There are two sides to almost every issue, and the proposed Roberta Phase II Landfill at Bear Creek in north Oneida is no exception.
On the one hand, the lifestyle that we live as a “civilized” society produces tons of trash each and every day; trash that has to be placed somewhere. And it’s impossible to blame the business partners of Roberta Phase II for seizing on an opportunity to make money. They’re good men; men who have dedicated much to the local community, not only professionally but through their personal acts of good will towards fellow Scott Countians. If you’re looking for something negative to be said about them, it won’t be here or by me.
On the other hand, it’s human nature to have a NIMBY (not in my backyard) attitude. If someone were proposing to build a landfill just down the street from me, I would be the first one to turn in my comment card to speak at the public hearing. You can’t blame Bear Creek residents for being up in arms about this proposed landfill. And you can’t blame Scott Countians who are, quite frankly, sick and tired of seeing this rural community used as a dumping ground by outside interests.
The primary problem here is the mandated permit process. Ideally, each county would be responsible for its own waste. As Scott County Republican Party Chairman Chuck Valentine said at Monday’s public hearing, let Scott County take care of its trash disposal, and let everybody else take care of their trash disposal. A simplistic approach to a complicated problem? Perhaps. But it certainly beats the alternative: Where counties can pay a little more to truck their waste away from their back yards and dump it in the back yards of their neighbors.
Unfortunately, no one can tell a private landfill whose trash it will accept and whose trash it will reject. And county and municipal governments have no say-so in whether a private landfill is approved.
Therein lies the problem. Local governments should have the authority to approve or reject a proposed landfill. Instead, the Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation serves as the sole authority on the matter and can single-handedly approve or reject an application (though the department is mandated by state statute to issue the permit if the proposed landfill meets technical requirements).
It shouldn’t be this way. Say what you want to about private property rights. But the fact of the matter is that a proposed landfill doesn’t only impact the landowners. Their neighbors have to see it, smell it and, eventually, maybe even drink a little of it. Although water quality issues tend to be blown out of proportion in emotional public hearings, the fact remains that the EPA says that all landfill liners will eventually leak. It was telling that, at last night’s hearing, Dr. George Hyfantis, the engineer hired to design the landfill, was pointedly asked whether he could personally guarantee that the landfill would never contaminate the ground water and he could not answer in the affirmative.
The question fielded by Dr. Hyfantis was one of many inquiries lobbed by citizens from the standing-room-only crowd. Of those who took the podium, the lone voice of support for the landfill was former Huntsville alderman Wes Riggins, who correctly stated that “you have to put a dump somewhere.” Granted, 60 or 70 citizens showing up at the Oneida Municipal Building at supper-time on a Monday evening don’t represent the 22,000 or so folks who make up Scott County. But every measure of public opinion on this matter—whether it’s newspaper polls, public hearings or coffee-shop chatter—has found an overwhelming majority in opposition to the proposed landfill.
But the court of public opinion doesn’t matter in the landfill approval process. TDEC representative Tommy Himes said as much when he told the gathering of concerned citizens at last night’s meeting that the state has already “tentatively approved” the landfill. The only thing that can derail the process, he said, is if technical information can be offered to the contrary; if something can be said that indicates the landfill would violate the state’s clean water and solid waste disposal standards. Folks who turn out for public hearings, for the most part, aren’t experts on clean air or waste disposal standards. They can’t offer the contrary technical information that the state is looking for. All they can do is offer an impassioned plea that trash not be dumped in their back yard. Their opinions don’t fall on deaf ears. But they might as well.
And what we’re left with is a landfill that Scott County and its leaders have no voice in. A landfill that will accept trash from 11 neighboring counties in addition to Scott County. A landfill that will collect somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,500 tons of trash per day…taking only 2.5 years to fill to capacity. Roberta Phase I is nearly full. Roberta Phase II (24 acres in size) will be full in less than three years. And, by the admission of the engineering firm, another landfill will be applied for, and then another, until the entire 308 acres is eventually filled to capacity.
