THE SAUGUS ADVOCATE – FriDAy, SEpTEmbEr 23, 2022 Page 3 Is this deal worth expanding the ash landfi ll? Four selectmen prepared written speeches to explain their vote on the WiN Waste innovations Host Community Agreement Board of Selectmen Chair Anthony Cogliano eryone a chance, please keep your remarks to three minutes maximum, regardless of how you feel about the issue. We encourage comments, not speeches. If you have questions for Anthony Cogliano Board of Selectmen Chair (Saugus Advocate photos by Mark E. Vogler) Thank you for coming tonight. For those who attended or watched the Committee [Landfill Subcommittee] meetings, I hope you will agree that the work has been very productive. WIN Waste Innovations made a presentation based on what committee members said they wanted to see in a Host Community Agreement. We had the opportunity to ask questions, and so did the public, at our last meeting. The committee then voted to move WIN’s proposal to the Board of Selectmen, which is why we are here tonight. The goal of a Host Community Agreement is for the Town to get the greatest benefi t possible from WIN Waste’s presence here and build a public-private partnership for the long term. WIN Waste has similar agreements in other communities where they have mutually benefi cial relationships. Unfortunately, Saugus doesn’t have one yet. That needs to change. It’s a simple fact that the waste-to-energy facility will continue to operate for many years. Our options are simple. We can continue wasting money on losing lawsuits. Or we can continue the positive dialogue we have started with WIN Waste and make the best deal possible for the town, while ensuring the health and safety of our residents. I will repeat what I said at the last two Committee meetings. I am out in the community every day and the vast majority of people I speak with want us to make the best deal possible for the Town. As elected offi cials, we have the same obligation – to do what’s best for our constituents. There will be an opportunity for the public to speak tonight. Because we want to give evWIN Waste about the proposal, please direct them to the chair and WIN will have the opportunity to answer. I know there has been a lot of discussion about a meeting the DEP is attending in Saugus next week and I’m not sure there will be additional discussion about that meeting. I would like to clear up an item: Rep Wong and I spoke to the [DEP] Commissioner after he issued a letter back in January. I informed him of the work that was being done by the Committee and that we felt it important that we be allowed to complete that work. He assured me that there was no proposal before the DEP at that time and that, if and when they do receive one, they would keep an open mind and judge it based on the merits. Nothing has changed. Board of Selectmen Vice Chair Debra Panetta water run-off . They uncapped a previously capped portion of their landfill, 39 acres, in Valleys 1 and 2. Now we hear that the landfi ll will be at capacity in 2025 (where there are no more slopes to fi ll in). It important to mention that several of us on this Board stated that we wanted the landfi ll closed in 2025. This Board of Selectmen voted on a policy approximately three years ago regarding waste to energy, ash disposal, and solid waste facilities within the Town of Saugus. The policy reads, “We hereDebra Panetta Board of Selectmen Vice Chair As we know, the landfi ll is located in an Area of Critical Concern (ACEC), where the Rumney Marshes ACEC has been characterized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as “one of the most biologically signifi cant estuaries in Massachusetts north of Boston.” The area includes approximately 1000 acres of highly productive saltmarsh, tidal fl ats, and shallow subtidal Channels. The WIN Waste / Wheelabrator / RESCO landfi ll was supposed to be closed in 1996 and topped with a grassy seed. Due to a consent order (that was amended 11 times), WIN Waste found ways to continue operations past their due date. WIN Waste has been closing in the slopes, which are the fi ngers, which were created for water monitoring and storm by declare that it shall be the policy of the Town of Saugus to encourage and support that which will result in a net decrease in air emissions and ash disposal. We are therefore opposed to any additional forms of combustion of solid waste that will yield additional air and ash emissions.” Saugus Town Meeting also voted on a similar resolution. Tonight’s meeting is about the landfi ll and real issues about how it impacts our community and residents. It’s not about whether WIN Waste gave money to a school or a park. It’s not about trustworthiness, shaping public opinion and building public perception. It’s about the safety and health of our community. It’s about whether this community, our community where we live, will be aff orded the same rights and protections that the people of Millbury, Shrewsbury, Bridgeport, Connecticut, and Putnam, Connecticut. Let’s not forget that the landfill is located in a flood zone. Regarding the proposal: WIN Waste wants 25 more years, so it would close in 2050. When asked how many feet 25 years means, the WIN Waste representatives didn’t know. Since they will need to tier and slope, perhaps it will stand an additional 50 feet or more. Do we want the highest structure in Saugus to be an ash landfi ll, potentially at 100 feet or more? Wouldn’t knowing the height of this proposed landfi ll be an important thing to know prior to us taking a vote? The Town of Saugus got the purple air monitors in January. Have they been installed? Do we have data to review? How do we consider a 25-year extension without proper air quality monitoring? Our focus this evening is on the unlined ash landfi ll, and when I say unlined, I mean that it doesn’t meet today’s standards. Today’s standards would require a double-liner. Remember, this is the oldest incinerator in the nation. However, it’s important to discuss the emissions as well. This is important because the better fi ltration, the more toxins go into the ash. The pollution doesn’t go away. That’s why most communities aren’t burdened with both an incinerator and an ash landfi ll. If you read the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency document, it clearly states that municipal waste combustors emit various pollutants into the air, including metal emissions (e.g., cadmium, lead, mercury), acid gas emissions (sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, and nitrogen oxides), and organic emissions (dioxin/ furan and carbon monoxide). The health impacts from these pollutants cause significant adverse health and environmental eff ects. For example, lead and mercury negatively aff ect the central nervous system, and long-term exposure can impair brain function and development. Dioxin/furans can result in cancer in humans. Acid gasses contribute to the acid rain that damages lakes and harms forSELECTMENS | SEE PAGE 12 “It’s been a rewarding experience to g p Anthony, Caregiver to Son, David 978-281-2612 AdultFosterCareNS.com
4 Publizr Home