Posted by: nevadansagainstgarbage | December 22, 2010

VIDEO HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DECEMBER 20, 2010 HUMBOLDT COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING December 22, 2010

The following are some video highlights of the Humboldt County Commission Meeting where the Commissioners declined to accept a proposed settlement agreement with Recology (Jungo Land and Investments). These videos will be posted over the next few days as time allows. Keep checking back for new updates.

Commissioner Fransway sums up the situation and offers his assessment of the proposed agreement

The other Commissioners voice their concerns, criticisms and comments

Commissioner Bell wants a guarantee, discussion of groundwater contamination, a word on the negotiation process, and allowing public comments

Public comments (1)

Public comments (2)

Public comments (3)

Public comments (4)

Additional comments

One last comment and the vote

END OF VIDEO HIGHLIGHTS

Advertisements

Responses

  1. In reviewing the testimony and comments in the video highlights section below, NAG has singled out some important points. All comments were timely and valid, but these three points stand out.

    1. The insurance pool lawyers are conflicted. Insurance companies make money from insurance premiums. When they are required to pay claims, or in this case, represent clients, they are losing money. Therefore, it is in their best interest to recommend accepting the proposed settlement, ending the litigation, and getting back to accepting premiums.

    2. Commissioner Bell along with several other people, commented that Jungo has played by the rules. Have they? The rules clearly stated that the conditions of the CUP be fulfilled within the three year time limit. They were not. Jungo’s answer was to request an extension. When the Commissioners denied this request, Jungo’s answer was to file suit against Humboldt County and the individual commissioners.

    3. It was pointed out that some of the commissioners felt like they were being held hostage by the citizens. Interesting concept since it is the duty of the citizenry to voice their wishes and make sure that their representatives act according to those wishes. But more importantly, it was shown that by Jungo suing the commissioners individually, the commissioners had a pecuniary interest in accepting the proposed settlement and thereby ending both the county suit and their individual lawsuits. Some referred to this tactic as hostage taking, others referenced blackmail, and others used bullying and extortion. It took real courage on the part of four of the commissioners to rule against the proposed settlement in light of these lawsuits.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: