Clarington Council decided we need an independent peer review, as well as possibly additional studies to help them to decide whether Clarington should be a willing host or not. So they asked Planning Department Staff to come up with a report, outlining what studies may be needed.
On May 23, Durham Region Finance and Admin Committee came up with a resolution that would limit the Clarington review and studies to a cap of $200,000. If that was not sufficient, Clarington could come back and ask Regional Council for more money. However, there is a time line attached to the site selection, which is in September. Regional Council has only one more meeting (3 weeks from now) before they break for summer - until September. It appears they don't want Clarington to do their "due diligence" and complete their review before the September site selection. Originally, Durham and York Regions approved a motion that said, "...that such adequate funding shall include the costs of all necessary studies and legal advice incurred by the potential host community to investigate and complete its due diligence in arriving at its decisions whether or not it will become a host community for the EFW facility."
Also at that Finance and Admin Committee meeting, which our Mayor Abernethy sits on and Charlie Trim was present for I was told, Regional Chairman Anderson made it a point to say that "a message needs to be sent" to Clarington before the May 28 Council meeting. The intent was made very clear - the Region wants control over which studies can be reviewed independently by Clarington. That's ridiculous. How could they possible call it an "independent review" if Durham is directing which of their consultant's studies can be reviewed? The Region wants this incinerator project to go through, one way or another. So Mr. Anderson showed up at Clarington Council on Monday night, and asked that he be allowed to address Council. Sending a copy of the motion to Clarington Council wasn't enough. He wanted to drive home his message in person.
This is when the fireworks began. All 4 local Councillors (Foster, Hooper, Robinson, Woo) voted "no". The three Regional Councillors (Abernethy, Trim, Novak) voted yes. The Regional Chair was denied his request to speak! Apparently that has never happened to him before, and he beat a hasty retreat from Council chambers after that vote, with at first a stunned, then an angry look on his face. His right-hand man in this endeavour, Cliff Curtis, accompanied him.
Later on, all 3 of our regional reps spoke about this - Charlie Trim being the most livid. He lashed out at the local councillors and everyone else. He was absolutely inconsolable. Mary Novak said she had wanted Mr. Anderson to be able to speak so he could give more information to Council and the residents, but what information was he there to give? He was there to pressure the local councillors, who had outvoted the 3 regional councillors the week before regarding approval of the peer review report, into changing their votes to agree with their regional counterparts. He even said he was there to make it clear to Clarington Council that the Region was not giving them a blank cheque. Council and Staff already knew that. There was no further information for him to give.
Mayor Abernethy's reaction and comments were particularly disappointing, but not surprising, as he and Councillor Trim are such strong supporters of "everything Anderson". Mayor Abernethy stated his position very early on, before all the reports were in (and they still are not in) that he is in favour of incineration and totally against landfill. He doesn't seem able to grasp the fact that incineration produces toxic ash that must be landfilled - about 1/3 of the total mass of garbage going in to the incinerator comes out as ash. The other 2/3 goes out of sight, out of mind, into the air to contribute not only to greenhouse gasses (I guess he doesn't care a bit for 
global warming), but also toxic emissions that affect human health as well as ecological health of surrounding areas. Where does he propose that toxic ash go? Do we keep it within Clarington or Durham Region borders so we can fulfill their grand claim of taking responsibility for our own garbage and a "Made in Durham solution"? They just don't get it, do they? They will need landfill for their incinerator and they will contribute even more to our smog days, global warming, and health problems. Do they even care that the emissions from burning garbage are worse than those from burning coal for energy? They care apparently about the ground but not the air we breathe. And they want to put in an unsustainable technology rather than putting all that money and energy into reducing waste, recycling, reusing, etc. Increasing waste diversion will reduce the need for landfill and is so much cleaner, safer, and LESS EXPENSIVE too! Also much more socially acceptable.
