[Sign Up Now] to Receive Our FREE Daily SCVTV-SCVNews Digest by E-Mail |
|
Inside Weather
Calendar Today in S.C.V. History January 8
1869 - Sanford Lyon, Henry Wiley and William Jenkins begin drilling the first oil well in Pico Canyon [story]
|
Comment On This Story |
Opinion Section Policy
Read More From... RECENT COMMENTARY
Monday, Jan 6, 2025
Thursday, Jan 2, 2025
Wednesday, Jan 1, 2025
Wednesday, Jan 1, 2025
Tuesday, Dec 31, 2024
Tuesday, Dec 31, 2024
|
1869 - Sanford Lyon, Henry Wiley and William Jenkins begin drilling the first oil well in Pico Canyon [story]
|
|||||
The California Department of Motor Vehicles today announced that industry business customers, including registration services and vehicle dealerships, currently “posting fees” (a type of payment-only transaction) at an Industry Business Center (IBC) or other DMV office will instead be required to use the DMV’s Vehicle Industry Services online channel.
|
|||||
Carefully sorting through the detritus — mostly animal bones — of an archaeological excavation that took place in Germany in the 1930s, California State University, Northridge anthropologist Hélène Rougier found inches-long bone fragments that offer a glimpse of what life was like for early modern humans more than 40,000 years ago.
|
With critical fire weather conditions and a major wind event forecasted to affect Southern California from the afternoon on Jan. 7 through Jan. 8, the County of Los Angeles Fire Department has implemented its augmented staffing plan by ordering additional staffing and pre‑deployment of ground and aerial resources throughout Los Angeles County.
|
|
|||
California State Sen. Suzette Martinez Valladares (R-Santa Clarita) announced her eight committee assignments for the 2025-26 legislative session, including being asked to serve as Vice-Chair of the Committee on Governmental Organization, the Health Committee and the Committee on Revenue and Taxation.
|
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
18 Comments
Everyone in this valley should read this. Especially the residents of Val Verde, Hasley Canyon and Castaic.
Everyone in this valley should read this. Especially the residents of Val Verde, Hasley Canyon and Castaic.
Daryl, did you talk to the managers of Travel Village about it? I wonder if the short term travelers there just deal and move on.
Yes! I often drive home to Val Verde at midnight from work, sometimes later, and I am stunned by the smells from the landfill on 126. I keep wondering why the major land investors who are planning to build a huge community where the cows now graze will not worry about the landfill downgrading the value of that property to residents. It really stinks along and across 126. How are they going to sell people there?
This is horrible..we have a huge desert…build it far away from people…not healthy
Thanks for sharing this. Val Verde residents are very aware of this and have stated their very intense desire for the Chiquita Canyon Landfill to close, as it agreed to do, when it hit a certain capacity (which it is close to reaching) or in 2019 (I believe, that’s the year). Yet, the landfill is now seeking to double its capacity and everyone in Val Verde is against the expansion. However, the LA County Supervisors, who will vote on the expansion, do not seem to be interested in our feelings or desires (or these odors) and have given no indication that they will vote against the landfill expansion. We will need lots of press coverage and lots of fellow Santa Clarita Valley residents making their voices heard against the landfill to have a chance at countering this expansion.
For years, the landfill has told the residents of Val Verde that the odors are from dead animals, trash cans, septic tanks, agriculture and even a flower!
Then somehow facts got turned and residents were told that the best way to report odor complaints was to call the landfill first vs calling the AQMD (gov’t agency).
Then the facts got even more twisted and the residents were told that the AQMD wouldn’t come by to check their complaint, unless they received 5 calls in a 30 minute window.
Just this year, the residents have found out that they should call the AQMD first, since it only takes one phone call to the AQMD (during normal business hours) or three calls after hours for them to respond and if they confirm 6 complaints in a one day period, the landfill will receive a Notice of Violation.
So, in the last few months, the AQMD has received a large number of complaints – a large increase from before, when someone was passing out the wrong information. And the landfill has publicly stated that these complaints are fraudulent and are wasting taxpayer money. They even have someone from the West Ranch Town Council making all sorts of false accusations about this, even though we can assume that he hasn’t been to Val Verde to try to confirm the odor complaints. Is this just a return of a favor, or is there money involved? Why risk his reputation by passing propaganda from the landfill?
