Barbra Williamson has more guts than just about anyone I know. The more she is pushed, the stronger she stands. It is very easy to have a strong allegiance to this tenacious woman.

The Task Force poll told the Task Force one clear message from the community. Our residents don't want to become known as the mega-dump for Los Angeles. In a report released this week by Ventura County, the Simi dump now takes garbage from nine Counties. It previously took garbage from five Counties. Garbage comes all the way from Indio. Why? Because it is cheap to bring it to Simi. How exciting for our community.

At least one of our City Councilmen claimed in today's Acorn that he is still undecided on the issue. How he could not have a position on the basic and most major issues of the dump expansion is beyond my comprehension. Is it that difficult to come to the conclusion that the Reagan Library is good for Simi Valley but a mega-dump is not so good? What is the fear of taking a point of view? Mayor Miller said he is not in favor of a mega-dump in town. Why are his collegues so unwilling to take a position?

We'll soon have over 105 municipalities sending their trash to SV because it's cheaper than managing that trash themselves. Yet Simi residents pay one of the highest trash disposal fees in socal. Why does a far-away city pay almost half what we pay? Why do we get the trash mountain while all those other cities get to offer attractive real estate for business development?

I have a few questions about how the Task Force conducted it's poll. We deserve honest and upfront answers to these questions:

The basics:
1) By whom were the surveys administered?
2) On what date and at what time were the surveys administered?
3) At what locations were the surveys administered?

The sample:
4) What were the criteria used to select respondents for the survey?
5) Who were the respondents (the sample) who participated in the survey? Are their characteristics representative of the population?

The data collection method:
6) Was the survey a person-to-person interview or was it self-administered? If it was person-to-person, who conducted the interviews?

The questions:
7) Who developed the questions and what was the process used to determine the wording of each question?

Thank you.

The poll was conducted last Saturday between 10:00 AM and 12:00 at commercial destination shopping centers located between Sequoia Ave. and Madera Rd. in Simi Valley by volunteers. Poll forms were given to respondents and the poll forms were subsequently deposited in poll boxes. Two to six indivuals conducted the poll at each location. Poll questions were formulated by the Task Force. No specific interviews were conducted. This information was presented by the Task Force at its meeting last night.

How about some "honest and upfront answers" from Waste Management about the push poll that it conducted County wide a few weeks ago,Tom?

Where exactly can I see these poll questions?

Yes, I am biased. I admit it. While the city council is, by agreement with WM, biased IN FAVOR of any sort of expansion that WM chooses to undertake from now through 2034, including any additional expansions WM decides to undertake, over and above THIS current plan, I am biased on behalf of having the entire community take a careful look at these plans before making a decision to support or oppose the expansion.

I'll let you in on a little secret: I'm in favor of some sort of expansion....I always have been, despite what some city leaders would have you think. Under the right terms the right expansion could be a gift to our community but under the present terms the wrong expansion could be a disaster. If the task force's simple poll helped get more people thinking about the terms of WM's expansion, then it was a great poll.

I'll repeat my question: Where can we see these poll questions for ourselves?

Never mind. I missed the download link when I read the thread.

OMG, I cannot believe these questions!! I don't need to speak out against the task-farce since they burn their own credibility every time they open thier mouths. You've got to be kidding me! I don't know who is full of more garbage, the landfill or the task-farce.

Can you come up with more biased questions than the following:

QUESTION 2: ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF THE SIMI VALLEY DUMP TAKING GARBAGE FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND MORE THAN 120 OTHER CITIES AND COUNTIES FOR BURIAL IN SIMI VALLEY?

QUESTION 3: DO YOU SUPPORT THE MORE THAN TRIPLING THE SIZE OF THE DUMP AND THE RAISING OF THE HEIGHT OF ITS GARBAGE BY 152 FEET ABOVE WHAT IS NOW PERMITTED?

QUESTION 5: WASTE MANAGEMENT, OWNER OF THE SIMI VALLEY DUMP, HAS BEEN CONVICTED OF HUNDREDS OF CRIMES AND LABELED A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND CALIFORNIA COURTS. IS WASTE MANAGEMENT A COMPANY YOU TRUST?

How about a question whether the public trusts a task-farce that deliberately lies to them and unfairly smears our public officials. Why wasn't that question on the list?

These poll results arent worth the paper they were printed on and the task-farce has turned into an embarassment for this City.

So which one(s) were lies, BK? The info from the first two questions come from WM while the third comes from CA's own court.

Gopher alert. Get your gopher traps and poison. Gopher is out from under rock. This is a gopher alert.

Saying that our Mayor was involved in a conspiracy with WMI was a lie.

No one ever said that. Only you did, BK.

Gopher alert. Get your gopher traps and poison. Gopher is out from under rock. This is a gopher alert.

You said it Gary. You can spin this any way you want but your lie was published in the Acorn for all to see.

No spin needed. I never said anything about the Mayor nor anyone else being involved in a conspiracy. What I've always said, in this blog and elsewhere, is that the City was bamboozled into the agreement with WM. Whether through ignorance, incompetence, accident or otherwise the City didn't know what it had gotten itself into. It's been had! It got itself involved as surely as Brer Rabbit got taken by the tar dummy. So what I maintained was that the City got dragged into a plan to ensure WM's expansion and to encourage its franchisees to do business with WM. A bamboozled victim the City may be but no one ever suggested the mayor was either responsible or that he was part of a conspiracy. In your typical rush to stridency you've created your own fantasy.

Gopher alert. Get your gopher traps and poison. Gopher is out from under rock. This is a gopher alert.

gs, you need to read the book "how to root out and kill a gopher".

Don't respond to a gopher other than setting a trap or poisoning.

WasteKnowledge,

One last question, do you believe the results of the poll conducted by the Task Force are representative of the views of all residents of Simi Valley and Moorpark?

Gary, Gary, Gary. You stated in your last post, "I never said anything about the Mayor nor anyone else being involved in a conspiracy".

Yet an article in the Acorn on July 27, 2007 says otherwise. The article, which discusses the proposed landfill expansion, contained the following: "The city seems to be involved in a conspiracy here," said Gary Selvaggio, one member of the task force.