global warming), but also toxic emissions that affect human health as well as ecological health of surrounding areas. Where does he propose that toxic ash go? Do we keep it within Clarington or Durham Region borders so we can fulfill their grand claim of taking responsibility for our own garbage and a "Made in Durham solution"? They just don't get it, do they? They will need landfill for their incinerator and they will contribute even more to our smog days, global warming, and health problems. Do they even care that the emissions from burning garbage are worse than those from burning coal for energy? They care apparently about the ground but not the air we breathe. And they want to put in an unsustainable technology rather than putting all that money and energy into reducing waste, recycling, reusing, etc. Increasing waste diversion will reduce the need for landfill and is so much cleaner, safer, and LESS EXPENSIVE too! Also much more socially acceptable.While it was certainly out of the ordinary for the Regional Chair to not be allowed to speak at a local municipal meeting, I can't fault our local councillors for doing it. They felt they had to send a message, then they succeeded in doing so. They were sending a message to the Region that Clarington needs to do it's own due diligence. After all, right now the only "studies" we have are the ones provided at those one-sided Public Information Sessions hosted by Durham Region. They also succeeded in sending a message to our Mayor and two regional councillors. Our local councillors play as important a role as do our regional reps, maybe even more so. They don't have a conflict of interest when it comes to standing up for Clarington as our regional councillors seem to have.
Remember that Durham Region decided a year ago that thermal treatment (incineration) would be their preferred method of dealing with municipal waste. How they came to this conclusion is beyond most of us, since they didn't have enough information to make that decision. Even now, the consultants hired by the region to push this project through to completion give us answers such as, "We can't answer that question", or "We don't have that information yet" when asked specific questions regarding health, emissions, etc. If the consultants don't have the information, neither does Council, so how did they make their decision a year ago? Crystal ball?
People ask, how biased are the reports being promoted by the Region's consultants? All you need to do is to attend one of their information sessions and hear them tell us that everything is good. There are no drawbacks to incineration, they say. The particular technology they will be using will be very clean and only emits water vapour from the stack they say, showing a picture of a little puff of white smoke. Problem there - the specific technology to be approved has not been decided yet. They give round-about answers to questions and don't answer anything that might be negative. It's no wonder that our gullible Regional Councillors have been taken in by it all - they hear only positive results regarding incineration. And they also hear how terrible landfill is. They haven't a clue about stabilized landfill, how it can be used in conjunction with enhanced waste diversion for a better solution to the garbage problem than incineration. The part to concentrate on is WASTE DIVERSION, not landfill. Certainly not incineration.
Our Regional Councillors keep touting the wonders of European Incineration - and those who have already been there are going over again, with a few additions, on our dollar of course. This trip should be restricted to those who have not gone previously, but that's another story. But why do none of them know anything about stabilized landfill when MBT treatment and stabilized landfill technology is practiced much more extensively in Europe than North America. A key reason for this difference is the requirements of the European Union’s Landfill Directive 1999/31/CE, which states: "only pre-treated wastes are allowed to be landfilled after July 2001; and • the amount of biologically degradable MSW to be landfilled must be reduced in a phased approach to 75% by July 2006, to 50% by July 2009, and to 35% by July 2016 of the total amount of biologically degradable MSW produced in 1995."
They sure didn't get much of an education on previous trips, if they learned nothing about stabilized landfill, and since most of them seem to believe that incineration is the answer to landfill and none will be necessary once we get that shiny new incinerator! How naive.
If the Region wants us to host that monster, they should pay for our "due diligence" so the best decisions can be made by our Council for our residents. But the last thing the region wants is for us to get the real truth from independent studies. Our local councillors did the right thing. And if our staff needs to run over the $200, 000. cap, then our local council should declare Clarington NOT a willing host. They could do it right now and not have to go to the expense, but these studies will help us if we have to go to court to fight this even after being declared unwilling.
Remember that Mr. Anderson has made it VERY clear a number of times when asked, that even if we are not a willing host, it will be up to Durham Region, and not Clarington, whether we are forced to host the incinerator. The bully strikes again. One more reason the Regional Chair needs to be elected by the people instead of re-appointed time after time after time by his buddies on Regional Council. He needs to be accountable to US, not just to his friends. He has quite the hold over most (although luckily not all) of those on Regional Council. There are a few who go their own way, and they are to be commended. But most, sadly, don't. They may not realize it, but they look like lap-dog automatons to those of us who watch those meetings on TV.
So thank you to Councillors Foster, Hooper, Robinson and Woo. We appreciate that you are looking out for our best interests, and that you have had the guts to stand up to fierce pressure from not only the Region, but also from our own 3 regional representatives (Abernethy, Trim and Novak). If you can stand up to them, it shows that the Mayor's ridiculous accusation that you are intimidated by delegations is another of his newly off-the-wall ideas. We see it as you listening to residents, not being intimidated by them. You have shown strength and caring and a loyalty to Clarington that the other 3 could learn from. We thank you and will continue to support your efforts.
