Proposition 2 Public Forum Part 1

I was able to attend the Yes on Proposition 2 public meeting at the library. There were a lot of fliers and handouts, a few slide show presentations, and a Q & A panel. For the Q & A portion pieces of paper and pens were distributed to the audience to write their questions. A moderator then read the questions for panel members to answer. While I understand the way the Q & A was handled to be an effort to prevent anticipated outbursts, it also prevented questioners from follow up to clarify understanding of the answers.

The News Miner article can be found here.

According to the article the organizers of the meeting are open to a debate. I think this would be more useful to the public. “Panel organizer Joan Franz said they avoided making the event into a debate because they hoped to educate people about the proposition, but didn’t rule out the possibility of a future debate.“

This is a heated issue as reflected by the comments to the News Miner article. Some comments are as follows:

« Lance_Roberts wrote on Tuesday, Sep 20 at 12:36 AM »
The EPA tested their coal boiler and was blown away with how clean it emitted. They wouldn't give them the paperwork, instead sending it to the Mayor, who is holding the results off until after the election.

Navin wrote on Tuesday, Sep 20 at 07:09 AM »
I, also attended the gathering. Yes, it could have been educational, but the panel didn't seem to know the answers to the screened questions. Oh, there was one, it was a planted question for the Yes vote, "How can I help?". Seemed like a waste of an hour and a half.

It just feels like the Borough Mayor is trying to add another layer of government to the already bloated bureacracy. How much is going to cost us tax payers for the sneaky smoke sniffers? They aren't telling us that are they?

If you have a concern about a blatant violator, call the State DEC. They have the POWER to regulate and control the wood and coal burners in this Valley, let them do their job. The borough has no police powers and they are trying to attain some by passing the Prop 2. I say NO to the Sneaky Smoke Sniffers.

I was very impressed with Ron Muir of North Pole Gravel Products. He brought his flatbed truck loaded with a Titan 2 coal-fired stoker boiler. He said it was producing 40,000 BTU's, enough to heat the Noel Wien library. There was no smoke that I could see coming from the stack.

I guess it all boils down to surviving the winter the warmest and cheapest way we can. The cost of heating fuel determines everything. Flint Hill could lower their prices and save us all, but they won't. Why, it's called GREED. Why, again, it's called GREED. Anchorage fairs better than we do and they get fuel from North Pole as well.

Hey, let's call our representatives and see if they can help us out. Wait, then again, it's election time and they remember they have to have an issue for us to believe in, so we can send them back to Juneau. I don't think they really care that much or they are not that effective down in Juneau. Which is it? Can't help us at home and can't help us in Juneau.

I am voting NO to the Sneaky Smoke Sniffers on Prop 2.

FBX79 wrote on Tuesday, Sep 20 at 07:22 AM »
I too was at this session. I have a different impression than what the commentors below have. The pannel included respected experts in different fields. The information given was excellent. It is clear from each perspective our PM 2.5 pollution is creating a huge problem for our health and the health of our children. And it is clear that it is the wood boilers and coal stoves that are creating most of the problem. Those maps showing the PM2.5 levels show this clearly.

The panel took questions from anyone in the audience. There were clearly questions from both sides of the issue. Here are some of those questions that I heard, along with a summary of the answer that was given:

Q. Aren't most of the PM2.5s sulfate based, from cars, trucks, fuel oil? A. No, the data clearly shows that 60 to 80% is from burning wood.

Q. Why won't EPA give a variance for Fairbanks? A. There are other communities in the lower 48 that have similar geography. EPA didn't give them variances. EPA does give us a variance for summer wildfire smoke, but they won't for winter smoke since it is man caused.

Q. We have not lost one single military unit. Who keeps saying we have? A. We have lost the A10 and the F14 units. Huge cuts to the Department of Defense are coming. The military is responsible for 38% of the employment in our community. Why should we risk losing this component of our economy? And why should we keep hurting our children, our hope for the future?

Q. The North Pole monitor showed violations of EPA standard 11 times in 2009 (6 from wildfires), 8 in 2010, and only 4 this year? How is this getting worse? A. These figures are not correct. The number of exceedances was many times higher than this. (I need to correct the answer FBX79 gave to this question as the individual who answered the question stated that the North Pole filter only takes samples every 3 days so we could actually triple the numbers)

There were more questions from both sides, these are just the few I took notes on.

After the session I went out and looked at the coal stove. They guy was right, it wasn't putting out much smoke at the time. But what about all the coal stoves in our community that do belch smoke? And what about the lead, mercury, and other heavy metals that is found in the Healy coal? Google "USGS Report DDS-77." According to USGS, Healy coal has high concentrations of lead and selenium, and also has mercury and beryllium. The recent coal ash study found mercury levels inthe coal ash 70 times higher than background. We certainly don't want lead and mercury in the are we breathe.

We absolutely need a cleaner, cheaper fuel like natural gas. But we also need healthy air to breathe, and we need it now. Voting yes will get us healthy air.

OneDad wrote on Tuesday, Sep 20 at 07:24 AM »
I also attended.

First off, no questions were screened. They were simply collected in a stack and passed to the moderator and read in order (anyone actually at the meeting could see this, as the comments were visible in the room the entire time). One person with the mic reading questions is much faster, and prevents the yelling and drama that can build with emotional discussions like this one. That they did not eliminate questions is shown by some of the questions that were asked, such as "Unenforceable. How will the borough enforce this ordinance?"

Well, the Borough Mayor, Luke Hopkins happened to be there, and answered "The borough is required to use current staff for enforcement, to have three people do the job, and are required to begin enforcement on all fines at the same time. The Mayor at the time will decide on the scheduled for enforcement."

So, no, the questions were not screened.

and No, the Borough is not "just looking for a way to add another layer of government that the taxpayers will have to pay for. All they want to do is to increase the budget, add more employees, more salary and health insurance, more bloated expenses" They *can't* according to current law.

and anyway, this is a Citizen's Initiative! The Borough had nothing to do with it.

The DEC has been completely ineffective at stopping polluters so far, what makes you think they will suddenly become efficient pollution fighters?

Prop 2 will help our community take care of its own problems. Stand on your own two feet and vote yes on Prop 2.

More from the forum in my next post.