You can click below for the link.

So you not only lied about a conspiracy between WMI and the City but you are now lying about even making a statement that everyone knows you made. Your credibility is going down the drain. Then again, I don't know if it can get much lower anyway.

Here is a quote that applies to your situation:

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt". - Abraham Lincoln

Gopher alert. Get your gopher traps and poison. Gopher is out from under rock. This is a gopher alert.

I don't deny saying there's an appearance of the City being involved in a conspiracy...but as I said many times, the involvement is unwittingly, the City is a victim. Try as you may to make it sound like something else, BK, never once did I mention the mayor or the council...only you have.

How very clintonesque of you Gary. Sorry, but that argument just doesn't hold water. How exactly does a city get "unwittingly" involved in a conspiracy? A conspiracy by definition would have to involve collusion on both sides. Now you're just being silly.

It is absurd to suggest that the city is the "victim" of a one-sided conspiracy as there is no such thing as a one-sided conspiracy. When you used the word conspiracy it is clear what you meant, but now you're trying to weasel out of your own words.

A bigger man would just admit he was wrong and apologize for his reckless comments. But that would be out of character for you.

I suppose you'll soon be arguing over language subtlties, like the definition of the word "is". The emperor truly has no clothes.

I think the Task Force survey is very fair; as someone else stated Waste Management often does thier own poll surveys too. So you can't say there is anything wrong with the task force wanting to do thier own survey.

What should really happen is those type of questions should be able to appear as ballot question in the upcoming elections. This way residents go in to a voting booth cast thier votes then answer community "issue" questions. This way the truth will really come out.............but I'd still bet every dollar I have it won't be in favor of Waste Management.

Keep up the good work task force.

If you need a good laugh about WM.....read this east coast article.

Deal or no deal
Christopher J. Kelly 03/11/2007
Email to a friendPrinter-friendly
Good morning, and welcome to a special Sunday edition of “Dump or no Dump.�

I’m your host, Howie Hardsell, and I’m contractually thrilled to announce that the stakes for today’s game have never been higher.

Our contestants are officials from Old Forge, a small town of about 8,800 in Northeastern Pennsylvania known for its pizza, proud people and pizza.

I’m told the town is also known for its pizza.

Welcome, contestants. You’ve all been apprised of the rules, which the producers reserve the right to change at any time.

Let’s get started. You see before you three silver briefcases.

One contains an approval for an 87.6-acre expansion of Alliance Landfill issued by the state Department of Environmental Protection and no guaranteed compensation for the taxpayers of Old Forge.

One contains a rejection of the expansion from the same agency, and no guaranteed compensation for the taxpayers of Old Forge.

One contains the unknown, which could be good or bad, depending on your perspective and the circumstances of the next 20 or so years.

You can choose to open one of these three cases, or accept a cash prize from The Banker, who is calling with an offer right now.

Hello? Yes, Mr. Banker, that is a lot of money. I’d say it’s an offer they can’t refuse, but let’s ask them anyway, just for fun.

Contestants, I’m pleased to inform you that The Banker has made an extremely generous offer. He is willing to pay you $42 million over the next 20 years if you support the landfill’s expansion and the state eventually approves it.

The decision is yours. You can walk away right now with $42 million, or open a briefcase that at best keeps the landfill from expanding to your border and at worst brings it right to your doorstep with little or no compensation.

So, Old Forge, what will it be? Dump, or no dump?

We’ll have the answer, right after this message from our sponsor, Waste Management Inc.:

“Cue ‘America the Beautiful’...

“What is a landfill? Some say it’s a noxious, nasty morass of trash that should never be situated anywhere near a residential community. Well, we here at Waste Management Inc. have a different view. When we look at a landfill, we see America.

“This is a throwaway culture, and all that garbage has to go somewhere. You and your family can sleep safe at night knowing it’s going to get there on a Waste Management truck.

“For what is a landfill, if not a great melting pot for the multicultural melange of waste cast off every day by Americans of every sex, race, color and creed? Americans like you.

“So let the America-haters bellyache, and we’ll keep piling it high until our putrid mountains’ majesty stretches all across the polluted plain.

“Waste Management — America, one truckload at a time.�

The preceding commercial, of course, is the invention of a snotty columnist with too much time and ink on his hands. Still, it’s not much more over-the-top than the public relations campaigns Waste Management wages in and around host communities the world over.

This week, the owners of Alliance Landfill went way beyond barbecues, bus tours and beautification projects, making Old Forge officials an offer they can’t refuse, at least not without considerable risk.

Like the hit television game show “Deal or No Deal,� Waste Management’s offer (bribe) is predicated on the notion that when forced to choose between a guaranteed payoff and the chance of walking away with nothing, most people will take the money and run.

This notion is likely to have even more traction with Old Forge officials who are part of a generation that grew up watching “Let’s Make a Deal.� Nobody wants to be the jackass who passes on a brand new Mustang to open Door Number Three and end up with a broken-down donkey.

The offer is as savvy as it is tempting. By setting up such a lopsided risk/reward equation, Waste Management has essentially said to the people of Old Forge, “Say no. We dare you.�

While the deal is far from done and contingent on state approval, Waste Management clearly believes that every community has its price.

If you can’t beat ‘em, buy ‘em. It’s the American way.

So, what’ll it be, Old Forge?

We’ll have the answer next time on “Dump or No Dump.� Stay tuned.

CHRIS KELLY, the Times-Tribune columnist, gets paid to write this garbage

This Bob Folger guy is right. How about we just put it to a vote. Waste Management can make their case directly to the people as to the economic benefits. Who is with me?

I want to know why the task farce is so insecure and cowardly that it has to ask loaded questions in order to fabricate its own poll results. Why not ask simple questions like whether or not you support the landfill expansion?

I bet I could design my own questionaire using the same type of biased questions that would show the public to be overwhelmingly opposed to the task force. All I have to do is ask questions like this:

Do you support having a rougue task force that doesn't have the support of our Mayor and former police chief, that has a history of making false accusations against our public leaders and city officials, that has launched unfair attacks against local business leaders, and that has a political agenda?