So... you're saying that you would whole-heartedly support a stabilized landfill in Clarington?
ReplyDeleteI mean, I understand that you are begging them to NOT build an incinerator but have you done anything to encourage them to build a landfill?
Something incredible happens when one group of people says Yes and another group says No. Actually, it's not that incredible. All that happens is the Yeses says Yes even louder and the Nos say NO even louder.
I suggest you find a more positive way to protest this incinerator plan because unless you can paint them a prettier picture than what they've got in their heads the Yeses will never see how ugly their plan really is. It's called entrenchment.
I said no such thing. Ms. McKeever said she would support a landfill (not stabilized since they're "notoriously unstable" according to her) in Clarington right next to the incinerator.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that incineration requires landfill capacity as well, since it produces bottom and fly ash that needs to go to a landfill.
A better solution is increased diversion, which will require about the same amount of landfill and eventually a lot less landfill than the incinerator, as diversion rates improve.
Use of stabilized landfill requires that more of the waste stream be removed at source and less toxic, less garbage overall goes into this landfill. More is reused, recycled, recovered.
Right now we have about a 20 year supply of landfill capacity due to increased approvals done quietly by the Province. There is no 2010 border crisis. We don't have to have this thing operational in 2010 as being touted by the proponents.
Where will any new stabilized landfills be located? I have no idea. The thought that it must be located within Clarington is ridiculous. Why would it be? Because we want to keep all of York's, Clarington's, Oshawa's, Ajax's, Whitby's, Brock's Uxbridges, Pickering's, and Scugog's garbage within CLARINGTON? I don't think so. Perhaps each municipality should take care of its own. Or perhaps each Region should take care of its own.
With incineration, will we be keeping all our garbage (and Durham's and York's and Northumberland's, etc) within Durham Region? Not a chance. The fly ash will have to go to the Sarnia Hazardous Waste storage facility. The emissions will be spread much farther than Durham Region, and in much greater amounts than if it was diverted and the residual landfilled.
We are not talking about landfilling all our garbage. We are talking about working toward Zero Waste. Getting to 75% would be an excellent start, but Clarington presently is somewhere in the mid-40% range of diversion, according to Durham Region staff. We're not even working hard at it because our officials in the Region are so definite about incineration. They never took a serious look at Zero waste goals or stabilized landfill. None of them even knew what stabilized landfill is at Regional Council. How could they have made an informed decision about it during the "Alternatives To" phase last year if they hadn't even heard of it this week?
There is much more to be said about all of this, and more information coming. Most of Regional Council is already entrenched. Luckily our Local Councillors are not. At least they are considering that incineration is not the be-all and end-all that our Regional Chair has been promoting. And a few of the formerly pro-incinerator Regional Councillors are starting to ask more questions. That in itself is encouraging.
We don't want anyone to make decisions without all the information. That is what we are trying to get across. Regional Council has been given a narrow view designed to have them support one technology that was preferred by a few early on, and the consultants were hired to promote that view.
We want nothing more than to have everyone on an even playing field, armed with more information, not less.
From the infantile behaviour I have witnessed by Regional Councillors (they should remember they are televised), I applaud our local councillors for their actions, especially in light of the abandonment of Clarington by Abernethy, Trim and Novak.
ReplyDeleteCouncillor Trim's little speech against the wishes of Wilmot Creek residents after a delegation brought forward the legitimate concerns to the Region was disgusting. And our regional councillors voting to approve the motion instead of sending it back to staff to incorporate the requests of Wilmot Creek residents, who pay for services we don't receive from the region - they were also disgusting. They will pay politically for their blatant snub of their constituents.
ReplyDeleteYou people in Wilmot Creek got the collective 'finger' from your Mayor (Abernethy)and Regional Councillors Trim and Novak...all under direct iron fist control of Regional Chair, Roger Anderson. Keep these names in mind. Even though the next municipal election is still 31/2 years off, it's never too early or late to remember who helped and who hindered. As a block, you people represent a major force in Clarington. Use it. Mobilize yourselves around your particular garbage issue and make your voices heard. While you're at it, keep in mind that the new incinerator in your general area as proposed ala Abernethy, Trim and Novak, at the iron-fisted insistance of Anderson that will burn garbage from all of Durham and York regions and beyond, will spew toxic waste into the air, water and land all around you. Wake up folks! Organize yourselves and use your numbers. Given that Mayor Abernothing will not represent you, nor will Trim and Novak because they take orders from Anderson, it's up to you people to make yourselves heard - otherwise, quit whinning.
