Griesheimer Says Aging Dams A Threat To Our Area

June 12, 2011 Randy Phillips 18 comments

As the county commissioners near a decision on whether or not to allow Ameren to build a coal ash landfill in the Labadie Bottoms floodplain, the National Weather Service is forecasting unprecedented water levels along the Missouri River. That could be an awkward decision for the commissioners should there be major flooding in Labadie this summer.

But get this …

Griesheimer said he has heard concerns about some of the dams, which have been in place for more than 60 years, failing.

“If they would, it could be a catastrophic event that would wreak havoc on everything downstream,” he said. “That’s not as wild of a scenario to believe as one might think.”

Now he tells us. The decision to build a landfill of any kind in a floodplain, let alone one that will contain toxic materials, should have been a no-brainer. It’s a stupid idea. But by all indications Griesheimer not only appears to be on the verge of allowing the landfill to go forward, but openly admits to the local paper he understands there is aging infrastructure upstream that could be catastrophic to Labadie Bottoms should it fail. To use his own words, “That’s not as wild of a scenario to believe as one might think.”

But here’s what irks me. Griesheimer’s party wants to cut spending. Part of that spending could be used for things like, oh, I dunno, upgrading aging dams on the Missouri River. At the same time they side with industry at every turn — in this case Ameren — giving them leniency to store toxic material in a floodplain downstream from the very aging infrastructure for which they want to cut spending. Of course, more stimulus money could go toward upgrading said infrastructure, and would have the ancillary effect of creating more jobs, but the geniuses in Griesheimer’s party oppose that too. Brilliant.

FCDBlog County Government, County Issues, John Griesheimer, Labadie Bottoms landfill, Missouri River

Comments

Written by Scott Dieckhaus about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply

Or Dems could have at least tried to spend biggest chunk of stimulus money on projects that were actually worthwhile: http://johnmccain.com/images/uploads/Stimulus_Report.pdf
- Written by Randy Phillips about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  Griesheimer is about to allow Ameren to put a toxic waste dump in a floodplain in YOUR district, knowing full well there is aging infrastructure upstream that could impact YOUR constituents, and this is all you have to say about it? Really Scott?
  
  Never mind this partisan report by McCain and Coburn. When are you going to represent the people in YOUR district, a plurality of which say they don’t want this landfill built, according to YOUR report!?
- Written by Darin Gilley about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  Scott, I am sure you did your best to bring attention to this infrastructure need, right? Or did you just ignore it like you did our resolution asking that the Chrysler plants remain productive as a condition of the bridge loans? Remember your statment “I would rather face a thirty year depression than pass debt on to my kids” There is a debt you are passing on – aging infrastructure, environmental hazards, and fewer jobs.
- Written by clyde about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  From the GOS:
  
  Low tax rates. Profits for so-called “job creators.” Spending cuts. The three things that conservatives say are most necessary for achieving a healthy economy are all occurring at historic levels. If conservatives were right, there could be no way that the economic situation could be this bad on either side of the pond. But it is, and that leads to one inescapable logical conclusion: conservative economic policies are not good for job creation or the overall economy.
  
  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/12/982153/-If-conservatives-were-right
Written by Scott Dieckhaus about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply

I am saying that if John is right about aging dams and levies (and I’m sure he is), I wish that the Dems (who had control of the House, Senate, and White House) would have invested money in infrastructure projects that would have actually provided short-term jobs as opposed to pork-barrel, pet projects.

Contrary to popular belief among many Dems, spending money is not the answer to many of our problems. Rather, managing the money that we do have is. We have seen that the current Dems in DC have no fiscal discipline or sense. I hope that the Republicans can do a better job when they take over in 2013.

As for my constituents, I have continued to have dialogue with them. Their primary concern is the “trucking in” (or trains, etc.) of waste from other sites. I have expressed that opinion a multitude of times to the prior and current commission.
- Written by PS about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  Scott, when LEO has talked with you about this issue… health risks have always taken the priority and property values and negative impacts on economic development in the corridor are secondary to that known risk. I spoke with a young family at the Labadie Picnic last week who said they wanted to buy a home in Labadie but, would not until this issue was resolved…not due to truck traffic but, risk to their young children. They wanted to live in Labadie to take advantage of the great school district…they were moving there for their family. Truck traffic is not the primary concern of most citizens…and certainly not the 2,000 who signed the LEO petition to save the bottoms. The primary concern is the risk of ground water and surface water contamination over time. Unfortunately, you did not attend any of the hearings at which experts on landfills and hydro geology testified. Charles Norris said in his testimony…it is not if, but when this landfill will leach into the environment. In the Labadie Bottoms, the ground water is often at the surface. Any impoundment or landfill would be coming in contact with ground water. The studies that Ameren did for their Site Investigation showed ground water movement across the bottoms, both toward the river and toward the bluffs depending on time of year. To most people, this means there is a risk of damages and harm. Why? Because it has been proven to happen in other communities with CCW landfills and experts on the topic say that it is inevitable with the limited technology that we have to seperate wastes from environment. That is why it is always recommended to landfill in places far from ground water, surface water and in a nonporous substrate. All we are asking is that Ameren manage it’s waste properly and safely given it will be somewhere forever.
- Written by Randy Phillips about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  I find it fascinating that Republicans are suddenly concerned about government spending after the spending spree that occurred during the Bush administration. Not since the Johnson administration had we seen such spending. The big difference is we have nothing to show for it. So for you to now be wringing your hands about “managing the money that we do have” is oh so convenient. After you guys drained the national treasure Democrats are left with little to work with to actually do things like fix aging infrastructure upstream.
  
