Online Petition Fights Sunrise Dump
BY BUDDY NEVINS
Opponents of a garbage transfer station in Sunrise have an online petition against the project.
The link is below.
The reasons for the petition are stated online.
“A few reasons this City of Sunrise should not allow this to happen:
1) The type of use proposed is not in conformance with current zoning in that it simply is not a recycling center, but proposed as a recipient of many types of waste.
2) The site is adjacent to a school and religious facilities. The use proposed would create a nuisance for noise, vibration, visual impacts, traffic, and odor.
3) Generation of Garbage Dump trucks at the rate proposed 100 a day or more poses a serious safety issue for children attending school and other community facilities in the area.
4) Businesses in the area may incur reduced revenues due to the proximity of the proposed facility
5) The site is in a prime location with high visibility along major thoroughfares. We hope that the City of Sunrise can establish an approach which enhances the surroundings, is an appropriate gateway to the City, and is compatible with adjacent uses; the proposed use does not achieve any.”
Once again I ask the question: How do Sunrise taxpayers benefit from allowing a garbage transfer station — a dump — in their city?
February 6th, 2010 at 12:18 pm
Some of those people on that petition are already squawking about suing the City. The majority of commissioners who vote for this silliness or let this keep going better be ready to justify why they thought this was a good idea to approve it when all them lawyer bills start rolling in. Friends are friends, but unbudgeted legal costs associated with a friend’s project?
February 6th, 2010 at 12:44 pm
Interesting use of technology to organize. Dont forget to email the Commissioners who voted to put this on the Agenda because I know they will be interested in hearing from anyone with an opinion:
rwishner@cityofsunrise.org;
drosen@cityofsunrise.org; lsofield@cityofsunrise.org;
FROM BUDDY:
Thanks for these links.
“Interested.” You give them more credit than I would.
I would term it “political self-interest”, because if enough people sign the petition they will be worried about their political careers.
February 6th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
Oh Sunrise, oh Sunrise
You are scorching now like a supernova
As so many gathering and watching eyes
Ask which of you met at Bova?
To the victors came the spoiled
They fell into the grips so steeley
What was fried, dripped in butter and boiled
At that dinner table with Feeley?
Now they scavange for valued land
with their friends so dear of Sunrise
they seek to be ever more grand
and to change our family name to Scumrise
The legacy of so many at stake
Our voices over time will not mellow,
as the pinstripped lawyers beg from friends a break
we will not let the legacy yet again be a Lomello.
See you on the 23rd!
February 6th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Let me say, if this latest controversy does not inspire somebody with credibility to run against those who are giving this issue even the chance to be heard, then we all deserve what we get.
That should be the next petition. A grassroots candidate who doesnt take money from every garbage and health insurance and monied interest in the city.
Take back our City!
February 6th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
If there was not a blatant Sunshine Law violation committed by the three commission amigos pushing this deal (and the city attorney), then there was certainly a pattern of conduct clearly designed to get them on board outside of the public’s view.
I’m sure someone with legal training who is opposed to it can muster up a decent case to file and then elicit in depositions and testimony exactly how it got this far and who did what along the way.
February 6th, 2010 at 6:10 pm
If there was a sunshine law violation, someone needs to come forward. Can suspect it. Can think it. But, how do you prove that one or more of them were present together and with Feeley or anyone else for that matter when the property was discussed? Any lawyers out there to help?
February 7th, 2010 at 8:01 am
Reading the comments to the petition, the real issues become clearer.
The 3 Commmissioners (Rosen, Wishner and Sofield) who supported giving this solid waste dumping station any discussion time and who refused to take the learned advice of the staff, have demonstrated an astonishingly and remarkable lack of sensitivity to the school next door, the places of worship in the area, and the businesses right along the property line.
To this point the controversy has been somewhat framed about garbage dumping and merits of that use. But, when you see what we are really talking about — placing a solid waste dumping station right next to a school, within wind distance of multiple places of worship, and right next to office warehouse space for many smalle businesses, the fact that Rosen, Wishner and Sofield refused to listen to staff is arguably evidence of larger betrayal to the solemn commitment they took when they embraced the oath of office. No longer can the commissioners hide behind a philosophical argument that everyone deserves to be heard at the podium. Staff said otherwise and commissioners had a choice — schools, places of worship, existing small business versus a friend trying to make some money off a piece of property.
Buddy has been asking how is this good for Sunrise? Maybe a more precise question would be, how is this good for the children and places of worship and small businesses in the area?
Look around the county. If there is a need for a transfer station, why in Sunrise? Why is this the last piece of property in the entire county that is best suited for it — right next to a school and places of worship and businesses? Or is this the only piece that Feeley found, and after substantial support to and frienships with the Commissioners, he is pressing every advantage possible.
The 23rd will define the political futures of Rosen Wishner and Sofield — not because of the specific piece of property, but because it will give us all an insight into their philosophy of governance in our town.
February 7th, 2010 at 8:25 am
When are the elections for Rosen, Wishner and Sofield?
FROM BUDDY: Wishner and Sofield are running this year.
February 9th, 2010 at 8:35 am
No no no! Sunrise is a rural area where families, live work and play,…this is no place for a dump!
February 17th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
Send e-mail messages to every resident you know! Then pass it on! Lets fill that council room with angry residents who will not forget this betrayal at election time. I think they need to feel the weight of their constituency!