ReplyDeleteThere's an old saying that bears repeating here: If you aren't part of the solution, then you're part of the problem".
ReplyDeleteOur Mayor (Abernothing), his weak Regional Councillors (Trim and Novak) all of whom are under direct control of Regional Chairman Mao Anderson, are not just a part of the problem; they are the problem!
The solution rests in the hands of the electorate. While we'll have to wait awhile (3 1/2 years)to get rid of some of our 'garbage' we can all play a part in the solution by letting these clowns know that the parade is over, and it's time to do what you're elected to do - represent the people, not Roger Anderson and not the $5M consultants.
Why would they not listen to us? We want to recycle more, not less. What have they got against Wilmot Creek residents? We're people too. We are paying the region for services we don't receive through our regional taxes. That is not fair.
ReplyDeleteI never thought I would say this, but I want Mutton back after Abernasty is thrown out of office for violation of the Municipal Election Act.
ReplyDeleteI don't want either one of them back. There MUST be someone out there who can do the job properly, without being overly influenced by the Region, but who also won't be a bully and nasty to people. Although lately Abernethy has not been exactly cordial to residents. His new tactic of trying to trip up delegations, just like Anderson does, is nauseating. It's too obvious and not at all helpful to residents or to anyone. It's a ridiculous tactic and he should stop it immediately. He'll end up with the same reputation as Mutton had, as a bully and not listening to delegations - just going through the motions. I don't like what I'm seeing one bit!
ReplyDeleteIn one of the posts above, there's a reference to this nutbar McKeever and her desire to see not only an incinerator located in Clarington along the waterfront, but a toxic dumpsite located right next to it!
ReplyDeleteGuess who owns the property right next to the site? You've got it... I've been told it's this same looney. This explains a lot if my sources are correct.
Recall, this is the same flake who suggested at a recent public meeting that (in reference to potential health risks) we should forget about our children and our grandchildren, and only worry about ourselves right now. Gee...
Wow, am I glad she's on the side of the incineration boosters (Abernethy, Trim and Novak and their leader, Mao Anderson), and not on 'our' side. The time we'd spend on damage control would be overwhelming.
Sorry to be posting so often, but there is so much that should be said!
ReplyDeleteOur local councillors done the people of Clarington a major favour by voting to refuse the Chairman of Durham Region to speak to council last week.
Firstly, anyone who wants to address council must file with the Clerk to do so, several days in advance. Anderson failed to do that. Who the 'heck' does Anderson think he is that he has rights here in Clarington that Clarington residents don't have!
Secondly, I would suggest that he was not here to answer questions like our naive Mayor suggests. He was here to warn our Councillors (the 4 local councillors not yet under his thumb like Abernethy, Trim and Novak)to toe the line; his line.
Now, I read in the weekend paper that Abernethy actually stood up in Regional Council last Wed. and offered an apology on behalf of the residents of Clarington for the actions of these same 4 councillors. What a wus. This guy just doesn't get it!
I think most Clarington residents are pround and pleased with the actions of the 4 local councillors and embarrased with the Mayor and 2 Regional reps (reps ??).
One of the candidates for Mayor in the last municipal election used to refer to Abernethy as 'Aberfluffy'; now we know why.
Am I understanding an above blog comment correctly; someone wants Mutton back? PLLLEEEAASE. If that low-life were still in the Mayor's office there would be no discussion here about incinerators - it would have been built by now and Mr. Arrogance would have his pockets full of dough, drinking our hard earned tax dollars at the local bars and degrading the Town like before!
ReplyDeleteShame on you for even thinking we need that corrupt style of politician back.
I just read in the Orono Weekly times that Abernathy has apoligized to Anderson for the local councillors refusing to allow him to speak. I think also telling him he has the right to come and speak anytime. I don't have the paper with me.
ReplyDeleteObviously, Abernathy, Novak, and Trim aren't listening to those in Clarington. The local councillors are smart and now that the people don't want this or are willing to listen to the experts.
Hopefully if the money for the study gets used up, council will wise up and not even try Durham for more money and just outright state that we don't want it.
Obviously Anderson is just holding hands with the mayor and regional councillors since they'll always do what he wants us to do, even if the people don't.
It should have been that sites were selected all over Durham Region, or at the max two here and two in York, so both sides would get a fair shot.