April 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          

« Damned hippies | Main | Bread lines »

Jul 20, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"consensus building is not even a consideration."

Just curious what type of concensus is being offered by those who oppose the reopening of the landfill?

"But Thompson and Knight were elected to serve the entire city, and it's abundantly clear that they are not doing any such thing."

Abundantly clear to whom? If they (Thompson and Knight) believe that the majority of their constituents think the landfill should resume taking residential trash and save the taxpayers money, would they not be working in those taxpayers best interest?


"What a shame for Greensboro."

What a shame we have certain bloggers who pander to the social justice/"intolerble raaaaaaaacism!" crowd.


It is not really about race. People just don't want a landfill that was for most intents closed, reopened.

I thought it was too valuable not to reopen, but have changed my mind.

It is not right to reopen the landfill to household waste.

It is over and lets be done with it.......


"It is not right to reopen the landfill to household waste."

It was not right to "close" it in the first place.

"It is over and lets be done with it......."

No, it most certainly not "over", regardless of your opinion on the subject.

I hope Robbie Perkins talks about this every chance he gets during the campaign. My guess is that he won't.

I don't think he's that stupid.




Well some on council are hell bent on opening this landfill regardless of the political consequences. Apparently Mayor Knight and Danny Thompson don't care that they will be voted out of office in November and Rakestraw will likely be gone as well.


But you know their battles are going to cost them the war when they are voted out and liberals take over again.

Tony Wilkins

EC: "But Thompson and Knight were elected to serve the entire city, and it's abundantly clear that they are not doing any such thing."

Allen, please stay off Ed's keyboard.

Ed Cone

Tony, I'm expressing my own point of view. You may be surprised, come November, to find out that it's pretty widely held.

As a taxpayer in search of practical solutions, I have wondered if some plan that involves White Street might be part of a well-thought-out future.

But the rush to seal a 15-year-deal, the lack of proper due diligence, and the legal missteps have given me serious doubts about the competence of the people running the show, while their indifference to the heartfelt views of so many citizens across the city makes me doubt their commitment to anything beyond winning a fight.

Reducing all issues to the level of team sports, where we pull for our side no matter what they do, is part of the problem here. Hate to see you fall into that trap. Our hometown needs more from you.

Billy Jones

What amazes me is how some conservatives in the local blogosphere seem so intent on turning the landfill into a left vs right argument thereby driving away support for reopening the landfill by people who don't want to be associated or in any way supportive of their far right world view. Conservatives will loose hard in the next local election.

And remember: this remark is coming from someone who has been an adamant landfill supporter since the 1990s when the issue first came to light.

Ed Cone

That's an interesting point, Billy -- I've wondered here often why a party at a distinct numerical advantage in GSO would want to highlight party politics, but that's been the stated goal of some in the GOP.

Beyond that, one of the good things about local politics is that party lines can matter less than they might at other levels, because finding common cause often is easier among neighbors with share and practical issues. Or at least it should be.

Billy Jones

"Or at least it should be."


Tony Wilkins

Ed, as to your team accusation. One member of that "team" recently stated that I had been his harshest critic since he had been elected. Please don't make the mistake that I am an aimless sheep following the herd. It saddens me that you would even remotely think that.

Also, the same thirty people show up and address the council to oppose action on the landfill. 270,419 residents do not. Please explain to me (remember I'm simple minded when you explain) as to how you come to the conclusion of the following statement, "But Thompson and Knight were elected to serve the entire city, and it's abundantly clear that they are not doing any such thing".

Ed Cone

Tony, I was reacting to your comment about Allen, which I took to mean I was not thinking for myself, just playing along on a team to which someone else assigned me.

Opposition to the ram-through goes well beyond the regular visitors at meetings. For one thing, three of the seven Council members who are allowed to vote adamantly oppose this project, and one supposes they hear from voters. The HRC and Wayne Abraham were among the voices speaking out on Tuesday, and they, too, have constituencies. And I see plenty of discussion on line and in the paper, too.

Is that statistically valid polling data? No, but it's anecdotal evidence that widespread and deep-seated reservations exist across the city.

Given those reservations, and given the history of the dump and the deep divisions in local politics, it seems reckless for a reduced minority to rush this thing through, potentially tying our hands for many years to come, and with some major infrastructure costs still uncounted.

Fec puts it well: "There can be little doubt the landfill will be re-opened. I’m not even sure it’s a bad idea, given the technology currently used for abatement of odor and pests. But what cannot be overlooked is the nightmarish process undertaken, needlessly incensing the community and incurring great expense. Indeed, insults to the citizenry, as well as legal and infrastructure expenses are sure to continue."

The comments to this entry are closed.