Category Archives: Health Care

Text of letter from Russell Anderson to officials

Can you find a “veiled threat” in the appended letter? LAKE couldn’t.

Some people seem to be forming opinions of that letter without ever having read it. LAKE has published links to a PDF of it from four previous posts: “Far from Over”, “What is Fiery Roots”, Russell Anderson Responds, and “We got off on the wrong foot”. Formerly LAKE only had a PDF of a scan of a paper copy of the email of 3 Jan 2011. Per request, Russell Anderson has sent plain text, which appears below. -jsq

All,

My name is Russell Anderson. I am the Co-Director of Collectiveprogression.org and graduate of Valdosta State. I am writing to inform you of my intent to publish the below piece on our website and to our readership as well as produce a full length documentary about the community struggle against the proposed Wiregrass LLC biomass incinerator. I have you all on this email {Sterling Assets, Langdale’s, Council, Commissioners, Authority, Attorneys} and ALL of you have continued to pass the blame and buck on the building of this plant. Rather than doing the more responsible thing (pending EIS),

Continue reading →

Jerry Jennett answers Bobbi Anne Hancock

Bobbi Anne Hancock asked a question at the VLCIA board meeting 18 Jan 2011, and Chairman Jerry Jennett explained that he’s a businessman, not a scientist, he has to trust the experts, and he’s not prepared to answer questions. He says she can state a position, though, and she does so. See it for yourself:

Apologies for missing the first part, and for the muddy sound. Professional staff of a tax-funded organization could probably do a far better job of taking and publishing videos than a tiny all-volunteer activist organizations such as LAKE. Video by John S. Quarterman for LAKE, the Lowndes Area Knowledge Exchange.

-jsq

Using sludge to build better communities –Matt Flumerfelt

This LTE appeared in the VDT 18 Jan 2011. -jsq
I was recently reading “Masterpieces of Eloquence,” which includes a speech delivered by the fourth Earl of Chesterfield to the House of Lords in Feb., 1743. “The bill now under our consideration appears to me to deserve a much closer regard than seems to have been paid to it in the other House, through which it was hurried with the utmost precipitation, and where it passed almost without the formality of a debate. Nor can I think that earnestness with which some lords seem inclined to press it forward here consistent with the importance of the consequences which may with great reason be expected from it.” He goes on to say, “surely it never before was conceived, by any man entrusted with the administration of public affairs, to raise taxes by the destruction of the people.”

I find this quote applies exactly, mutatis mutandis, to the present situation. The effects of these toxic chemicals are far more devastating to my mind than the effects of gin. The science panel assembled by Michael is more credible than the assurances of the industrial authority expert. In fact, the emissions from the plant are so close to the permit threshold that they could easily exceed that threshhold on occasion. Would the IA expert then continue to hold the position that there is “No health hazard to the public?” I don’t think anyone who favors the proposal is aware of the enormity that could result if the plant goes into operation. They have left the public health out of their equation. They have just enough science, they think, to push the deal through over the objections of an easily deceived public.

Matt Flumerfelt
Valdosta

“we got off on the wrong foot.” –Russell Anderson

See also his letter to LAKE. -jsq
From: Russ Anderson
Date: Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:11 AM
Subject: Mr. Paulk. My apologies and clarifications
To: apaulk@lowndescounty.com

Dear Commissioner Paulk,

It seems that we got off on the wrong foot. I have recently been notified that some of the content within the email I sent to you and other commissioners January 3rd 2011 regarding the biomass Plant were taken as a personal attack towards you and perceived as having “veiled threats”. I’m sorry about that and I apologize for the perceived hostility.

I was also told that in a private conversation, after the {1/11/11} commission meeting, you referred to me by name as a threat similar to the “Virginia Tech Shooter.” That is a very personal (and misinformed) attack and I would appreciate/request a retraction of that statement. Like everyone, I was absolutely appalled when that tragedy occurred as I am anytime I see senseless violence committed against anyone.

My motives are to simply attempt to help support the health of Lowndes County residents and our environment. To compare me to the person that committed this atrocious crime is slanderous and a defamation of my character. Such words and perceptions

Continue reading →

Russell Anderson Responds

Received this morning; see What is Fiery Roots? and Paulk interrogates Noll for backstory. -jsq
From: Russ Anderson
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:18:02 -0500
Subject: Russell Anderson responses to article about Fiery Roots and Commissioner Paulk Accusations

Dear L.A.K.E.,

My name is Russell Anderson. Thank you for taking an interest in the Wiregrass LLC Biomass incinerator issue and my affiliated organization Collectiveprogression.org. I am writing today with hopes of clarifying a few things.

