See this instyle article by the San Diego Union Tribune: instyle.pdf
Monday, February 7, 2011
Gregory Canyon landfill effort inches along
NCTimes.com
FALLBROOK ---- The Gregory Canyon landfill project took another step forward recently when an agency governing water quality in the region deemed as complete the landfill's application for a major permit.
In a letter dated March 1, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board told Gregory Canyon Ltd. owner Richard Chase that his application for a water-quality permit was ready to be ruled upon.
In a letter dated March 1, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board told Gregory Canyon Ltd. owner Richard Chase that his application for a water-quality permit was ready to be ruled upon.
The board will consider the extent to which the dump would affect local water sources and will either issue or deny the permit. A decision is expected in July, officials said.
While the announcement did not amount to permit approval, a spokesman for Gregory Canyon Ltd. called it "an important milestone" after more than five years of revising the application to the board. The application was at first deemed inadequate and was returned on May 11,1999.
Gregory Canyon spokesman Scott Maloni said Friday that the company "looks forward to the Water Quality Control Board hearing."
He declined to elaborate and Chase could not be reached for comment.
Proposed for 1,700 acres three miles west of Interstate 15 off Highway 76, the landfill would accommodate 1 million tons of solid waste annually for 30 years.
The water-quality permit, one of several still needed to begin construction of the $60 million landfill, would address the dump's proximity to the San Luis Rey River, as well as technical aspects such as the liner intended to keep the solid waste from reaching the soil.
Bill Hutton, a permitting lawyer for Gregory Canyon Ltd., said in a December interview that the five-layer liner system "vastly exceeds both the federal and state standards" for containing harmful substances that could leak from the dump into the groundwater.
A lawyer representing RiverWatch, a group dedicated to protecting the San Luis Rey River, said Friday that he hopes the water-quality board will deny the application.
"(Gregory Canyon Ltd.) has really touted the idea that this is the most advanced liner system known to mankind, but one has to keep in mind that all liners eventually leak," DeLano said. "I suppose a thicker liner or a more complex liner might take longer, but they're all going to leak. The question is, what impact is it going to have on the groundwater?"
DeLano is the lead attorney on a lawsuit filed in Superior Court last fall by RiverWatch, the city of Oceanside, and the Pala Band of Mission Indians against the county's Department of Environmental Health and Gregory Canyon Ltd.
The suit also personally names Gary Erbeck, director of the San Diego Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency, as a defendant.
In the complaint, DeLano and lawyers for Pala and Oceanside claim that an analysis performed by Gregory Canyon Ltd., and on which the county based its solid waste permit approval, was flawed. Specifically, it states that the project's effects on air pollution, traffic, noise, endangered species and nearby sacred American Indian sites were understated in the report.
The first briefing in the lawsuit is scheduled for April 15 and the trial is scheduled to begin in late June. Two major permits from the Air Pollution Control District and the Army Corps of Engineers, along with a host of smaller permits, are still needed before the landfill can open.
Contact staff writer Tom Pfingsten at (760) 731-5799 or tpfingsten@nctimes.com.
Gregory Canyon spokesman Scott Maloni said Friday that the company "looks forward to the Water Quality Control Board hearing."
He declined to elaborate and Chase could not be reached for comment.
Proposed for 1,700 acres three miles west of Interstate 15 off Highway 76, the landfill would accommodate 1 million tons of solid waste annually for 30 years.
The water-quality permit, one of several still needed to begin construction of the $60 million landfill, would address the dump's proximity to the San Luis Rey River, as well as technical aspects such as the liner intended to keep the solid waste from reaching the soil.
Bill Hutton, a permitting lawyer for Gregory Canyon Ltd., said in a December interview that the five-layer liner system "vastly exceeds both the federal and state standards" for containing harmful substances that could leak from the dump into the groundwater.
A lawyer representing RiverWatch, a group dedicated to protecting the San Luis Rey River, said Friday that he hopes the water-quality board will deny the application.
"(Gregory Canyon Ltd.) has really touted the idea that this is the most advanced liner system known to mankind, but one has to keep in mind that all liners eventually leak," DeLano said. "I suppose a thicker liner or a more complex liner might take longer, but they're all going to leak. The question is, what impact is it going to have on the groundwater?"
DeLano is the lead attorney on a lawsuit filed in Superior Court last fall by RiverWatch, the city of Oceanside, and the Pala Band of Mission Indians against the county's Department of Environmental Health and Gregory Canyon Ltd.
The suit also personally names Gary Erbeck, director of the San Diego Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency, as a defendant.
In the complaint, DeLano and lawyers for Pala and Oceanside claim that an analysis performed by Gregory Canyon Ltd., and on which the county based its solid waste permit approval, was flawed. Specifically, it states that the project's effects on air pollution, traffic, noise, endangered species and nearby sacred American Indian sites were understated in the report.
The first briefing in the lawsuit is scheduled for April 15 and the trial is scheduled to begin in late June. Two major permits from the Air Pollution Control District and the Army Corps of Engineers, along with a host of smaller permits, are still needed before the landfill can open.
Contact staff writer Tom Pfingsten at (760) 731-5799 or tpfingsten@nctimes.com.
Gregory Canyon construction may begin in the fall
NCTimes.com
By: TOM PFINGSTEN - Staff Writer
FALLBROOK ---- The Gregory Canyon landfill near the Pala Indian Reservation needs only a few more permits before construction begins, perhaps as early as this fall, a spokesman for the group that wants to build the dump said Thursday.
With the approval of its major operating permit on Dec. 22, Gregory Canyon Ltd., the group that has struggled for more than 10 years to build the dump off Highway 76, three miles east of Interstate 15, gained momentum that could translate into an early 2006 opening.
With the approval of its major operating permit on Dec. 22, Gregory Canyon Ltd., the group that has struggled for more than 10 years to build the dump off Highway 76, three miles east of Interstate 15, gained momentum that could translate into an early 2006 opening.
"It has been a long process, and the end is in sight," said Nancy Chase, a Gregory Canyon spokeswoman. "It's been so long because we live in a state that requires large infrastructure projects to go through intensive environmental review, as they should."
Gregory Canyon Ltd.'s plans focus on 320 acres of a 1,700-acre site. If the remaining permits needed for operation are approved before next summer, as expected, said Chase, the way will be cleared to build a landfill that would accommodate 1 million tons of solid waste each year for 30 years.
Opponents of the project range from local politicians to a San Luis Rey Rivershed watchdog group to the Pala band of Luiseno Indians. Lenore Volturno, Pala's environmental director, has vehemently opposed the project, and traveled to Sacramento last month to contest it before the California Integrated Waste Management Board.
Even though that council ultimately approved the landfill's most important permit, Volturno said Thursday: "We're very hopeful that there will be an agency that will not supply a permit to Gregory Canyon, because it's such a terrible environmental location for a project," she said. "There's so many issues with this particular site, both environmentally and culturally."
Among the complaints that Volturno has voiced are that the landfill will pollute the tribe's major source of water, the San Luis Rey River, and that its footprint encroaches on sacred land situated atop a hill nearby Gregory Canyon.
But the dump is not a sure thing yet.
Bill Hutton, the attorney who handles Gregory Canyon's permit process, said Thursday that several more permits are required before construction can begin.
Water quality at issue
Perhaps the most consistent accusation leveled against the landfill by its opponents is that it will negatively affect the quality of water, both underground and in the nearby San Luis Rey River.
To prevent that from happening ---- and to earn the approval of a local water board ---- Hutton said that Gregory Canyon plans to install a 7-foot-thick, five-layer lining system that he called "unprecedented" in other Southern California dumps. It will consist of five barriers sandwiched between layers that are designed to detect leakage and collect liquids and gases.
