  Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 879 Registered: 11-2005 |
I was asked to pass this along. *PLEASE READ AND SPREAD THE WORD... We are gathering the masses for a public statement to stop burning our trash and start recycling. Please help support by attending this peaceful protest rally. This is our time to do this right, join us to stop another twenty years of health issues and 1.2 billion dollars of wasted taxpayers money. **The protest rally will be heald on Thursday May 29, 4pm to 6pm at the corner of Woodward and Jefferson in front of the Spirit of Detroit statue. Please bring as many people as you can, protest signs, and gas/dust masks.* > > > > *WHEN: Thursday May 29, 4pm to 6pm* > > > > *WHERE: Corner of Woodward and Jefferson* > > *WHO: Everyone including the most affected children* *We want green jobs, clean air and to end this wasteful/unnecessary overspending!* > > Also... We need as many people as we can to attend the city council meeting on TUESDAY 10am (tomorrow).( sorry I am a little late posting for this) And we will all Rally on Thursday at 4pm in front of the Spirit of Detroit statue in support of the council. All of the news cameras will be there and we will bring this issue to the front page and make it the lead story on all channels. It looks like FOX world wide is going to pickup the story. We will be asking the Mayor to concede and do the right thing. We have never been closer to shutting it down then we are today! (Message edited by urbanoutdoors on May 27, 2008) | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 2514 Registered: 10-2006 |
You do know that the City has a long term contract to supply the incinerator with trash, right? What's your solution for that? It's wise not to protest the present until you have a better plan for the future. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 880 Registered: 11-2005 |
Charlottepaul, You do know that contract is up on June 1, 2008 and would be renewed hence the reason for such a protest. (Message edited by urbanoutdoors on May 27, 2008) | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 2516 Registered: 10-2006 |
Yep. "The upcoming expirations of the primary agreements associated with the City of Detroit’s current solid waste management system offer the City and the GDRRA the opportunity to assess and restructure existing practices. The Report has presented the status and key components of Detroit’s current solid waste management program. The role of the RRF in providing the majority of the steam to downtown businesses and contributing to regional electricity supply has been described. The Report has also presented information on the performance of recycling and yard waste composting programs in other urban areas and key components of successful programs. Results of a survey of landfills within and outside Michigan, and key trends affecting hauling and landfilling, were presented in order to estimate the potential for disposal of wastes currently directed to the RRF. Options for developing an integrated solid waste management system for the City of Detroit, including the potential contributions of recycling, composting, resource recovery, and landfilling have been presented and analyzed with regard to implementation requirements and costs. The City, the GDRRA, and other stakeholders will review the Report and provide input and direction toward selecting a strategy." http://www.ecocenter.org/recyc ling/documents/GDRRA%20SOAR%20 Exec%20Sum.pdf Just making sure that you had an alternative in mind and weren't simply relaying others' opinions. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 2351 Registered: 07-2004 |
Yeah, wait until Adams and Company have decided to re-up on the incinerator before you start protesting it. That'll work.  | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 2517 Registered: 10-2006 |
Sorry for being so crass. I just wanted to make sure that people understand that this issue is more complicated than simply protesting something that one doesn’t like. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 881 Registered: 11-2005 |
I am quite aware of the issue and was also part of the original protests in the 1980s, so my passion to shut this down runs quite deep! | ||
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936 Post Number: 3186 Registered: 01-2005 |
"*WHO: Everyone including the most effected children" Affected, Urban, not effected. Ah, you got it. Quick work! (Message edited by ray1936 on May 27, 2008) | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 884 Registered: 11-2005 |
Thanks Ray fixed it | ||
Barebain Member Username: Barebain Post Number: 18 Registered: 02-2006 |