See how easy that is. And I bet that question would be answered with 98% opposed to the task force. Obviously that is a leading question that is biased and unfair, just like the questions in the task farce survey. Which means that the results of the survey are meaningless since the questions themselves are tainted.

The survey itself show the task farce to be biased and dishonest.

Sure "Let us Vote", a vote would be great. Other than the gopher, I doubt one person in town would vote for a mega-dump in Simi Valley. Voters are what Waste Mgt. is most afraid of. Politicians can be bought, but voters can not. Smith and his gumbas from Chicago & Houston can paint all the trucks green and talk about saving lots of trees, but this dump offers nothing to Simi Valley residents and will destroy the last chance for Simi Valley to have a significant job base in its west end.

That Bubba Kidd reminds me of a gopher as well. Underground, then in the dark comes up quickly only to retreat to the dark once again. Must be a real weirdo for sure. One sick puppy.

You anti-landfill folks sure are afraid of people having different ideas and opinions. You also don't seem to trust an informed public since you try so hard to distort the truth. Why is the task-farce so afraid to do an honest poll? Why do they feel the need to mislead the public with loaded questions, half-truths and smear attacks? If you were confident in your position then there would be no reason to employ those types of tactics. Instead you become a bunch of self-righteous cynics who believe that you know what is best for everybody and are willing to stoop to any level to attack anyone in your way.

Gopher alert. Get your traps and poison. This is a gopher alert. Gopher is out from under the rock. Gopher alert!

Dantona must have really done something to this guy. Perhaps cost him his job? Perhaps humiliated him? This is great. This whining pathetic piece of protoplasm attacks and attacks and attacks with the same dogma over and over. One has to wonder just how emotionally wounded this emasculated Hannibal must be. How very sad that someone actually lives like this.

Boy, you sure got that right WasteKnowledge. I've seen a lot of odd ducks in the psych ward during thirty years working for the County, but I've never met one as demented as this Bubba thing.

I had this debate with a friend today about what a proper poll should call the place where our trash goes.

Calling it the dump obviously seems loaded and conjures up a bad image.

But calling it a landfill seems to try to pretty up a pile of trash with a fancy name. Kind of like there was a hole that needed filling.

So, what should a proper poll call it? Maybe a dumpfill? A landdump? Trashplace?

Let me know.

Brian, since I came up with the poll questions, I'll explain my thought process. When I was a kid, we didn't have trash service like we have now in town. Every Saturday my Dad and I would load up the garbage cans and go to the dump. It was a fun outing. We would dump our garbage in the dump, look around for anything we could use and head home excited about the trip.

Many years later when Waste Management and a couple of other mega-waste haulers got in the business, they experienced community outcry from coast to coast when they tried to expand or place new dumps in neighborhoods. I can't explain why. But then again I can't explain many things. Anyway, they decided to make a new and politically correct language to describe their business. Dumps were renamed landfills. Garbage was renamed refuse. Trucks were even painted green to denote the environment.

Do we as the rate payers and citizens have an obligation to adhere to the new language that the public relations talking heads came up with? I don't think we do. To me, the dump is still the dump. My garbage is still garbage. And I really don't care what color the garbage trucks are painted. By the way, the garbage man became the trash man who became a sanitary engineer. My Dad, on the other hand, was the mailman and my mail is still delivered to my house by the mailman. Mom was a teacher, and teachers still teach school. One has to wonder why these careers didn't change name. Nevertheless, Waste Management, Councilman Becerra and a few anonymous bloggers demand that we use Waste's politically correct language. I don't agree. Our poll was conducted using our labor and our money. Our poll was for our benefit and the benefit of those taking it. Anyone who doesn't like our poll can use it in the john, burn it, ignore it, or take their own poll.

By the way, our poll couldn't have been too offensive. Mike Smith, general manager of the Simi Valley dump, took the poll, affixed is name thereto and said thank you. For that little bit of time, he has my respect.

Maybe if the City had participated in asking questions about the dumpfill (TM, Brian) there wouldn't be such a controversy over a few citizens asking on their own.

It amazes me that there are always people trying so hard to shut down discussions, so the deliberations can be kept to a small group of insiders.

Not normal people, gs. These are creatures. They come from under rocks in the dark of night filled with hate. These cowards would never surface in the light of day. The sun is their enemy. They still cry for the day before the last primary. They remember yesterday and fear tomorrow. Their wicked witch is in Arizona and their bald life is in shambles. They are but creatures, gs. Speak not to them, just of them. Set your traps at your end of town,gs, and I'll lay out poison at the other end. Soon, Simi Valley will have one less gopher.

Landfill? Dump? Looking for the right word?

Roget's Thesaurus says that they are the same thing. However, there are lots of synonyms which you can find by clicking the attached link.

Churchill once said: "Broadly speaking, short words are best and old words are best of all."

So, "dump" is accurate, acceptable and - according to Sir Winston - preferred for communicating in this instance.

Then I guess the task farce must be comfortable calling those who are menatally handicapped "retards". After all, it technically means the same thing.

Your poll was deliberately hostile and biased. I love the letter in the Star this morning from a college professor who teaches marketing and is an expert in the subject of polls. He blasted the task farce poll and was appalled at the questions.

You're at the lies once again, Gopher. Your "college professor" actually refers to himself as a post graduate teacher. Ever hear that term used before? Not I. Sounds like he is a realtor who teaches a night class at Moorpark JC or perhaps a trade school. No college professor would use the words this guy used. Polls aren't marketing, Gopher. Polls are for other purposes that you either don't know or you prefer to lie. My suggestion is you lie because that is what you always do. I recall a story we read in elementary school. It was the jaborwalky, or the jajko, or something silly like that. I can't recall. But it was nonsense and that is what you are Gopher.

The gopher fruit cake is making an analogy between racist words and calling a dump a landfill or referring to garbage as rubbish or waste. Gophers speak gopher language of grunts and squeaks. The analogy is a disgrace and minimizes the negative impacts of racist remarks. This gopher is beyond comprehension. Nothing out of its mouth makes any sense. Instead of debating the dump expansion, it goes after the wording of the poll, the task force members, Dantona and the like. But never does it address any issue directly. Talk about a political agenda? This gopher marches to a different drummer. Fortunately for society, most gophers are not nearly so weird.

