Letters to the editor July 10 | NevadaAppeal.com

Letters to the editor July 10

Research Recology before signing contract

Before the Carson City Board of Supervisors considers dealing with Recology, they should carefully review Recology’s activities in Humboldt and Lincoln counties. Recology proposes importing by train eight million pounds of non-recyclable garbage a day, five days a week for 95 years, and burying it in a landfill less than 35 feet above the groundwater in an area known for high winds, flooding and poor soils.

Only one permit has been granted – the air quality permit. Recology applied for an extension for their use permit which was ultimately denied by the County Board of Commissioners because of Recology’s own procrastination. Once the citizenry woke up to what was proposed, an initiative petition was organized and signed by the county voters and, if unchallenged by Recology lawyers, will go before the voters in November.

I urge Carson City officials to determine if they are really going to get what they expect from a relationship with Recology. Ensure an environmental impact study is performed prior to any agreement for a landfill expansion.

Even though Nevada air quality regulations are inept, when it comes to landfills, make sure you get more than just a promise from management that no dust will leave the site. Consider Recology’s tactics in Humboldt County.

And remember, they are suing the county as well as the individual commissioners, and refer to locals as angry citizens because the citizens are engaged in their own local government and the fiscal as well as ecological realities of the county.

Fred Baryol


Radicals help keep Congress in balance

I’ve listened to and been bothered by those who say Reid has their vote because Angle is more radical. Granted, level-headed leaders are best, but we have radicals. The problem comes when we fail to look at what the radicals believe. How will their views on the issues affect us? Will their actions erode or increase our constitutional freedoms? Having radicals on both sides helps achieve a better balance, a fulcrum point. When one side has an excess number of radicals, there can be no balance, only a heavy weight and kicking at the air.

There was once an extreme radical. He went against the numerous and burdensome laws that the leadership had laid on the people. He taught the simplicity of the original law and those who listened enjoyed their originally intended freedoms. The powerful lawyers who enjoyed the notoriety of their positions became exceedingly angry and looked through their many laws to find a way to destroy him. They were unsuccessful and eventually got him on trumped-up charges at a sham trial where they condemned him to death. His name was Jesus of Nazareth.

No one could ever come close to his example, but the point is, we do need some radicals. But we need to be sure our votes keep a fulcrum in Congress so no one side can distort our America and fundamentally transform it into something it was not intended to be.

JoyceGale Ramos

Carson City