Question: Hearing the arguments, in support of keeping the incinerator, claiming that the issue is more "complicated" than first glance would tell, has me remembering my time spent living in Ann Arbor. I spent two of those years living one block away from the big steam plant at Huron and Washtenaw, and never once smelled the distinctive odor of garbage being burned that I now smell regularly, living in Detroit (several miles from the incinerator). I saw the plant in operation on many nights, spewing steam and making a racket, and never thought twice about it's environmental/public health repercussions. So. If we really do need the steam, why can't we just produce it without burning trash? There are other means. The Ann Arbor plant uses natural gas, I believe. I use natural gas to create steam in my home. Yes, it costs money, but so does burning trash in our city, and those environmental/public health repercussions are creating a very different, a much more lethal cost to citizens. Thoughts? | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 885 Registered: 11-2005 |
Here is a good synopsis email I have gotten of the issue: The lease on the Detroit Incinerator is up for renewal on June 1, 2008. The Detroit City Council has adopted a new plan for trash disposal which includes recycling and shutting down the incinerator. Our Mayor wants to continue using this MONSTER POLLUTING/ASTHMA MACHINE! We need to act NOW! Call and write to the Detroit City Council and thank them for moving us forward. Call and write the Mayor, ask him to reconsider the health, welfare and finances of Detroit. -The Detroit incinerator is contributing to the rising dioxin levels, cancer, asthma, and low birth weights in our neighborhoods. The asthma rates for the 9 zip codes around the Incinerator are 4 times higher then the Michigan average. Detroit was just designated the ninth most air polluted city in the country. The Detroit Incinerator is the 6th largest pollution source of over 180 facilities in Wayne County monitored by the state. Wayne County is currently in violation of EPA air quality health standards. The Detroit Incinerator annually emits an estimated 600,000 tons of global warming carbon dioxide. The Detroit Incinerator only burns about 70% of the trash put into it and the resulting highly toxic ash (about 30%) goes to a landfill. -Our waste is one of the biggest resources for the future. What kind of products could Detroiters produce with the endless supply of this material? Recycling creates 10 times more jobs than incineration. It promotes environmental consciousness and responsibility. Detroit is the only city of the 30 largest cities in the United States that does not provide curbside recycling. By continuing to burn these easily recycle-able items we will never make a full switch to recycling. We are losing the revenue from recycled raw materials. Again, Detroit will be left behind on one of the biggest movements toward a greener economy. - Detroit Taxpayers have overpaid for trash disposal by an average of about $50 million per year over the last 20 years. In the fiscal year 2007-2008 Detroit residents are paying over $170/ton for trash disposal - about 5 to 7 times more then the suburbs pay. If the Incinerator continues to be used the disposal costs are estimated to be 2 to 3 times higher then what the suburbs will pay. About half of the trash burned in the Detroit Incinerator is from suburban cities, about 50% of the toxic emissions such as lead, mercury and cancer causing dioxins are from suburban trash. (Message edited by urbanoutdoors on May 27, 2008) | ||
401don Member Username: 401don Post Number: 497 Registered: 11-2007 |
Recycling is great and definitely the way to go but also requires cooperation on the part of citizens and an excellent management program. Just wondering what will happen if trash bags are limited to 1 or 2 and folks decide dumping on empty lots is more convenient. I live in a Toronto suburb. It was decided the city would sort our recyclables for us to increase the total amt being recyled. That simple decision lead to tons of stuff being dumped in the recycle boxes that should not have been. The resulting contamination lead to less overall recyling and more going to landfills (yeah, Michigan landfills). | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 888 Registered: 11-2005 |
401don, It has to happen in steps, with proper education and along with other green programs it can become a magnificent program. It is definitely the transition that needs to be made and the city will be better for it. I hope many of you come out and realize just how important it is to show up and that we have power in numbers! | ||
Sean_of_detroit Member Username: Sean_of_detroit Post Number: 517 Registered: 03-2008 |
Urbanoutdoors, keep it up! I will be sending a letter based on this post (and the research it led to) alone. So that is one. I'd like more links to some of your research if you have them. On a side note, I know some other people who have lived in Livonia post on here. Livonia (I must say) had a GREAT recycling program. Everything seemed like it was recyclable. If if had one of those little numbers on it, it was recyclable. The papers and boxes were also. Anyone know more about their program? | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 889 Registered: 11-2005 |