Between that and a series of monitoring wells that will detect possible leaks into the groundwater, said Hutton, Gregory Canyon Ltd. should have no problem securing a water-quality permit.
"It vastly exceeds both the federal and state standards, and it's something we did to provide an enhanced level of protection," Hutton said of the lining system. "The likelihood of pollution from the landfill impacting the uses of groundwater are, in my opinion, nonexistent with all of the systems we have in place. It's an exceptionally secure site."
Hutton said that Gregory Canyon Ltd. has several meetings scheduled with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, after which a formal permit application will be filed. If the water board approves, the permit will most likely be issued within 140 days, or some time this summer.
Air is another issue
The quality of air is another point of contention that has held up landfill development. Pollutants from trash trucks, fumes from the waste and site dust are three key issues that concern officials with the Air Pollution Control District.
The application for a permit authorizing and enforcing air-quality standards for the proposed dump is in the research phase, said Hutton, adding that preliminary results from that study indicate the landfill will be able to meet the established standards.
"It addresses everything ---- dust, auto pollutants like nitrogen oxide, and air toxics, which would largely be a product of landfill gas," he said. "What we're really seeing is that the thing we have to control most is just good old dust."
Gregory Canyon Ltd. is in the process of identifying dust-prevention measures. The completed application will probably be submitted to the county this spring, said Hutton.
Dredging must be done
If approved, the landfill will be at the base of a set of hills south of Highway 76, with the San Luis Rey River running between the dump site and the highway. In order to allow customers to access the facility, a bridge must be built across the river, a process which requires approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Even though the actual area that will be dredged to place bridge pilings amounts to only a very small area, the corps of engineers must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that no endangered species are threatened. Hutton said that Gregory Canyon Ltd. will submit its application to the corps in one to two months.
Approval for the bridge could be given as soon as this summer, he said, adding that it is in discussion with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and that the issue of environmental protection has arisen repeatedly, said Hutton.
"I understand that the river right now is pretty degraded," he said. "So we're going to be restoring the riverbed. About 72 or 73 percent of the Gregory Canyon property will go into permanent, deeded, habitat preservation."
The approximate 1,230 preserve would be furnished with an outside curator that would work with the dump's operator to ensure that "the landfill and the habitat coexist with each other," said Hutton.
Miscellaneous permits
Once the last three major permits have been secured, Gregory Canyon Ltd. will need several other smaller permits for the construction of an access road, a maintenance building, a water tank and a flare station where methane gas will be burned off.
"Those are ones that will generally follow, at the time that you begin actual construction," Hutton said. "We will, on an ongoing basis, start working on those, but that's a lot of detailed engineering work."
The permits for grading and other procedural operations aren't expected to hold up the project's estimated 2006 opening date.
While opponents such as Volturno with the Pala Indian Reservation will continue to battle the Gregory Canyon project, the landfill's proponents feel confident as they near the end of a decade of legal battles.
Hutton cites the fact that Gregory Canyon Ltd. has been able to obtain quotes on a $100 million environmental insurance policy as evidence that the site is more secure than its detractors say it is.
"No insurance company is going to give us a policy of that size if there's any risk," he said.
When it opens, Gregory Canyon officials said the landfill will be open from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. during the week and from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday. It will be closed on Sundays. The landfill will not accept green waste, said Hutton, but may accept some on a limited basis to use as an alternative cover for the trash, which is usually buried under dirt every night.
"There will be a drop-off recycling facility, probably outside the landfill gate," Hutton continued. "We're also going to accept waste tires, and shred those either onsite or offsite and try to find a reuse for them."
Contact staff writer Tom Pfingsten at (760) 731-5799 or tpfingsten@nctimes.com
Opponents of the project range from local politicians to a San Luis Rey Rivershed watchdog group to the Pala band of Luiseno Indians. Lenore Volturno, Pala's environmental director, has vehemently opposed the project, and traveled to Sacramento last month to contest it before the California Integrated Waste Management Board.