Has anyone looked at the effects on wildlife of this large expansion? So far, I do not recall hearing a word about the subject from proponents or opponents.

One example: what will happen as a result of the gull population growth that will follow this expansion and its effect on other bird species in the area? What about the impact nearby human population? You would think this should be addressed before this moves development moves forward. (See attached link.)

The Environmental Impact Report will address these impacts. Based on the report, discussion about the specific impacts will begin.

Bubba,

I never said the methodology of the poll would meet the criteria of a marketing firm or a fair poll. I didn't say I vouch for the integrity of the poll or its results. I am not on the task force and I don't attend their meetings regularly.

I didn't post on the front page some dramatic number as proof of something.

What I said was:

"I do not know the methodology but I am sure task force members will fill us in."

I also said that "dump" is a loaded word. My exact words were:

"Calling it the dump obviously seems loaded and conjures up a bad image."

I would say the goals behind the poll were both to weigh the opinion of the public AND to inform them of the point of view of the task force.

Those types of polls are commonly called push polls.

I don't see how any of this means I am giving the task force a pass.

My general plan is to post almost anything local groups send in. I figure if the readers have a chance to see everything they can decide for themselves the truth of a statement of the validity of an argument. That's why I even posted links to their blogs including those I disagree with ( socalpundit.com,) to further the discussion in our community. You better believe I will post every press release that Tony Strickland sends to me. Just like I posted every press release Peter Foy's team sent in. But just because I post it, doesn't mean I agree or disagree with it.

I have unlimited space unlike the print edition of the paper. The paper might print up a short description of the poll with a summary but I can post the whole thing and allow you, the reader, to figure out the validity to it.

I have spoken to employees at the landfill and taken their tour. Have you yet? When I was there employees told me it is common to call it a dump but because they take pride in their work they prefer to call where they work a landfill.

I am not afraid to say that in general an expansion of the landfill/dump to take more outside trash doesn't seem like something I would prefer. I haven't taken a poll but I would guess most residents would agree. But I am still open to listening to WM as they try to convince us why it will provide job opportunities and other benefits to the community.

I deleted part of your comment as it was uncalled for. E-mail me so I can further explain.

Thanks for reading and posting.

I found this strange, but true story from a local veterinarian on the web that I thought I would share about one unexpected effect of landfills on local species and nearby the environment.

It is an interesting subject you raised. Thank you

After being away for a few days I was interested in turning on my computer and looking at the "new stuff" on Brian’s blog. Recently, I find myself reading with interest all of the blog comments and yes posting some myself, what fun.
With that in mind I want to offer a few ideas for your consideration.
With regards to the "survey" that was taken, Saturday the 22nd, I would hope that those who are in favor of the expansion of the Simi Valley Dump stop and consider that the public had the opportunity to answer the survey in either direction and choose not to support the Landfill and Waste Management.
I believe that folks like Bubba K often fly off into a direction that suits their own agenda rather than look at each situation with open mind.
QUESTION 2: ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF THE SIMI VALLEY DUMP TAKING GARBAGE FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND MORE THAN 120 OTHER CITIES AND COUNTIES FOR BURIAL IN SIMI VALLEY?
Generally speaking, when a person is asked a question that requires a yes or no answer he/she can choose yes or no, it is not the fault of the Task Force that a huge percentage answered no.
The simple part of all of this was that a huge percentage of the population in Simi Valley had no idea that Waste Management even accepts waste from other Counties but, upon finding this out Simi Valley residents seem to be not in favor of this practice.
If someone stands in front of some of you good folks who are following this blog and asks question number 2 of the survey, do you fly into a rage or simply answer “yes� I am in favor of Waste Management accepting trash from Cities and Counties outside of the Ventura County area.
It is just that simple.
“Yes� or “No� questions are just that and the problem here is that some of you take it a step further and offer up your own agenda to confuse the issues. The other part of this is that apparently some of you outraged folks think that the average person who was good enough to take this survey has no mind of their own and is incapable of making their own decisions. I on the other hand give the citizens of Simi Valley more credit and the survey is the proof. I also think that some of the reasons that you Waste Management supporters are so upset about this Survey is that even though only approximately 600 folks took the survey a huge number of people who formerly had no idea that this problem existed now have become a little better informed.
Frankly I would be interested in knowing from some of the Waste Management supporters how accepting trash from communities outside Ventura County benefits the City of Simi Valley or any body other than Waste Management? If the over 230 Felony Convictions (and the real number was not even used in the poll question) is an inaccurate number than what is the correct number? Orange County, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties have land that they could use for possible new dump sites, why can’t they dump their trash in their own communities? If I lived in another community I might be tempted and even grateful that my trash was going to a far away city rather than be in my own back yard. As a mater of fact the survey proved that point because a very high percentage of the folks outside Simi Valley who took the poll were in favor of the expansion. Here is another point of interest, over 72% of the folks who took the poll were willing to give their “real� names, seems to me to add legitimacy to their answers and to the poll.
Can someone tell me what are the benefits to the City of Simi Valley with the purposed Landfill Expansion?

Concerned Citizen, you are too cool. I took the poll and I found the poll questions to be funny, yet accurate. I've seen a few individuals, including Councilmember Becerra, criticize the poll. What I haven't seen, though, is the Councilmember question Waste Management's application or the impacts it will have on our community. I'm sure the Councilmember isn't a consultant for Waste Management as is our previous Mayor. I just can't figure out then why the Councilmember goes after the Task Force, criticizes the wording of the poll, but doesn't take a position on the mega-dump expansion. Any explanations are very troubling.

I just heard from a member of one of the Neighborhood Councils that a protocol has been established to deal with public comments when WM makes its presentations. According to this source a total of 30 minutes will be set aside for public comments and no person shall have more than 5 mins to speak. If 30 people show up to speak they'll each have 1 minute.

Can anyone verify this information?

I've said long ago that the landfill issue deserves a lot more public discussion than usual. The City said the matter will be fully explored by the public through NC meetings. The way things look the public is being set up for the Big Fall.