Barebain, So you know the plan that Joann Watson and city council back the recycling plan. Also a coalition of environmental groups opposing the renewal of the lease on the incinerator (locking us into ten more years of burning), have developed a very viable alternative business plan to handle the city's waste stream, which would include recycling as well as, initially, a minimal percentage of land filling ( which is much less toxic than burning). Some of downtown's energy is supplied by incinerator steam. The plan also includes a plan for phasing this out. | ||
Barebain Member Username: Barebain Post Number: 19 Registered: 02-2006 |
Yes, I know that the Council supports curbside recycling and opposes the incinerator. I also know that every single citizen I have heard discuss the incinerator is in opposition to it. What I do not understand is why the only people I hear supporting the incinerator are people from GDRRA? Listening to Anthony Adams ramble on about the benefits of waste-to-energy and the alarmist viewpoints of people living in the shadow of that Death Star, makes me extremely skeptical. This administration is on thin ice as far as credibility is concerned, and my gut tells me that Adams is not telling us the entire story. What is that story? I realize that a good portion of the downtown is running off of steam power, but all of the new buildings I work on as an architect do not choose to contract with Detroit Thermal. I have seen the basements of these places, and the miles of piping and dozens of broken down steam valves and pressure gauges are clearly archaic. If the city really wants to commit themselves to centralized steam power, I feel it could be done, and the potential for incorporating geothermal technology is enticing. And yes, a large number of buildings would require significant upgrades, but there is potential there. However, if the city chooses to phase out steam, it could also be done with some cost to buildings currently on the system to switch over their existing utilities. Again, a viable alternative. Both scenarios present hurdles. But both scenarios are also better than the current mess we are in. (an aging steam infrastructure, powered by an incinerator that nobody wants except a few city administrators and, I presume, utility workers.) But, I see no attempt by GDDRA to discuss either of these options. It is only 'we can both incinerate and recycle, how wonderful!' Again, I want to know why the vested interest on the city's part to maintain this facility? I fear that no amount of picketing is going to change GDRRA's mind, unless we can know the real root of the problem. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 890 Registered: 11-2005 |
Here you go Sean http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20080525/NEW S01/805250582/1009/NEWS07 http://metrotimes.com/editoria l/story.asp?id=12836 http://metrotimes.com/editoria l/story.asp?id=12748 | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 891 Registered: 11-2005 |
http://metrotimes.com/editoria l/story.asp?id=12915 | ||
Dan Member Username: Dan Post Number: 1546 Registered: 10-2003 |
Bump! I hope lots of folks can make it tomorrow at 4pm. This is an important issue for all of Metro Detroit, so suburbanites and Detroiters alike should attend. There will be signs provided. | ||
Lukabottle Member Username: Lukabottle Post Number: 161 Registered: 12-2004 |
I was under the impression that only one of the contracts expires. There is also a contract that doesn't end until until 2024. One contract was regarding steam and another involves electricity. Does anyone have more information on this? I have since relocated to Oakland, CA and have been out of the loop.Was the other contract somehow canceled? If not, the incinerator is not going anywhere. I wish you all luck. My asthma has improved dramatically since relocating. GDRAA wants to support it because they are getting money from it. Of course they will not oppose it. It seems as if the media is failing us again and only providing parts of the facts or I may have been misinformed. Anyone from Recyclean or Rosedales that can clarify this for me. | ||
Kevgoblu Member Username: Kevgoblu Post Number: 114 Registered: 02-2007 |
I'm not very well informed about this issue, but I do have a few questions. What will the cost be to utilize a landfill instead of the incinerator? One time shutdown costs, in addition to standard $$ per ton costs. If recycling creates 10x more jobs than incineration, doesn't that dramatically increase the costs? How do Detroiters pay 5-7x what the suburbs do, yet the suburbs supply 50% of the trash that is burned? How many companies can be expected to sue the city for the costs to upgrade their heating / cooling systems? | ||
The_recycling_people Member Username: The_recycling_people Post Number: 82 Registered: 11-2006 |