Even though that council ultimately approved the landfill's most important permit, Volturno said Thursday: "We're very hopeful that there will be an agency that will not supply a permit to Gregory Canyon, because it's such a terrible environmental location for a project," she said. "There's so many issues with this particular site, both environmentally and culturally."
Among the complaints that Volturno has voiced are that the landfill will pollute the tribe's major source of water, the San Luis Rey River, and that its footprint encroaches on sacred land situated atop a hill nearby Gregory Canyon.
But the dump is not a sure thing yet.
Bill Hutton, the attorney who handles Gregory Canyon's permit process, said Thursday that several more permits are required before construction can begin.
Water quality at issue
Perhaps the most consistent accusation leveled against the landfill by its opponents is that it will negatively affect the quality of water, both underground and in the nearby San Luis Rey River.
To prevent that from happening ---- and to earn the approval of a local water board ---- Hutton said that Gregory Canyon plans to install a 7-foot-thick, five-layer lining system that he called "unprecedented" in other Southern California dumps. It will consist of five barriers sandwiched between layers that are designed to detect leakage and collect liquids and gases.
Between that and a series of monitoring wells that will detect possible leaks into the groundwater, said Hutton, Gregory Canyon Ltd. should have no problem securing a water-quality permit.
"It vastly exceeds both the federal and state standards, and it's something we did to provide an enhanced level of protection," Hutton said of the lining system. "The likelihood of pollution from the landfill impacting the uses of groundwater are, in my opinion, nonexistent with all of the systems we have in place. It's an exceptionally secure site."
Hutton said that Gregory Canyon Ltd. has several meetings scheduled with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, after which a formal permit application will be filed. If the water board approves, the permit will most likely be issued within 140 days, or some time this summer.
Air is another issue
The quality of air is another point of contention that has held up landfill development. Pollutants from trash trucks, fumes from the waste and site dust are three key issues that concern officials with the Air Pollution Control District.
The application for a permit authorizing and enforcing air-quality standards for the proposed dump is in the research phase, said Hutton, adding that preliminary results from that study indicate the landfill will be able to meet the established standards.
"It addresses everything ---- dust, auto pollutants like nitrogen oxide, and air toxics, which would largely be a product of landfill gas," he said. "What we're really seeing is that the thing we have to control most is just good old dust."
Gregory Canyon Ltd. is in the process of identifying dust-prevention measures. The completed application will probably be submitted to the county this spring, said Hutton.
Dredging must be done
If approved, the landfill will be at the base of a set of hills south of Highway 76, with the San Luis Rey River running between the dump site and the highway. In order to allow customers to access the facility, a bridge must be built across the river, a process which requires approval by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Even though the actual area that will be dredged to place bridge pilings amounts to only a very small area, the corps of engineers must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that no endangered species are threatened. Hutton said that Gregory Canyon Ltd. will submit its application to the corps in one to two months.
Approval for the bridge could be given as soon as this summer, he said, adding that it is in discussion with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and that the issue of environmental protection has arisen repeatedly, said Hutton.
"I understand that the river right now is pretty degraded," he said. "So we're going to be restoring the riverbed. About 72 or 73 percent of the Gregory Canyon property will go into permanent, deeded, habitat preservation."
The approximate 1,230 preserve would be furnished with an outside curator that would work with the dump's operator to ensure that "the landfill and the habitat coexist with each other," said Hutton.
Miscellaneous permits
Once the last three major permits have been secured, Gregory Canyon Ltd. will need several other smaller permits for the construction of an access road, a maintenance building, a water tank and a flare station where methane gas will be burned off.
"Those are ones that will generally follow, at the time that you begin actual construction," Hutton said. "We will, on an ongoing basis, start working on those, but that's a lot of detailed engineering work."
The permits for grading and other procedural operations aren't expected to hold up the project's estimated 2006 opening date.