It appears that Southern California Edison can't take a poll any better than did the Task Force; at least in the eyes of one City Councilmember. And Edison did it to rip off the taxpayers. Boy, I hope one Councilmember, a District Manager with the company, is as critical of his employer as he has been of the Landfill Expansion Task Force; expecially since he knew about this problem at Edision before he criticized the Task Force.

_____________________________________________________________________
Calif. utility judge wants $200M penalty for SCE

LOS ANGELES, Sept 28 (Reuters) - Southern California Edison should be penalized $200 million in fines and lost financial incentives for rigging safety and customer satisfaction data to meet performance targets, an administrative law judge with the California utility regulator said, according to a report in Friday's Los Angeles Times.

Southern California Edison (SCE), a subsidiary of Edison International (EIX.N: Quote, Profile, Research) of Rosemead, California, did not comment because the judge's decision has yet to be formally issued, a company spokesman said on Friday.

Administrative Law Judge Robert Barnett's decision has not been formally issued. It will be final 30 days after it is issued unless the issue is appealed to the full California Public Utilities Commission or one of the five members on the commission calls for a review.

No public document has been issued of Barnett's decision, but it is circulating within the commission, the newspaper said.

Three years ago, the company admitted that it urged its workers to achieve the highest customer survey results so that SCE could get higher financial incentive awards, which are funded by ratepayers.

The survey regarded a rate incentive mechanism in place between 1997 and 2003, SCE said.

SCE did say that it has taken steps to ensure that the same thing doesn't happen again anywhere in the company, and has made a commitment to give customers back $49.5 million in financial awards.

Barnett wants SCE to be fined $40 million and lose $160 million in incentives.

SCE has asked that it be formally penalized with $50 million in bonuses and a $2.5 million fine because the company voluntarily and expeditiously reported the problems, fired 11 people and disciplined 46 others, the LA Times reported.

This question is for Bubba Kidd...
Why have you taken such a strong stance in support of Waste Management? I haven't heard you say one thing negative about Waste...Do you support garbage coming from 100 differenct cities to our the landfill? Are you familiar with vision 2020? If not, this was a document prepared some years ago by some pretty bright people in our community. They came from all walks of life, and they had some interesting things to say about the West End Specific Plan and the landfill...only taking in trash from Ventura County. Do you know of this document?
Thanks

Barb, I know this gopher and the anti-Task Force comments have nothing to do with the landfill expansion. It is strictly a hate Dantona lifetime campaign. Nothing more or less.

Set your traps. Get your poison. As the other blogger says, when the gopher comes out from under a rock, get him!

As a former Neighborhood Council member, I can tell you that historically when there is a controversial item the Chair has the choice to limit the speaking time to no less than 2 minutes per person. So, as we have done in the past, if the Chair decides to limit the speaking time he/she can do so. However, this would not be 1 mintue per person. He/She can limit it to 1 minute per person, but I doubt that he/she would do that because that isn't enough time. To make it clear...this is not as GS states a new protocol. The City Council does the same thing by the way, limits public comments if thre are a lot of people speaking on the same topic. In reality, you don't need to hear the same comments over and over and over for hours on end. So, it is a logical protocol.

Sounds real logical, Longtime. Who needs to hear from the residents. Let's just hear from Waste Management. After all, why wouldn't Waste Mgt. tell the truth? It is a logical protocol? Nope, it isn't. It is a way to try to give Waste Mgt. an edge, unless Waste Mgt. is also limited in its presentation.

Longtime....I agree that it's a logical and perhaps even reasonable protocol for assessing an application for a new car wash on 1st St, a 20 unit condo on Cochran or a taller than average wall along Kuehner. But the expansion planned for the landfill is one of the area's most unusual proposals. The impacts of the expansion aren't known. The effects could be terrible for this community. The City has already committed to supporting whatever expansion WM desires but refuses to provide any opportunity for its citizens to be educated about and to discuss these impacts & effects. 30 minutes of public comments is too little. The City should be mailing information, conducting polls, holding scoping sessions and projecting what effects & impacts (if any) the expansion will have in the future. It should inform its citizens. Only then should the process be opened up for NC meetings and 1 minute comments.

This is not Speed Dating. This is the well being of our families and the futures of our children being decided.

Boy, you hit the nail on the head GS. Clearly the City is still trying to stifle public input at the direction of Waste Management if the one minute nonsense is reality. How very sad for the City to do this if Becerra, et.al. really want to hold public hearings.

Barbra,

I have never spoken in favor or against the landfill expansion. However, rather than address the issues I raise the anti-landfill zealots on this blog choose to use a broad brush and paint anybody who questions their motives as being pro-Waste Management.

I am not for or against the landfill, I just want the task force to live up to its commitment to an honest and objective evaluation of the landfill proposal. But from what I've seen the task force members are so biased that there is no hope that they can provide objective information to the community. The survey speaks for itself. The task force seems more concerned with manipulating public opinion instead of informing the public.

Including Jim Dantona on the task force was also a mistake that certainly give the image of political opportunism. There is little doubt that Dantona will try to leverage his association with the task force in his bid for the SD19 seat. The fact that other members of the task force were strong supporters of Dantona in the Supervisors race and that the group refuses to comply with the Brown Act and takes action in private only reinforces the impression that there are poltics involved in this process.

I find it facinating that the liberals around here routinely accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being sexists, racists, or homophobes. Just yesterday there was another typical post on this blog calling a conservative blogger "anti-woman". But on September 30 at 7:56 p.m. WasteKnowledge called me a "fruit cake". It seems to me that any conservative around here who would say such a thing would be universally blasted as having made an anti-gay slur. But interestingly WasteKnowledge gets a free pass by his buddies. I liberals only apply these types of standards to conservatives but not to themselves.

Ah shucks. Gophers have feelings? Me think not.

You can never pin a gopher down. That is unless you drive a nail through its head.

We need another gopher alert. This local gopher, a remnant of the Mikels reign of terror, as resurfaced.