As a general rule, I stay out of this issue. Regardless of what disposal method is utilized by the City of Detroit, The recycling rate must increase. The Recycle Here program was created to give citizens the option to recycle, while educating citizens and DPS students on the benefits of recycling. A few factors that aren't ever discussed by the landfill/ recycling proponents: 1) using the suburban costs as a model to project the Cities program is not correct. The suburbs have privatized recycling programs. The city will use DPW to pick up recyclables. The suburbs, with their private haulers, have yearly line item costs. The City will have higher labor costs and the associated legacy costs due to their union agreements. The private haulers also can lock in a waste disposal rate ( Say 20.00 per ton) and then take it to the incinerator for 13 / 15 per ton. This does happen. 2) This is a regional facility, used by the surrounding communities. Once removed from the equation, this will raise the distance that some haulers will have to travel to dispose of waste, causing their associated costs to rise. 3)The recycling rate in Detroit is really low. There will be a rise when curbside is implemented, but how high will it go? A massive education program must accompany any curbside launch. Also, we must decide on whether we will take the carrot or the stick approach to enforcing/ encouraging participation. Trash police or coupons? Without the debt, I am interested in just how cheaply this facility can operate. Can it compete with landfill disposal pricing and support a ramped up curbside/ drop off recycling program? If so, the City of Detroit will still control it's own waste disposal future, produce steam and electricity, and recycle. This scenario would justify it's existence. But we don't know the numbers. Until we do, please continue to support our recycling program. We will be open this Saturday at the Holden Ave. Recy-clean Center from 9am 'til 3pm. See you on saturday. The Recycling People | ||
Sean_of_detroit Member Username: Sean_of_detroit Post Number: 556 Registered: 03-2008 |
The_Recycling_People, You underestimate the people around here. Many are actually saving up their recyclables and handing them over to their family or friends in the suburbs. I've also seen many people in the exurbs and satellite cities do this. Maybe I just happen to come across a lot of people who do this. Maybe they are the minority. I really don't know. I've seen a lot of people do this though. | ||
The_recycling_people Member Username: The_recycling_people Post Number: 83 Registered: 11-2006 |
s of d - I hope I am underestimating the number of people that are doing what you have stated. Regardless of the disposal method, our recycling rate must increase. We must educate on not just recycling, but waste reduction as well. trp | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 893 Registered: 11-2005 |
TAKE ACTION: • Click the following link to send an email to the Detroit Mayor (and City Council Members) demanding that he not renew the lease for the incinerator, and that he support the proposed recycling plan: http://salsa.democracyinaction .org/o/1843/t/4860/campaign.js p?campaign_KEY=24565 • Send a fax to Deputy Mayor Anthony Adams at +1 313 224 4128 with the following demands: 1) Instruct Covanta Energy before June 1, 2008 to NOT renew the lease with the private owners. 2) Embrace, adopt and implement the full plan of the New Business Model for Solid Waste Management. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 894 Registered: 11-2005 |
bump... Anyone goin? | ||
Sg_creative Member Username: Sg_creative Post Number: 52 Registered: 01-2007 |
I was there. Pretty good turnout... no incidents that I was aware of. http://www.detroitstockphotos. com/Production/PhotoGroupView. aspx?pbid=4&msa=1&pgid=1625169 4 | ||
Terryh Member Username: Terryh Post Number: 773 Registered: 11-2006 |
The protest will bring about awareness of pollution and how it effects the community. | ||
Sg_creative Member Username: Sg_creative Post Number: 53 Registered: 01-2007 |
For sure it will. I was glad to see Channel 4 & 2 there. Hard to beat TV Coverage! | ||
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936 Post Number: 3196 Registered: 01-2005 |
Sounds like a NIMBY to me. | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 2410 Registered: 09-2006 |
So lets say they shut it down then what? You have an abandoned incinerator sitting there. Is that really a victory? An incinerator sucks yeah but at least it is functioning. I really don't want to see yet another hulk of an abandoned building sitting there for 20 years if that is what is to happen. Educate me because I really don't know. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 895 Registered: 11-2005 |
Mayor Sekou are you really trying to make the argument that one more abandoned building is worse than having "-The Detroit incinerator is contributing to the rising dioxin levels, cancer, asthma, and low birth weights in our neighborhoods. The asthma rates for the 9 zip codes around the Incinerator are 4 times higher then the Michigan average. Detroit was just designated the ninth most air polluted city in the country. The Detroit Incinerator is the 6th largest pollution source of over 180 facilities in Wayne County monitored by the state. Wayne County is currently in violation of EPA air quality health standards. The Detroit Incinerator annually emits an estimated 600,000 tons of global warming carbon dioxide. The Detroit Incinerator only burns about 70% of the trash put into it and the resulting highly toxic ash (about 30%) goes to a landfill. " I would say the positives out way the negatives ten fold! Not to mention many say they would buy in that area and try to fix up a house but won't because its there. I personally think just let it rot because no good can come of that monstrosity. On the other hand this could be used as a filtering facility for recycling creating countless more jobs and promote a better future for Detroit. | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 2412 Registered: 09-2006 |