While opponents such as Volturno with the Pala Indian Reservation will continue to battle the Gregory Canyon project, the landfill's proponents feel confident as they near the end of a decade of legal battles.
Hutton cites the fact that Gregory Canyon Ltd. has been able to obtain quotes on a $100 million environmental insurance policy as evidence that the site is more secure than its detractors say it is.
"No insurance company is going to give us a policy of that size if there's any risk," he said.
When it opens, Gregory Canyon officials said the landfill will be open from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. during the week and from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday. It will be closed on Sundays. The landfill will not accept green waste, said Hutton, but may accept some on a limited basis to use as an alternative cover for the trash, which is usually buried under dirt every night.
"There will be a drop-off recycling facility, probably outside the landfill gate," Hutton continued. "We're also going to accept waste tires, and shred those either onsite or offsite and try to find a reuse for them."
Contact staff writer Tom Pfingsten at (760) 731-5799 or tpfingsten@nctimes.com
Gregory Canyon gets boost from state board
NCTimes.com
The California Integrated Waste Management Board narrowly approved a solid-waste permit for the Gregory Canyon dump Tuesday, effectively removing the last major hurdle in the development of the long-contested landfill.
For opponents of the facility, who are concerned about traffic, noise and pollution at Gregory Canyon, the decision was disappointing. For the developer who has fought for years to gain the approval, the decision was a huge victory.
For opponents of the facility, who are concerned about traffic, noise and pollution at Gregory Canyon, the decision was disappointing. For the developer who has fought for years to gain the approval, the decision was a huge victory.
"We're delighted," Gregory Canyon Ltd. spokeswoman Nancy Chase said in a telephone interview following the vote. "This is the biggest, most significant of the permits."
With Tuesday's approval, the landfill is one step closer to being built at the base of Gregory Mountain, which is two miles west of the Pala Indian Reservation and three miles east of the intersection of Highway 76 and Interstate 15. As the first new dump in San Diego County in more than 25 years, its "footprint" would occupy 320 acres of the 1,700-acre site.
"We now have three more permits to get," Chase continued, referring to approvals that need to be secured from the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, as well as a federal permit for the construction of a bridge and a road.
Chase said that Gregory Canyon Ltd. hopes to gain all three of the last approvals needed to begin construction on the $60 million landfill by June 2005.
Technically, because one director on the six-member panel recused herself, resulting in a vote of three in favor, two opposed, the decision will not be final until a deadline for the case expires Dec. 22.
Board spokesman Chris Peck said that even if the absent director, Cheryl Peace, were to weigh in with a negative vote, the decision would stand because a tie vote is counted in favor of the applicant.
The public hearing in Sacramento had been delayed until after the resolution of Proposition B, a measure on the Nov. 2 ballot that would have permanently blocked the construction of a landfill at Gregory Canyon. The measure was soundly defeated, though some contended its wording caused confusion for voters.
Among dozens of local residents who traveled to Sacramento to express disdain for the Gregory Canyon project was Barry Martin, director of water utilities for the city of Oceanside and a director with the San Diego County Water Authority.
"We've been concerned for over 14 years" about the quality of water in the San Luis Rey River, which runs next to the proposed landfill, said Martin, whose comments were broadcast over the Internet. "To be honest with you, it scares the heck out of me. Oceanside is lucky to have a local water supply; we're very concerned that this supply will be contaminated. We do not want to face this in Oceanside."
Operating from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday, the landfill would accommodate up to 1 million tons of solid waste per year, with an estimated expiration date of 2034.
Pursuing a debate that has spanned several years, the environmental director for the Pala Band of Mission Indians, Lenore Volturno, was at the state waste agency's meeting Tuesday to register opposition to the proposed landfill.
Her argument, which followed a presentation by Jack Miller of Gregory Canyon, echoed many of the same protests as in the past, such as the infringement of the landfill's footprint onto land sacred to the Luiseno Indian Nation.