And there’s nothing anyone can do about it.
The NIMBY arguments might not be grounded in sound technical reasoning. But if Scott County is going to be used as a dumping ground for our neighbors’ trash, is it too much to ask that we be given a say-so in the matter?
| Print article | This entry was posted by BenG. on March 9, 2010 at 6:16 pm, and is filed under Scott County. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed. |
about 6 months ago
Where to start? It appears there is only one real way to impact the proposed dump. And that will have to be actions that will change the minds of the dump owners to go ahead with their plans.
That is the only realistic hope to stop their plans. From what you say there is nothing else that will change them. There is no way a far away bureaucracy is going to say no when the only ones against the plans are little ole us in backwoods Scott County with no state-wide influence.
So how do you do that short of criminal activity? Mass demonstrations in front of their homes might be a good start. Make them know that if they persist in their plans they are not welcome anywhere near Scott County.
I am not the least bit impressed that they “have dedicated much to the local community, not only professionally but through their personal acts of good will towards fellow Scott Countians”. That sounds a little like bragging about slave owners for giving their slaves a day off for Christmas.
I do not know who the owners are. I think I may know one of them but I am not sure. What I do know is that the value of every piece of property in Scott County will suffer at least some loss in value from this dump. The longer we allow Scott County to be a dumping ground to the rest of the State (and even other states!) the more you will see the permanent devaluation of Scott County. It will be a permanent blight to the reputation of the county.
So no preaching about “private property” should convince anyone that these individuals should have the right to profit from that which will take money out of the hands of their neighbors.
These owners know what this dump will do to their neighbors property values and quite simply they just do not care if it means they can get rich in the process.
Sorry, but that is a fact. Just like the fact that mountain top removal devalues the value of land adjacent to the strip mines should make strip mine owners despised by their neighbors. I know there has to be a way to dispose of public waste and trash. But let the communities that produce the trash put up with their own public dumps. Or if they want to send their trash out of their own communities they should pay for the priviledge to live in a dump-free community. And that payment should go to the counties that VOLUNTARILY accept the dumps in their counties and communities. And if no one can be found to voluntarily take the dump then so be it. No one should be forced to take the trash of someone else and see their property values decline.
Let the free market determine the value of living in a community or a county free from trash. Let the people vote for the tax rate it takes to pay someone else to take their trash and let the people vote on how much money (or tax deductions) it takes to get them to be willing to put up with a dump accepting others trash.
I know for a fact that I would never consider living near the proposed landfill. And most people would feel the same way. So how does that fact effect the value of the property a half mile, a mile or even several miles down the road from the dump?
So no, I do not believe in the concept that the use of private property is left to the sole discretion of the property owner. All you have to do is go talk to people who have bought property only to see their neighbors put in a hog pen or a chicken coop in their back yard and have to put up with the smell and sounds and unsightly mess of their neighbors to realize that the idea of sovereign property ownership is not a good thing in a civilized society. We all have responsibilities to our neighbors to use our property in a way that benefits the common good and when we refuse to live up to that responsibility we throw away the expectations of respect from our neighbors.
Personally I have no respect for these owners and I doubt many of the people who own property close to the proposed dump do either.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
about 6 months ago
From your article: “The only thing that can derail the process, he said, is if technical information can be offered to the contrary; if something can be said that indicates the landfill would violate the state’s clean water and solid waste disposal standards.”
So no one has technical information that can be offered to the contrary? Too bad we didn’t use some of our taxpayers’ money to pay for some testing before now. Is this feasible? Can the permit process be delayed?
Another quote: “It was telling that, at last night’s hearing, Dr. George Hyfantis, the engineer hired to design the landfill, was pointedly asked whether he could personally guarantee that the landfill would never contaminate the ground water and he could not answer in the affirmative.
Wow. Their own engineer.
If we have no technical information that can be offered to the contrary, who’s to say that the landfill isn’t safe? We need data.
Like or Dislike:
0
0