Well if the site is brought up to EPA and other environmental agencies standards which would cut down on the illnesses and pollution associated with the site, would it be better? I don't see it being converted to a recycling processing center because there is no money backing such a project that I know of. And if it shuts down I seriously doubt there will be all of a sudden a rush to move into the area. I mean there will still be an abandoned incinerator in the neighborhood. Yeah it running and being here in the first place sucks but there has to be a better compromise that the thing becoming the next MCD or Tigers Stadium. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 896 Registered: 11-2005 |
It has no place in Detroit and definitely does not compare in anyway to MCS or Tiger Stadium. I know that people won't flock to the city regardless but having it here does not help one bit. Even if abandoned or sold for scrap to help pay for demolition the city will be better off. As it stands right now we are paying way to much for Kwame's buddies to sit on GDRRA's Board Collecting our tax dollars and never meeting their quotas for not collecting enough Trash. It needs to go no if, and, or buts about it, if that means it has to be abandoned so be it. I am sure who ever would take over the site could get some major Brownsfield Tax Credits. | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 2419 Registered: 09-2006 |
But is that position really responsible? Leave it at all costs? It will become yet another very visible eyesore if abandoned, the consequences of that are not yet known, whereas we know what will happen should the incinerator stay open. If it becomes more friendly pollution wise enough that is causes no real illness amongst the citizens, why should it close? Especially since the alternative is just to let the site rot empty for some decades. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 897 Registered: 11-2005 |
The fact of the matter is, that staying open is the least responsible of the two scenarios. Due to the fact that they have only once I believe met their quota for amount of trash collected and have to pay huge penalties when it is not met importing trash in from timbuktu and causing even more harm to the air quality in Detroit. Even with the EPA being stringent it would not be enough because it would never eliminate harmful chemicals and therefore would always cause adverse health effects to the future generations of our city. If the city could do it it would make much more sense to demolish and build a recycling facility on the site and until then contract out through the recycling people until they could implement a city wide plan that would be housed on the site. But none the less the city is better off and the environment is much better off without the nations largest trash incinerator functioning. (Message edited by urbanoutdoors on May 30, 2008) | ||
Mayor_sekou Member Username: Mayor_sekou Post Number: 2424 Registered: 09-2006 |
If you say so okay. Good luck. Though I still think the most responsible and likely solution is it still running in a diminished state just cleaner and more efficiently. | ||
Urbanoutdoors Member Username: Urbanoutdoors Post Number: 898 Registered: 11-2005 |
I dunno am I Wrong in my logic? What do other forum members think? | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 2527 Registered: 10-2006 |
It's just that, sure the incinerator is not the best thing to have around, but it is far down the list of evils in Detroit, is it not? Aren't schools, police, etc. more important issues? Why don't those sort of things require staging protests? Is it to late, or are they too large of issues to tackle? Believe it or not, I am not playing Devil's advocate on the incinerator, but it just catches me off guard when so much passion is behind such a relatively minute issue/problem in the whole scheme of the city. | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 4732 Registered: 02-2004 |
No, it should be in the forefront. How many businesses will locate here knowing their employees children have a better than even chance of suffering respiratory illness after they live here? What will that do to their precious bottom line, with so much of the health care dollar going to asthma medication. I have asthma, the drug I take every single morning to breath costs $170 for 40 inhalations. Not only that, but it's putting a 13th century solution to a 21st century problem. | ||
Russix Member Username: Russix Post Number: 81 Registered: 11-2006 |