Among other concerns raised by Volturno were the potential increase in traffic, noise and air pollution. Besides threatening sacred American Indian land, claimed Volturno, it has been determined that there are "feasible alternatives" to locating the dump at the controversial site near the San Luis Rey River.
"This is not an appropriate location for a landfill and the board should reject the solid-waste facility permit," read the last slide of her presentation.
Volturno was not available for comment after the meeting.
Miller urged the board to support the landfill, focusing his presentation on the fact that county voters have approved the project twice ---- once in the 1994 effort to rezone the site, and again last month when they struck down Prop. B.
By passing Prop. C a decade ago, voters authorized the rezoning of the Gregory Canyon site to allow for the construction of a municipal solid-waste facility. This year's Prop. B would have repealed that zoning ordinance and placed a rural-use requirement on the property to prevent its development.
Contact staff writer Tom Pfingsten at (760) 731-5799 or tpfingsten@nctimes.com.
"We now have three more permits to get," Chase continued, referring to approvals that need to be secured from the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, as well as a federal permit for the construction of a bridge and a road.
Chase said that Gregory Canyon Ltd. hopes to gain all three of the last approvals needed to begin construction on the $60 million landfill by June 2005.
Technically, because one director on the six-member panel recused herself, resulting in a vote of three in favor, two opposed, the decision will not be final until a deadline for the case expires Dec. 22.
Board spokesman Chris Peck said that even if the absent director, Cheryl Peace, were to weigh in with a negative vote, the decision would stand because a tie vote is counted in favor of the applicant.
The public hearing in Sacramento had been delayed until after the resolution of Proposition B, a measure on the Nov. 2 ballot that would have permanently blocked the construction of a landfill at Gregory Canyon. The measure was soundly defeated, though some contended its wording caused confusion for voters.
Among dozens of local residents who traveled to Sacramento to express disdain for the Gregory Canyon project was Barry Martin, director of water utilities for the city of Oceanside and a director with the San Diego County Water Authority.
"We've been concerned for over 14 years" about the quality of water in the San Luis Rey River, which runs next to the proposed landfill, said Martin, whose comments were broadcast over the Internet. "To be honest with you, it scares the heck out of me. Oceanside is lucky to have a local water supply; we're very concerned that this supply will be contaminated. We do not want to face this in Oceanside."
Operating from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, and from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday, the landfill would accommodate up to 1 million tons of solid waste per year, with an estimated expiration date of 2034.
Pursuing a debate that has spanned several years, the environmental director for the Pala Band of Mission Indians, Lenore Volturno, was at the state waste agency's meeting Tuesday to register opposition to the proposed landfill.
Her argument, which followed a presentation by Jack Miller of Gregory Canyon, echoed many of the same protests as in the past, such as the infringement of the landfill's footprint onto land sacred to the Luiseno Indian Nation.
Among other concerns raised by Volturno were the potential increase in traffic, noise and air pollution. Besides threatening sacred American Indian land, claimed Volturno, it has been determined that there are "feasible alternatives" to locating the dump at the controversial site near the San Luis Rey River.
"This is not an appropriate location for a landfill and the board should reject the solid-waste facility permit," read the last slide of her presentation.
Volturno was not available for comment after the meeting.
Miller urged the board to support the landfill, focusing his presentation on the fact that county voters have approved the project twice ---- once in the 1994 effort to rezone the site, and again last month when they struck down Prop. B.
By passing Prop. C a decade ago, voters authorized the rezoning of the Gregory Canyon site to allow for the construction of a municipal solid-waste facility. This year's Prop. B would have repealed that zoning ordinance and placed a rural-use requirement on the property to prevent its development.
Contact staff writer Tom Pfingsten at (760) 731-5799 or tpfingsten@nctimes.com.
