equipment that would mitigate odors from the landfill. Most people in the neighborhood believe the recent rash of bad smells has been due to New Ventures failure to maintain the landfill gas recovery system and to empty leachate tanks.
DEP sent out a similar letter last August, which was, as has so often been the case, ignored by New Ventures. That led Attorney General Martha Coakley's office to file a compliant against the company for its flagrant contempt of an order meant to protect public health and the environment.
But in what has become almost typical Crow Lane luck, the judge hearing the case had a scheduling conflict and penciled in the New Ventures trial for April 23. Coakley's office responded with a motion asking the Superior Court to move up that trial date to January.
Council looks for solution
Meanwhile, on the local front, the City Council has been chewing over a new version of a settlement agreement that would allow New Ventures to truck in more construction waste that would round off the surface of the landfill and allow the company to finish capping the area.
In exchange for the right to dump more waste, New Ventures would agree to release the city from any liability in cleaning up the area, which DEP has designated as a 21E or hazardous waste site. Because the city years ago sent some waste and sewerage sludge to the landfill, Newburyport would also bear some responsibility in cleaning up the site.
Although some councilors initially seemed to favor the settlement agreement - since it would save the city any potential clean-up costs as well as some significant legal bills, and would allow the site to finally be capped - the more the agreement has been talked over, the less people seem to like it.
Neighbors were encouraged last week when Councilor Brian Derrivan, who represents Ward 5 where the landfill is located, said he had asked Mayor John Moak to stop negotiating a settlement with New Ventures.
Derrivan said the talks seemed unlikely to yield any worthwhile concessions for the city, and the money being spent on negotiations should be saved for future court battles. Derrivan also told neighbors that he didn#146;t think the majority of councilors were willing to support the settlement agreement.
Councilors have raised a slew of questions about the agreement.
At-large Councilor Tom Jones, who grew up in the Crow Lane neighborhood and can now see the landfill from his front door, says the 21E issue and any potential clean-up costs are essentially a big club that New Ventures is holding over the city's head.
Jones suggests that any waste the city dumped at the site is a fraction of what's been hauled in by New Ventures, and he believes any clean-up costs would be divided accordingly.
Jones also wonders what the city gains through the 21E concession, since the settlement agreement also calls for the city to assume responsibility for maintaining the site for 30 years after the landfill is capped. If anything goes wrong or if any additional clean-up work is needed, it would be up to the city to provide it.
Waste not, want not
But one of the most troubling aspects of the settlement agreement is that it allows New Ventures to start trucking in more waste a lot more. Most neighbors agree that the odors they are now enduring are minor compared to the early days of the capping project when residents couldn't step outside their doors without getting sick to their stomachs and the hospital actually interrupted a procedure taking place in the operating room to see where the unbearable smell was coming from. But some neighbors figure if the dumping starts again, the problem will return full force.
If you double or triple the number of trucks, I think we can anticipate that we would be inundated with that stench again, says Jones.
And with New Ventures track record of ignoring court orders, dismissing complaints from the neighborhood and its total disregard of the health problems it's creating, some feel it would be difficult to trust or even hope that the company would play by the rules this time around.
Klodenski believes one of the problems is that the city never had a consistent legal strategy for dealing with New Ventures. And, in the past, neighbors have felt abandoned by DEP which, for so long, has been either unable or unwilling to step in and enforce its own rules at Crow Lane.
As Jones puts it, "At every turn, the city has been outmaneuvered by the terms of the state and the crafty dealings of New Ventures."
Still, at this point, Klodenski and the neighbors seem to be allowing themselves to feel a little cautious optimism about DEP and the attorney general's ramped-up roles in the Crow Lane solution. They seem to be holding out hope that a judge will order New Ventures to comply with the existing court order to maintain the site and control the smells.
I really don't know what other choice we have, says Klodenski.
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2008 : 08:39:57 AM
|
Some questions I hope were resolved last night in Newburyport. I have not heard how the decision went yet.
Landfill Questions
Tonight, the City Council takes a longer look at the proposed amendment to the landfill agreement tonight, according to the Daily News.
Without having read the original, the first amendment and the second one, I can't offer any insights beyond what I read in the papers. (Just being honest here.) But I still have some real questions.
A past article in the Daily News suggested the new provision would provide the following protections. The agreement presented tonight might be slightly different than the one outlined in the article, since the mayor has still been negotiating with New Ventures, but I suspect the two are close enough.
My questions follow in italics.
The city would have a full release from 21E regulations by New Ventures. Is this really full release? Is there anything preventing a third party--say a shadow company set up by New Ventures or even the state--from going after the city?
New Ventures will maintain the landfill for one year after closure. I'm not quite clear on how this could be enforced. Since we don't have the appetite for lawsuits, I don't see how we'd have any leverage to ensure this happens if NV decides it doesn't want to comply. At that point, NV will have already dumped everything it's wanted to dump.