Sorry about the misunderstanding of the "fruit cake" comment, Goph. It wasn't meant to be an anti-gay slur. Simply put, it was meant to infer than you are of limited cranial capacity or otherwise mentally ill with you continued unfounded and factless attacks against Dantona.

Don't worry about it. Apparently your friends are OK with you being a homophobe. Just continue to say whatever you want so that other can know your true character.

Ah, get over it. She lost because she was mean spirited. You can't blame Dantona for your change in lifestyle.
I thought you had a nice, though deeply imbeded, side. I now doubt it.

BK...I think you will find when all is done and said that you are incorrect when you make the statement that the TF is anti landfill.
In fact, I don't ever remember saying I was opposed to the landfill, I just want to make sure that we look at EVERYTHING they are proposing before we give it the thumbs up. I want to know where the trash is coming from. I want to make sure that Simi valley gets its fair share of the money, $260,000 in my mind just doesn't cut it. The City of Oxnard gets a better shake at dumping than your own city does. That has to bother you. This has slipped by us once or twice before, and it isn't going to happen again. The franchise agreement the city has with waste won't allow a "mom & Pop" francize to come into our community. Know I realize there are some trade offs, but if I, Barbra Williamson or you, Bubba Kidd, want to pay someone to come to my house and take a washing machine or an old television, computer or clothes, and pay that person for taking it, I, as a homeowner am not allowed to do that.
You didn't answer my question about 2020...You're very knowledgeable about our community, so I am of the opinion you probably were on one of the committees???

Do you really think you will get some reasonable dialogue with Goph? Not on your life. Living in darkness, eating roots, all must have a significant psychological impact on its life. It is driven by hate, not logic. Watch out Barb, Goph bites. Just like its master was those many years at the Board. Nasty, nasty, nasty. Bet ya a nickel you don't get any dialogue back out of Goph.

Can anyone tell me what percentage of the Waste Management workers who are employed by Waste Management at the landfill live and raise thier families in the community of Simi Valley?

Bob Folger - Taylor, PA

Also....does the public relations rep for Waste Management live in the host community of the landfill?

Response to Bob Folger was sent via e-mail.

Barbra, I don't disagree that we should be getting a better deal on our dumping fees. I'm also familiar with Vision 2020. The funny thing is I probably agree with you on this issue more than I disagree with you.

My issue is with the makeup of the task force. I'm getting tired of the attacks against our local elected leaders and the open hostility toward WMI. That is not an effective way to manage this process. The poll questions were so biased and one-sided that I can't believe you can say with a straight face that the TF isn't anti-landfill. Your TF has declared war on WMI and it is self-evident that they will never agree to any landfill expansion proposal. I predicted this from the beginning when you first announced the TF members, but even I didn't anticipate how low thing could sink.

Gopher alert. Get your traps and poison. This is a gopher alert. Gopher is out from under the rock. Gopher alert!

Goph knows what the Task Force is recommending before the report is issued. Hmmm. It fabricates a scenario, then references it as if it were reality in the first place. I suggest it is a very sick rodent searching for an identity.

Surf's up Barb. See you tomorrow morning for a Task Force meeting on a wave.

PS: No chance of Goph snooping on us. They are afraid of water.

I’m beginning to see a pattern on some of these controversial blogs. For example, on this blog regarding the Simi Valley Dump there are the folks who are either in favor of the Task Force and their quest to make Waste Management accountable to the citizens and City of Simi Valley or the people who seem to say that they are in favor of the Landfill Expansion but never offer any facts just continue to attack the individuals who support the Task Force. Over and over questions have been posed to the supporters of the landfill but all they seem to do is attack individuals. Maybe I am just not seeing something here but it seems to me that if you support the landfill project than there should be some legitimate reasons that benefit the community that supporters could come up with.
I have heard arguments against the landfill like 1) unwanted trash from cities outside Ventura County. 2)Waste Management does not compensate Simi Valley appropriately 3)Excess trucks that damage the Simi Valley roads without sufficient compensation to Simi Valley. 4)Damage to the environment of Simi Valley. 5)Inappropriate charges to Simi Valley, the host city as compared to say Oxnard. 6) Waste Management with their extensive past Criminal background just in California let alone in other states 7) The dumping of the green waste over the regular trash instead of actually recycling more of it as they advertise they do 8) The charging of $4.00 per billing cycle or more for the recycling of green waste and than not actually doing it and all of the other reasons that the Simi Valley Expansion Task Force has to want the citizens informed and Waste Management’s future intentions limited.
The thing that I have not seen is rational discussion from the supporters of Waste Management, from them all I see and hear are personal attacks and rhetoric about nothing that has to do with any facts.
Frankly, these actions confirm my original thoughts and let me know that the folks who constantly volley the personal attacks against the members of the Task Force have no substantial legitimate reasons to support Waste Management.
In all of the “blogs� and articles where someone from Waste Management has actually responded the most I have heard from them is how they are offended or outraged by someone’s comments against them but never to my knowledge have they actually answered any of these regularly stated comments about what their company practices are.
To me it looks like Waste Management’s only concern is to quiet the public so that they can continue making their billions while they continue to pollute and use up the resources of Simi Valley.
Personally, I could understand it all if the City of Simi Valley was getting rich like Waste Management is getting but Simi is getting according to the math I did about .005 to .006 cents for every dollar Waste Management takes in which is not enough in comparison for what Waste Management is doing to this city’s resources. (For those math folks I took an average figure of $45.00 per ton times 3000 tons per day times a 5 day work week or 260 days or $35,100,000.00 and to get the correct figure I used the approximately $186,000.00 figure that the City currently is paid). Remember this nominal figure only serves to make the point that Waste Management has a huge source of income from this endeavor and as far as I can see is not taking the appropriate care in dealing with the “host� city. If not for Simi Valley Waste Management would not be the billion dollar business that it is and should be more appreciative of its host city.
But this is just my opinion and I am just a concerned citizen.

Nobody here is a supporter of Waste Management, which is why your questions are irrelevant to the discussion. People should be able to speak out against the obvious bias of the task force, which, by the way, also includes our Mayor and other members of the City Council, as well as many members of the community. These are legitimate questions and the biased poll sent out by the task force only reinforces the impression that they are a political anti-landfill group.