Landfill project advances
State panel approves Gregory Canyon permit
By Bill Ainsworth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
December 15, 2004
SACRAMENTO – A permit for the proposed Gregory Canyon landfill was approved by the state's Integrated Waste Management Board yesterday, eliminating a major hurdle for the project.
A 3-2 majority of the voting board members, after hearing three hours of testimony, agreed that the proposed landfill had met the state's environmental standards.
Rosalie Mule, a board member who voted for the permit, said growth is coming to San Diego County, "and we're going to have to address the solid waste needs."
Richard Chase, project manager for Gregory Canyon, the investment partnership that has spent about $20 million so far to develop the landfill welcomed the decision.
"We're obviously very pleased. They did the right thing," he said.
The permit from the board, which oversees landfills and encourages recycling, is the most important for the project by far, Chase said.
But the landfill still must be approved by agencies that regulate air pollution and water quality. It must also survive a court challenge to its environmental impact report.
Barry Martin, water utilities director for Oceanside, which opposes the landfill, expressed disappointment, especially because the board is part of California's Environmental Protection Agency.
"They are here to protect the environment," he said. "I think they let us down."
Mule was impressed with the public support for the project, which was demonstrated in two countywide election victories, in 1994 and last month. "The voters have spoken, not once, but twice," she said.
Mule and board members Carl Washington and Rosario Marin voted to approve the project.
Board members Michael Paparian and Linda Moulton-Patterson voted against the permit, saying it would endanger sacred tribal sites, threaten water supplies, increase air pollution and harm endangered species.
They also said increasing recycling and expanding existing landfills in the county are better alternatives. "It's clear that there is no need for Gregory Canyon landfill," Paparian said.
Cheryl Peace, a board member from San Diego County, recused herself, saying a firm that provides income to her husband, former state Sen. Steve Peace, had been hired by opponents of the landfill during the November ballot campaign.
Peace said she had strong feelings on the issue, but she wanted to avoid "even the appearance of a conflict of interest." In an interview outside the board meeting room, she declined to discuss the issue further.
The proposed landfill in Pala is off state Route 76 about three miles east of Interstate 15. It would take up about 320 acres of a 1,770-acre parcel. The remaining acreage would become a nature preserve.
If built, Gregory Canyon could accept a million tons of trash a year for about 30 years. North County, which now has no operating landfill, generates about 800,000 tons of garbage a year.
"North County needs a landfill," Bill Hutton, a lawyer for project proponents told the board yesterday.
Hutton said the landfill would serve North County, but he refused a request from Paparian to accept a ban on accepting trash from outside the county.
Cheryl Reiff, a volunteer coordinator for the Sierra Club's San Diego chapter, which opposes the landfill, said those positions are inconsistent. "That smells fishy to me," she said.
In last month's campaign, opponents of the landfill charged that the developers plan on accepting trash trucked in from Los Angeles.
The proposed landfill is next to Gregory Mountain and Medicine Rock, two sites considered sacred by the Pala Band of Mission Indians. Their representatives urged the board to deny the permit.
"This is clearly a case of environmental injustice," said Lenore Volturno, director of environmental services for the Pala band.
Other speakers said the landfill would be close to the San Luis Rey River and a major aquifer and would threaten water supplies used by the Pala tribe and some North County cities.
"Oceanside is lucky enough to have a local water supply. In a desert, you know how precious that is," said Martin, the Oceanside utilities director. "We're very concerned that these water supplies will become contaminated."
Proposition B on the Nov. 2 ballot was intended to block the landfill but was rejected by more than 63 percent of voters countywide. It was the most expensive ballot measure in county history, with both sides spending more than $4.3 million on their campaigns.
Judge rejects landfill suit as premature
By John Berhman
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
December 4, 2004
VISTA – In a tentative ruling, a judge has thrown out most of a lawsuit challenging the county's decision to grant a permit for the proposed Gregory Canyon landfill in Pala.
Superior Court Judge Michael Anello concluded that the lawsuit was premature and that the attorney representing the Pala Band of Mission Indians should have waited for the state to approve the landfill permit before filing the suit.