Then the city would undertake all post-closure activities at the landfill for 30 years, including mowing, maintenance and monitoring. The mayor said estimates for that work are about $10,000 a year. This sounds low. And we'll be maintaining private property? The city still won't own the landfill, correct?
New Ventures will be responsible for paying the inspector retained by the city to inspect the truckloads during the closing.Is NV hiring the inspector directly or reimbursing the city. I hope the latter.
New Ventures may transport up to 35 trucks per day, with the approval of the mayor, in addition to the current 35 trucks per day that are now allowed under the host agreement. So NV is getting the 70 trucks it wanted initially.
New Ventures will allow the city to install a pad or platform on the landfill where the city can build a cell tower or wind turbine and will pay $50,000 toward the design and construction of the pad or platform. To what end? Wouldn't a cell phone company normally pay for the construction of the platform? As for the turbine, where would the power go to? Will it be connected to a school building?
This isn't an easy matter. I know the landfill needs to be closed sooner rather than later, and the city doesn't have the funds available for a prolonged court fight.
I don't know how much faith to put into the Attorney General's sudden interest in New Ventures, it may amount to nothing but perhaps we should give the legal wheels some time to spin. I worry that accepting this new agreement would stop the spinning.
What would make me feel better? Perhaps a little upfront money from New Ventures--in the form of a bond--to cover the costs of closing the landfill or at least pay for that first year of post-closure maintenance.
Yeah, I know, good luck with that.
You must be logged in to see this link.
|
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2008 : 10:31:06 AM
|
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Mayor pulls landfill agreement off table
Mayor John Moak did not ask the City Council to consider the proposed agreement with New Ventures at last night's meeting.
Councillor Brian Derrivan told his fellows that it is "time to move forward in light of the DEP and AG's office showing some life."
I saw an email in the chain of emails that are sent around regularly by residents near the landfill to complain about the smell. This one was different - it was from a business on Graf Road (in the industrial park).
I think this is the first time I've seen a complaint by a business. This is even more serious because the city has been trying to lure companies to relocate their corporate headquarters into the industrial park.
Also, the DEP on Nov. 28 cited New Ventures for 12 more violations at the landfill. DEP Chief John Carrigan in his letter to NV attorney Chip Nylen said that he visited the site on Nov. 26 and the landfill gas collection and treatment system was not operational.
The AG's office has also filed for an expedited contempt trial (it was scheduled to begin April 23, 2009) because it says in part that New Ventures is causing damages to the environment that cannot wait five months to be addressed.
The Commonwealth is asking that the trial be scheduled for January. The motion was filed Nov. 26 and NV had 10 days to serve opposition to the motion ...
You must be logged in to see this link. |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2008 : 11:48:29 AM
|
| Since Newburyport didn't vote on the agreement with New Venture's/Thibeault last night, I would assume the landfill in Newburyport will remain closed. It is time for Everett to step up and force Wood Waste to remove those piles, or at the very least to put a stop to any additional debris being allowed stored down there. This is a public health issue, a safety issue and an environmental issue, besides Thibeault being non compliant and breaking the law. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/09/2008 : 11:52:02 AM
|
| It's time for our Board of Health to stop sitting on their hands or private citizens should start to sue the Everett Board of Health. I cant fully blame them though, because like the city solicitor, they are puppets on a string. |
Edited by - Tails on 12/09/2008 11:52:27 AM |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2008 : 09:35:43 AM
|
December 10, 2008 03:59 am
NEWBURYPORT — Hours before the City Council was scheduled to meet and vote on a proposal to cap the Crow Lane landfill Monday, Mayor John Moak filed a memo informing the councilors he was withdrawing the settlement agreement between the city and New Ventures, the owner of the landfill.
Moak said it was clear to him that he did not have the support of the council on the proposal and saw no sense in bringing it forward for a negative vote.
"This office will work with the City Council to find an alternative method to address the Crow Lane landfill," Moak wrote in his brief letter to the council, time-stamped at 1:36 p.m. Monday. "We need to collectively pursue a solution that will minimize our legal liabilities and maintain our ability to monitor the activities at the site."
The mayor said he will not renegotiate an agreement. Moak said he doesn't believe he would be able to amend an agreement that would be considered favorable by the City Council.
"We need to look at some cooperative efforts, through either state or other agencies," the mayor said yesterday. "I'm committed to trying to find an effective closure on this. We're going to work diligently to get this landfill closed."
The city's attorneys spent the last several months finalizing a draft version of a settlement agreement, but the final version was not significantly different than the initial proposal presented to councilors in October.
The agreement would have increased the volume of fill arriving at the site but would release the city from possible contamination lawsuits. It would also require New Ventures to maintain the landfill for one year after closure, after which the city would undertake all post-closure activities at the landfill for 30 years, including mowing, maintenance and monitoring. Also included in the agreement was a stipulation that New Ventures would allow the city to install a pad or platform on the landfill, where the city could build a cell tower or wind turbine, and New Ventures would pay $50,000 toward the design and construction of the pad or platform. All revenues generated by the facility would initially be applied to its construction and then used by the city for post-closure costs. Any remaining revenue would be divided equally between the city and New Ventures with an annual accounting by the city.
In recent weeks, the state has taken more steps against New Ventures to bring the landfill up to code.
The state Department of Environmental Protection notified the owner of the embattled Crow Lane landfill that it is once again in violation of a court-issued preliminary injunction, listing 12 separate violations in November.
Also last month, Attorney General Martha Coakley's office filed a request for a contempt order against New Ventures, saying owner William Thibeault has not met the terms of a preliminary injunction set up in 2006. The state asked the court to direct New Ventures to control leachate, respond to odor complaints and to operate the landfill gas control system that works to prevent the odors that have plagued the neighborhood for years. A trial date has been set for April, but the state has asked for an expedited trial.
Ward 5 Councilor Brian Derrivan, who represents the neighborhood around Crow Lane, said the landfill must be capped correctly, and the residents around the landfill need to have their lives back.
"It's time for DEP to step up," Derrivan said. Derrivan said he contacted Newburyport's state legislators and asked them to set up a meeting with the Attorney General and DEP, and to include Newburyport in negotiation talks.
"I would like this to be on the front burner for everyone at this time," Derrivan said. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2008 : 09:43:33 AM
|
| Has anyone seen this “agreement” Basically Thibeault gets what he wants. Increased trucking…….the Ad Hoc Committee was left out, and they are the ones that did all the work, and have been the ones suffering from this disaster of a landfill. Also, New Ventures is supposed to take daily measurements of Hydrogen Sulfide and it’s crossed off that “failure to provide such measurements for a period of two consecutive days will be deemed a material breach of this agreement." It goes on and on. He’s going to do what ever he wants. The sad part is the residents that have been going through this and I know landfills are a touchy subject, but there are some that obey the law. |
Edited by - Tails on 12/10/2008 09:44:17 AM |
|
|
|
massdee
Moderator
5299 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 10:49:45 AM
|
| Thanks, Michael. It is a good idea for Wood Waste to have it's own thread. |
|
|
|
Tails
Administrator
2682 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 12:22:19 PM
|
Why cant we take the hard road on Wood Waste? It's too bad our Mayor is in his pocket. Now after that story in the Advocate(?) and he did not have the courtesy of informing the city council...it could not be more obvious.
Taking the hard road on Crow Lane
December 12, 2008 03:35 am
How do you bargain with a business that thinks flying the Jolly Roger flag on its stench-infected property is the right way to garner respect?
Newburyport's Mayor John Moak deserves credit for having the patience and presence of mind to sit down with the renegades at the helm of New Ventures, the firm that's managed to turn the Crow Lane landfill into the ripe armpit of this city.
But Moak's negotiations came to naught this week, when it became clear to him that the City Council wasn't going to accept the deal that he was trying to broker with New Ventures. He withdrew his proposed agreement, because he didn't see the point of fighting a losing battle.
Neighbors who have been living with the stench for years think the landfill needs to be capped and closed as soon as possible. Moak thinks the most realistic way to do that is to deal with the pirate-flag-flying management at New Ventures. And the City Council thinks New Ventures can't be fully trusted, based in large part on past experiences the city has had with the firm. Councilors seem to think the state should be playing a bigger role in this.
The problem is everyone is right, at least to some degree. And thus, there's no good solution.
The only hope for a solution seems to be keeping all eyes fixed on the end goal, and working backward from there, taking into account the known factors and problems. At this point, it's clear the neighbors are right - the foremost goal is to get this capping job finished, and done correctly, as soon as possible. There's no realistic plan on the table to find someone other than New Ventures to do it, so it seems that Moak's goal of finding a compromise solution with New Ventures is the correct path.
But councilors are right in casting a skeptical eye on any agreement that gets put in place. They are right to be angry at New Ventures. The state needs to continue to wield a stick over New Ventures' head, and the city needs to ramp up its actions when New Ventures pulls shenanigans - such as the time when state officials said New Ventures' odor-burning device was intentionally shut off after the city closed down the operation due to violations. Why can't the city use its police force to call that kind of act a public threat or nuisance, and serve arrest warrants? Keep some cameras trained on the property and let's make sure that everything is documented. It's obvious that issuing warnings and shutting down the operation temporarily doesn't get a lot of productive response from New Ventures.
We're playing hardball, and the message needs to be clear. This landfill needs to be capped correctly and quickly. And there will be zero tolerance for the kind of baloney New Ventures has been pulling for years.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Wood Waste