It is also dishonest to claim that anyone who disagrees with the task force is therefore a supporter of WMI and the landfill expansion. That is simply not true.

Oh stuff it Gopher. Nothing that comes out of your mouth makes any sense. Go sit on the pot with an oversized seat and flush. You will enjoy the twirl as you go down.

It constantly amazes me that some folks can read something and then make comments that have absolutely no reference to the material they just read.

And Bubba, you just keep up the good work as you continue to make me laugh, you are like the man who gets on his horse and rides off rapidly in all directions, but I have to tell you that sometimes it's hard to follow your train (wreck) of thought.

OK Bubba....
When the TF makes their final decision on the lanfill, and makes the recommendations it would like to see, I will expect an apology from you...I don't care if someone wants to speak out against the TF...Heavens Becerra and Sokja have had their say, and that's ok..
For so many years the City has let WM do whatever they damn well please because they were the elephant in the room, but NO more. The residents need to take control because no one else has until the TF forced them to loom at the whole picture...believe me, nothing will be swept under the rug or not discussed this time. There are too many eyes looking, and that is a good thing!

Barbra, it is your task farce that is reponsible for politicizing the landfill issue. They are the ones who owe our Mayor and this community an apology for their repeated reckless and false accusations. And their ridiculous "poll" has only further eroded their credibility and made them an embarassment to this City.

Oh stuff it Gopher. Nothing that comes out of your mouth makes any sense. Go sit on the pot with an oversized seat and flush. You will enjoy the twirl as you go down.

Gopher alert. Get your traps and poison. This is a gopher alert. Gopher is out from under the rock. Gopher alert!

What seems so strange to me is that I have constantly heard Barbara talk about her 15-20 years that she has been on the City Council (which is respectful) but NOW she has a big problem with Waste Management and the Simi dump? Now she has a problem with the agreement with WM and the city? And it seems she figured out that trash is coming from other cities? What's changed? I don't see Barb getting re-elected next time around, because she seems to act a little too much like Judy did in that later years, and look what happend to her. You see, I'm actually a democrat but I don't think Dantona's meager political experience really qualifies him to run for much of anything. The good news is he has never really won anything in the first place so really, he is more of a professional victim. Now don't get me wrong, I think Strickland is pretty much of a weasel too. Hopefully we can come up with some other credible candidates.

One other observation, if Dantona stops too quick it seems that GS and Pandolfi would bump right into him! NOW, as far as the TF goes, talk about a WEASEL ALERT!! --> Where do I start! I'll just say, political HACKS that can't seem to even conduct a poll without looking painfully obvious!!! Anyway, I think ya'll gonna find out when all this is over, you're going to say Marsellus Wallace was RIGHT!!

Peace, Love and God Bless.

Marsellus...Out

There is a difference between revealing an issue and politicizing it Bubba. Since the landfill expansion was the covert plan of WM, Judy Mikels, John Magness and an all-too quiet former Mayor and City Council, it was already political; and as Magness' retreat from California illustrates - it was more political scandal than political issue.

If PUBLICLY offering an opposing point of view for the PUBLIC to consider and discuss is considered political to you - so be it.

Until Dantona, and now Williamson and the Task Force, publicized this plan - the only discussions about landfill expansion took place behind closed doors. The rest of this Council seems more concerned with restricting hot dog vendors and establishing schoolmarm dress codes than practicing Democracy. People should be able to speak out against their bias as well.

Keep the heat on Barbra.

Marsellus, your characterization of me walking up Dantona's rear end is unfounded. I supported him in the Supervisor's race because Peter Foy was a late entry. As I told Peter in days following, had he been an early entry, he would have had my vote. Recently, Dantona asked my wife and I to host a fundraiser for him. We agreed. Although our daughter is a registered Dem., my wife and I have remained Republicans our entire adult lives to this day. I support Glen Becerra, Steve Sojka, Barbra Williamson and Paul Miller on the City Council; all Republicans, but I reserve and enjoy my right to differ with them on specific issues. Dantona, two of his brothers, and his father remain my friends. His mother was a charming, brilliant and fun loving woman who we similarly respected. We sip wine, talk about growing up in the east, and enjoy Italian food. Beyond that, we don't conduct business, don't do family vacations, don't agree on many political issues and don't hang out in the same circles of friends. To say I walk up his rear end is unfounded and without merit. You, my friend, are a coward to insult me behind a phony name.

Dont bother with insults from people who won't lift a finger to help their community. All their efforts go to tearing down those who try. In all the time this Blog's been online and all the spiteful verbage tossed off their keyboards not one of them has offered any reason to support their landfill or their candidate. Not one. How sad is that?

Thanks gs, but I'm done with reading this rubbish. I'll fight my battles and enjoy life. Being insulted by ghosts isn't my cup of tea. They should be in a mental institution. See you on the road one day, my friend.

Keep up the positive work for the community, Mr. "P". It will take more than make believe mob kingpin Marsellus Wallace, his wife, Mia, and underworld problem-solver Winston Wolf to stop Dantona's freight train that is coming down the tracks.

Concerned Citizen,
Let me begin by responding to the arguments against the landfill.
1) Unwanted trash from cities outside Ventura County. - I personally don’t care where the trash comes from garbage is garbage. All these cries about L.A.’s trash sounds like elitist nimbys to me. When you stop producing your own garbage then you can complain about your neighbors. I do however support charging a fee for L.A.’s garbage that is high enough to subsidize trash collection in Simi Valley. I have no qualms about making L.A. or any other community pay dearly if they think that they are too good to deal with their own garbage.
2) Waste Management does not compensate Simi Valley appropriately. – As I understand it Waste Management does not compensate Simi at all for any landfill activity. The only documents that I have seen pertain to the arraignment that gives Waste Management exclusive rights to approximately 80% of the trash collection business here in Simi Valley. While I would like to see a portion of the tipping fees go to Simi Valley we must remember that the dump is located outside of the city on county land. I don’t know if we have any legal ground to request some form of compensation.
3) Excess trucks that damage the Simi Valley roads without sufficient compensation to Simi Valley. – Outside of trash collection in Simi Valley almost all truck traffic generated by the dump is confined to the freeway.
4) Damage to the environment of Simi Valley. – Landfill technology and the laws have changed dramatically in recent years. With liners to prevent ground water contamination, methane gas collection systems, dust control measures and State laws regarding regular trash and hazardous waste there is little chance of environmental damage.
5) Inappropriate charges to Simi Valley, the host city as compared to say Oxnard. - I am not aware of where Simi Valley is being charged inappropriately but keep in mind that while dump is in our back yard it is not actually in the city and therefore we are not the host.
6) Waste Management with their extensive past Criminal background just in California let alone in other states. – I firmly agree with those who believe that this is a serious issue that needs close scrutiny. But Waste Management is already here and wither we approve the expansion or not their Criminal background is an issue that our civic leaders should always keep in mind.
7) The dumping of the green waste over the regular trash instead of actually recycling more of it as they advertise they do. – This is called alternative daily cover and is allowed under state laws passed in the early 90’s. Check this link http://www.cawrecycles.org/issues/adc Many people are working to change the laws so that this is no longer permitted. As for now Waste Management is working within the law on this matter.
8) The charging of $4.00 per billing cycle or more for the recycling of green waste and than not actually doing it. – This fee is for the collection of green waste and is part of a separate agreement between Simi Valley and Waste Management that deals with trash collection services. It has nothing to do with the landfill.

With that said, let me move on to your comment about how landfill supporters continue to attack the individuals who support the Task Force. It appears to me that the worst offenders are task force supporters. If I see one more “Gopher alert� post I am going to scream (actually I already have screamed over those posts). To Moondoggie and WasteKnowledge, if you can’t respond to BK with sound facts and reason, please, keep your fingers off of the keyboard.

BK the construction, expansion, and operation of landfills will always be political. The only question is, do want these political decisions made in public or behind closed doors? Before the task force none of our elected officials was willing to discuss the landfill expansion in public.

Good report JimmyM. Mike Smith, dump manager, will be proud of you and hopefully give you a little bonus.

While you don't care if the Simi Valley Landfill becomes a mega-dump for Los Angeles and beyond, others do. Every County has an obligation to take care of its waste. Our County can grant or deny the expansion permit. It is not a birth right. Waste makes billions and Simi Valley residents watch the garbage mountain grow and the garbage trucks flow through town may sound great to you. To others, we want something a little better for our community.

As far as gopher alerts, believe me JimmyM, they shall continue to be issued to one blogger who doesn't say anything that deserves a comment.

Thanks for your comments, JimmyM. Opinions are great to hear. Fortunately, I think you are in a minority of our residents. Too bad for Mike Smith and his Houston gumbas, but good for our community.

WasteKnowledge is possible for you to respond to anything without making a personal attack? Your implication that I am working for mike Smith is totally baseless. But, I guess you feel that your position on this issue is so weak that your only recourse is to insult anyone who has an opinion different than yours. Why not stick to the facts?

Gopher alert. Set your traps. Get your poison. This is a gopher alert.

Jimmy M, I really appreciate your comments and while I'm convinced you answered them with sincerity I believe that it is not that simple. You actually hit on several real problems that need to be resolved between Waste Management and Simi Valley and therefore the obvious need for the Task Force. Several of these problems I believe stem from the “splitting hairs� so to speak. You mentioned the City boundaries. You’ve mentioned the problem over the city lines, yes that is a real problem and Waste Management uses it to their advantage whenever possible. When it is convenient for Waste Management to be a part of Simi Valley they take advantage of this and when it is not convenient for them they take advantage of that too. The City of Simi Valley would be well advised to change those lines to make this landfill part of Simi Valley, which I’m told they can do.
The landfill has been sort of a smelly pimple on the back side of Simi Valley. What they want to do with the megadump expansion will turn it into a festering boil.
As far as the green recycling or lack of it and Waste Management working within the law, have you seen any of their commercials recently, I have and here again they take advantage of which way the wind is blowing to suit their own agendas. Your answer to my statement regarding the $4.00 per billing cycle for recycling green waste is really vague and here again Waste Management apparently uses this sort of double talk to suit their own needs. Remember the public believes that when they take their time to separate the green waste and pay the additional charge, it going for a good cause and being recycled and not just dumped over the regular trash. Whether or not it is a separate contract we the citizens have some real expectations that are not being met by a company that apparently could care less about the environment. The recycling fee amounts to a subsidy to cover their cover as it were. I would not object to the fee if it went to cover the cost of recycling which is definitely what Waste Management wants us to believe. The reality is quite different than their misinformation/propaganda (choose one) implies.
As for your comments about “trash is trash� come on, why should Ventura County have their waste areas filled up with trash from other counties? Full is full. In 30 years or so, our children and grandchildren will be forced to pay a much higher cost to ship it to wherever the NIMBYs will allow. These other counties have their own land area’s, they just don’t want their trash to fill up, smell up, and pollute their lands, so dumping it in our area, makes great sense to them and Waste Management whose pockets are getting lined with money.
Although the landfill is technically outside of the city, access to that landfill from LA and its neighbors is only possible along the 118 freeway (or the streets of Simi Valley), and, city, state or federally maintained, the residents of Simi Valley have to travel that freeway and those roads frequently if not daily.
Just because something is not located within city limits does not lessen its effects on the city. The Rocketdyne site above the Knolls is also not within the city limits. We were the victims of nuclear accidents on that site. There were at least three accidents if I remember correctly, and at least one of those was a lot more severe than Three Mile Island and reputedly the worst in U.S. history. Simi Valley received much of the radioactive fallout resulting from those accidents. The one in 1959 spewed radioactive material into the air and the ground for two weeks. Newsweek reported that a study by the Santa Susana Field Laboratory Advisory Panel Study (funded by U.S. Department of Energy and the California Environmental Protection Agency) found from 260 to as many as 1800 cancer cases in the area could be attributed to the radioactive material. The study found chemical and radioactive waste from the plant has polluted soil and groundwater in the area... That is a high price to pay for something that came from outside the city limits.

There is a ton of thoughtful debate on this entry. Thanks for contributing everyone.