http://www.wxyz.com/news/local /story.aspx?content_id=90d17fc 3-9747-4e6f-b717-85d36f0766e9 Detroit Won't Renew Incinerator Lease | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 681 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote:I think your logic is fine. That thing needs to go yesterday. | ||
Southen Member Username: Southen Post Number: 403 Registered: 08-2006 |
Here are some shots I took of the rally downtown for those interested.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/s outhen/2535885237/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/s outhen/2539616602/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/s outhen/2541670612/ | ||
Dan_the_man Member Username: Dan_the_man Post Number: 52 Registered: 07-2006 |
There is no way that the incinerator can run and at the same time not pollute the area. Even right now as it runs, it follows all of the EPA standards, but many would argue that they are quite relaxed, and they definitely don't make it illegal for pollutants to enter the air, they just try to limit how much of certain pollutants enter the air. In my opinion one more abandoned building would make very little difference, whereas eliminating this huge source of pollution from the city has the potential to greatly improve the health of the immediately surrounding areas. | ||
Mdoyle Member Username: Mdoyle Post Number: 424 Registered: 10-2006 |
I've only just skimmed this thread and aside from the pollution from the incinerator perhaps someone could fill Mayor_sekou in on the financial situation. I've read that it actually costs more to run the incinerator and the city makes very little of the money back by selling the power off to GE, so that it actually more expensive than traditional landfill and also due to the need to fill a quota of energy is prohibitive to recycling programs. This is just roughly what I recall. Can some one with more knowledge fill me in further. | ||
Dan_the_man Member Username: Dan_the_man Post Number: 54 Registered: 07-2006 |
I don't have the exact numbers, but I believe the city pays 4 or 5 times as much per ton to send it to the incinerator compared to what it would cost to send it to a landfill. It also doesn't help that they give suburbs cheap rates so they can try and keep the thing running near capacity. Also, the city has laws against city wide recycling programs because many of the things easiest to recycle, plastic and paper, are also the things that burn the hottest and keep the incinerator going. | ||
Jb3 Member Username: Jb3 Post Number: 344 Registered: 06-2007 |
quote: 'An incinerator sucks yeah but at least it is functioning. I really don't want to see yet another hulk of an abandoned building sitting there for 20 years if that is what is to happen.' No way, there is too much momentum building in the city for it too sit there for twenty years. The next big step for our city is too institute a statute of limitations on property owners that limits the amount of time that it sits vacant or goes without any capital investment before it gets put onto the auction block. quote: 'If it becomes more friendly pollution wise enough that is causes no real illness amongst the citizens, why should it close?' Hahahahaha. More friendly pollution. ROFLMAO! quote: 'If the city could do it it would make much more sense to demolish and build a recycling facility on the site and until then contract out through the recycling people until they could implement a city wide plan that would be housed on the site. But none the less the city is better off and the environment is much better off without the nations largest trash incinerator functioning. ' Screw that! Detroit is an untapped market for raw materials that recyclers are looking for. Let THEM pay us to demolish it and set up a recycling center. Even if that site isn't worth the investment, the City should be sending out invitations to bid on handling all of Detroits recycling. Yes they have to deal with the organized labor force, but so what..local jobs, who cares who the employer is as long as they are working. quote: 'It's just that, sure the incinerator is not the best thing to have around, but it is far down the list of evils in Detroit, is it not? Aren't schools, police, etc. more important issues? Why don't those sort of things require staging protests? Is it to late, or are they too large of issues to tackle? Believe it or not, I am not playing Devil's advocate on the incinerator, but it just catches me off guard when so much passion is behind such a relatively minute issue/problem in the whole scheme of the city.' I disagree, these issues are the #1 evil. Schools, police and other civic services perform better when there is a higher tax base to tap into. Here in the 21st century, companies are not looking to invest in places that are dirty and counter productive. That means we are losing jobs and residents by keeping it open. That equals loss of money for civic services like schools and police. So if you want better schools, than you have to buy into the whole 'quality of life' issue. If we have a clean city, we'll have a prosperous city with engaged citizens. Cheers. |