First, I’m glad to see there is such an effort as L.A.K.E. in the Lowndes area. L.A.K.E appears to use strategies that could be modeled by other communities seeking a more informed population. Information sharing is critical to achieving a more just and equitable world. The objective of our organization is simply to share the narratives of community struggles, solutions, and efforts in hopes of creating better channels of communication and resource sharing between communities dealing with justice issues. Any similarities to LAKE’s efforts to “Cover the planners to connect the dots” are nothing more than pleasant coincidence.

Hopefully, as our website develops from its infancy, our mission will become more apparent in the content. We have interviewed people across the country to uncover ways that people working for justice can be more connected and,

Continue reading →

VDT Civics Lesson on How to Stop a Biomass Plant

The VDT explains how to effect change, if anyone is listening. Editorial, 13 Jan 2010, Powerless to stop the power plant:
This week as the rhetoric around the proposed biomass facility has continued heating up, leading up to last night’s forum, one of the main themes has been that “government should do something.”

While the Times does not condone or condemn Chairman Paulk’s actions in the commission meeting Tuesday night, understanding the situation may help shed light on the issue. The county is powerless to do anything to stop this power plant. The only governmental entity with any power over the project is the city, and that’s only in the form of the services being extended and the water being sold to the company, as well as the sewage sludge that’s being burned. They too are powerless at this point to stop it.

The editorial continues with the tired old excuse “they can be sued”. Don’t they have insurance for that? If the whole thing goes as bad as some opponents predict, they could be sued for the kind of financial disaster that faces Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

There is one governmental entity that does have the power. Ah, here it is: Continue reading →

VDT and WCTV on WACE anti-biomass meeting

The first word is the key word in David Rodock’s VDT article today, Opponents to proposed biomass plant speak out at meeting:
Experts from a variety of fields presented the health risks, pollution and water issues, and other concerns involved with the construction of a biomass plant in Valdosta Thursday at the Wiregrass Activists for Clean Energy (WACE) forum held Thursday evening.
The Valdosta-Lowndes County Industrial Authority (VLCIA) has repeatedly claimed to have a long list of experts on its side; Brad Lofton wants everyone to see him read his laundry list of authorities and experts. “I will proudly share it with everyone,” he says. The VDT points out that there are experts who are against the plant. Experts whom the VLCIA can’t even bring itself to name, only allude to as “folks come into the community”.

Even the caption on the VDT picture is telling: Continue reading →

The issue of the proposed biomass incinerator is far from over –Dr. Noll

LAKE has reviewed the allegedly “threatening” letter Chairman Paulk referred to in his interrogation of Dr. Noll, and we find nothing alarming about a wakeup call, so we have posted it on LAKE’s website. More on that later. -jsq
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 21:05:59 -0500
From: noll_family
To: apaulk@lowndescounty.com, jevans@lowndescounty.com, rraines@lowndescounty.com, cpowell@lowndescounty.com CC: noll_family@bellsouth.net, kay.harris@gaflnews.com, “John S. Quarterman” <jsq@quarterman.org>
Subject: Re: Tuesday’s Meeting

Dear Chairman Paulk and Commissioners.

I again would like to extend my invitation as President of WACE to the upcoming event this Thursday (see attachment).

The issue of the proposed biomass incinerator is far from over and concerned citizens of Lowndes County and Valdosta will use their constitutional rights to (respectfully) speak up at future meetings, as they have done in the past.

Continue reading →

Paulk interrogates Noll

Last night the County Commission Chairman turned a routine event invitation into front page news in the VDT this morning: http://valdostadailytimes.com/local/x1162624684/Paulk-No-more-biomass:
Lowndes County Commission Chairman Ashley Paulk called a halt Tuesday evening to commissioners hearing biomass comments during public portions of regular board meetings.
LAKE has videos; here’s a playlist, and here it is embedded: Continue reading →

VDT publishes biomass email exchange from December

David Rodock writes in The Valdosta Daily Times today, in “Debate over biomass heats up”, about the exchange of email from December that you’ve seen in full on this blog. Rodock also got some new quotes from Dr. Noll and Brad Lofton, but no answers to any substantive questions from Lofton. Is a public employee funded by 1 mil of tax money supposed to refuse to address substantive questions from the public that pays that 1 mil?

-jsq