The landfill also has a contract with Val Verde, which was signed in 1997. In this agreement, it states that the landfill shall close when 23 M tons are reached or Nov 24, 2019, whichever comes first.
Since they are in the process of expanding the landfill, we take it to mean that they will not honor the contract. This shouldn’t surprise us, since we have found out that they breached contract prior to this.
The contract states that they will not accept Sludge, PERIOD! Here are some more facts on this Sludge:
– The landfill bid on numerous contracts to accept Sludge
– The landfill won at least one contract to accept Sludge
– The contract was for 3,600 tons – 7,200,000 pounds of Sludge
– The Sludge came from a water treatment plant, where it was tested and found to have Arsenic
– The community specifically put “No Sludge” in the contract, to prevent things like this from happening
– The landfill tried to change the name of the material on the invoice
– LA County gave the landfill a Notice of Violation for accepting Sludge
– The landfill’s permit also does not allow Sludge
– When confronted by the community, the landfill publicly stated that the material they took in wasn’t Sludge
– The community researched this and found that the EPA and the California Code or Regulation both have the same definition of Sludge
– The community also found out that Waste Connections (the parent company of the landfill) has the same definition on their website
– The landfill finally changed their story and admit to taking in Sludge
– The landfill rep mocked the woman who found the violation, by calling her names
– The landfill has made a public statement that they tested the Sludge and it does not contain Arsenic
– I doubt that they tested the Sludge and have asked for the test results
– The landfill claim that the test results are proprietary information
– The 7.2 Million pounds of Sludge are still buried in the landfill. The residents are worried about the contents of this Sludge and what the health effects are.
– As of this date, the landfill will not remove the Sludge – the community of Val Verde lives with the fear of what this Sludge can do to us.
I live in Castaic it’s not that bad but there are moments when it’s obvious….
Greg… As the landfill rep you continuously reference and deliberately misquote with false attributions, I would like to say the claims you’ve made in your comments above are riddled with misinformation and are misleading at best. We’ve asked you to provide proof of your allegations and you have not… because it does not exist.
Sludge: See Waste Connections Definition at http://www.wasteconnections.com/specialwaste/definitions.aspx
Sludge: See EPA definition (Code of Federal Regulations) http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title40-vol27/xml/CFR-2012-title40-vol27-sec260-10.xml
Here is where Chiquita Canyon Landfill accepted the contract for 3,600 tons of sludge.
http://chiquitalandfill.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/santa-barbara-sludge-approval.pdf
Here is where the contract says they aren’t allowed to accept sludge: http://www.valverdecac.com/pdf/StatementofAgreements.pdf
The permit for Chiquita Canyon Landfill prohibits them from accepting sludge: http://www.valverdecac.com/pdf/MinutesofBOS.pdf
Sludge definition: California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 15, Section 2601 https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I1DF743B0D45B11DEA95CA4428EC25FA0?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)
Arsenic naturally occurs in ground water. RO filters remove it and since they are from the treatment of water, the filters are part of the sludge.
The landfill has claimed to have tested the sludge, but they will not provide the results. This was requested at a CATC public meeting on more than one occasion.
Here is information which states that the ground water does have arsenic. http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wwd/web/Documents/In-situ%20Arsenic%20Removal.pdf
I could post copies of the Notice of Violation here next.
Also, the person who John Musella made fun of could verify what he said.
And there are plenty of witnesses who could verify what was said at these public meetings.
So, based on what I posted tonight, I would say that the general message is that Chiquita Canyon Landfill broke their operating permit by accepting sludge. They breached contract by accepting sludge. This sludge is still at the site of the landfill. It’s obvious why Val Verde doesn’t want this sludge so close to homes. The community does not want it and wants Chiquita Canyon Landfill to do the right thing and remove it from the premises.
It surely doesn’t look good when the Chiquita Canyon Landfill rep keeps trying to confuse the issue by saying the facts are “riddled with misinformation and are misleading at best”. It’s a distant hope that they will be the good neighbors they claim to be, so instead of putting another spin on things or doing a cover up job, it would also be nice if they apologized to the community. And if they keep stating that the facts above are “riddled with misinformation”, how about proving it?
And so we don’t have a disagreement on what riddled means, here’s what the Oxford Dictionary says http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/riddle?q=riddled#riddle__9