Gary Erbeck, director of the county's Department of Environmental Health, approved the permit for a solid-waste facility June 2, basing his decision on the environmental report the county approved in February 2003. The lawsuit was filed in July.
A three-member review panel of the state Integrated Waste Management Board is scheduled to consider the county's approval of the landfill permit Monday in Sacramento. A final decision by the seven-member state board is scheduled for either Dec. 13 or 14.
Anello issued a similar ruling Sept. 17, this one related to a challenge to the county's approval of the environmental report for the landfill. He concluded the suit had been filed prematurely.
Ted Griswold, the attorney representing the Pala band, said yesterday he was hoping for a ruling this time that would have declared that the environmental report was inadequate, thus forcing the county to reconsider its approval of the permit.
"We were afraid if we waited too long to file our suit, and then the state approved the county permit, then it would have been too late for us to challenge the county's approval," Griswold said. "The law is a little unclear in this area, and we wanted to make sure we covered all of our bases."
Attorney Wes Peltzer, who represents the landfill developer, said he believes the law is quite clear and that a judge cannot make a ruling on the county decision about the permit until it is considered final.
The lawsuit is one aspect of a 15-year battle to block construction of the landfill, proposed for a rural canyon off state Route 76 about three miles east of its intersection with Interstate 15. Proposition B, a ballot measure intended to stop the landfill, was overwhelmingly defeated Nov. 2.
No on Prop. B...means handling North County trash sensibly
October 31, 2004
UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL
Let's talk trash. Each year North County has about a million tons of it, all of which must be trucked to distant landfills. For several years now, those tons have gone to East County, South County, Orange County, Ventura County – anywhere but North County. Yet the newest rumor raised in support of Proposition B, the ballot measure to stop a North County landfill already under way, is that it would accept trash from Los Angeles.
That sort of hypocrisy belongs out on the curb, awaiting the sanitation engineer.
Bag that rumor, too, for it's hype. The odds that Los Angeles trash will wind up in the Gregory Canyon landfill are about nil, for the same reason North County needs this landfill: The farther trash is trucked, the more costly disposal gets, not to mention the heavier freeway truck traffic and other environmental impacts.
This rumor is only the latest of the hyped criticisms bruited by opponents of the Gregory Canyon landfill, who are also the proponents of Proposition B to sack it. They have claimed as well that the landfill will contaminate drinking water, despoil tribal lands and natural habitat, overburden local roadways. Geologists refute the former. The casino of the Pala Band of Mission Indians refutes the latter.
The landfill owners' pledges of funding to widen the roadways and of dedicating more than 75 percent of the acreage to habitat preservation refute the latter. Arguing all this has made Proposition B the county's most expensive ballot measure ever. At last report, the Pala Band has poured about $2.5 million into it; the landfill owners, $1.8 million. As long as the lever on the tribe's 2,000 slots get pulled, it will make big bucks. And fill big Dumpsters. If the landfill proceeds, its owners will make money too, perhaps enough to recoup the $20 million they've put into it over 15 years of meeting ever stricter requirements to get it built.
That there's money to be made in trash seems to gall some landfill opponents. But the county lost boodles trying to handle trash itself, meaning county residents lost money. Another private landfill increases competition here, helping to keep costs down. Hence, the earlier passage by 68 percent of a proposition approving the Gregory Canyon landfill for trash disposal "in an environmentally sound and economically competitive manner."
If passed, Proposition B would reverse not only that previous vote but the progress made in fulfilling it. The result: a return to square one, with more years of fighting to site and build a landfill, more years of noisy opposition in North County NIMBYists, and who knows but more outcry from neighbors near and far at North County's sending its trash into their back yards.
North County generates trash. North County should handle that trash responsibly. Voting not to repeal a wise vote 10 years ago will accomplish that. Vote No on Proposition B.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)