  But here’s what I really want to know, Scott. Why don’t you stand with as much conviction on the landfill issue in your own district as you do on the GOP’s latest talking point regarding spending? Given the implications of this landfill in your district your response seems uninspired, if not misinformed.
  - Written by clyde about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
    
    Directly to your first point Randy, Washington Monthly presents the following:
    
    It seems hard to believe but, just a decade ago, the deficit didn’t exist and there were surpluses as far as the eye could see. The United States was on track to eliminate the national debt altogether by 2010, making the country debt free for the first time in nearly two centuries.
    
    Then 2001 happened. In fact, a year ago this week, George W. Bush’s tax policy became law, and to honor the occasion, Slate’s Annie Lowrey tried to “find something redeeming” to say about them. Alas, she came up empty, concluding that they’ve “been a failure in every conceivable way.”
    
    Ten years ago this week, the policy’s conservative champions made bold predictions about what the tax cuts would do — massive job growth, vast new wealth, higher incomes, smaller government, and balanced budgets. None of these predictions proved to be even remotely true.
    
    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/failing_to_learn_the_right_les030207.php
    - Written by Randy Phillips about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
      
      Yes, thanks clyde. One has to have one’s head buried pretty deep in the sand to not be able to see what an abject failure GOP economic policy has been.
      - Written by clyde about 1 year ago.
        
        More of the same from the American Prospect:
        
        “I Ruined the Economy and All I Got Were These Lousy Tax Cuts”
        http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=i_ruined_the_economy_and_all_i_got_were_these_lousy_tax_cuts
      - Written by clyde about 1 year ago.
        
        And more…..
        
        According to the very best evidence we have, the Recovery Act prevented the economic downturn from becoming a full-brown depression or something very close to it. And private sector employment has been growing, albeit in fits and starts. The primary reason employment overall isn’t growing faster is that public sector workforces are shrinking, because low tax revenues are forcing local and state governments to balance their budgets with spending cuts.
        
        http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/89866/shelby-obama-stimulus-economic-nonsense
      - Written by clyde about 1 year ago.
        
        Jared Bernstein piles on:
        “No Virginia, There Is No Such Thing As Expansionary Contraction”
        
        …it [the Recovery Act] demonstrably helped, but the unemployment rate still went up and hasn’t come down much. Independent analysts, including the CBO, make the case that the economy would have been worse without the stimulus, but good luck with that one in a climate where people really don’t want to see their much-needed, hard-earned income spent on stuff they’re sure is wasteful.
        
        OK…but how do you get from “stimulus doesn’t work” to a particularly unfortunate strain of the current policy debate: “the best way to stimulate job growth now is to aggressively cut gov’t spending.”
        
        It flies in the face of logic that in an economy like ours that’s operating significantly below capacity—like with 20+ million un- and underemployed—that cutting spending would help.
        
        http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/no-virginia-there-is-no-such-thing-as-expansionary-contraction
      - Written by Randy Phillips about 1 year ago.
        
        But John McCain and Tom Coburn cherry picked some examples of how the stimulus money appears to have been misspent so that proves spending doesn’t work. Better to stick with trickle down economics, cut taxes on the rich, cut medicare for seniors, and deregulate big business. That will create the jobs. Sheesh.
Written by anonymous about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply

I have to say it’s nice to see some comments from Scott about this toxic landfill issue.

Here’s what I find interesting in his response. “Managing the money we do have”. Starve the “beast” and then get along on to cutting spending. Is that a wise management strategy?

Really Scott, how about spending some of that money you all been keepin’ on poor o us. Oh wait, you don’t like being taxed. I feel sorry for the working class souls out there who just keep on voting Repub.
- Written by Randy Phillips about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  I probably disagree with Scott on just about everything but I respect him for stepping into the lion’s den and voicing his opinion publicly. I can’t think of a single local Democratic officeholder or candidate for office who has even bothered to register on this site, let alone articulate an opinion about an issue — and this is friendly terrain. I think that’s bizarre.
Written by Larry Hurlbert about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply

Scott..we do appreciate the fact that you are willing to participate on this site. In regards to the levee situation (assuming John is correct), how much stimulus money did we apply for and why was the request denied. If, in fact, we did apply for funds to repair the levee systems and the request was turned down I think your point is valid. However, if our predominately Republican county and state government bodies didn’t bother to apply for the funds or we were too busy to apply,that’s another matter. If you look at the legislative accomplishments of the State House and Senate over the past few years it wouldn’t seem as if “too busy” is a valid reason.

Thanks to elected officials like the “honorable” Brian Nieves Missouri is becoming the laughing stock of the nation. I don’t know how any request for Federal stimulus money could be taken seriously. The concept of requesting Federal stimulus so that we can build or repair a levee to protect a toxic waste site that will be built on a floodplain is rather ludicrous.
Written by PS about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply

Scott, we need you to stand up for the people of your district. Please talk with the Commission and ask them to stand by the current zoning code and not allow toxic coal ash landfilling in our county. The geology of our region does not support the long term storage of materials that leach readily into water. Then Senator Griesheimer told us that the whole lower 1/3rd of the state is not suitable…but, then went on to say that we needed to landfill it somewhere.

Ask why there are no hazardous waste sites in our region. Then ask why material like coal ash with arsenic, lead, mercury and carcinogenic chromium is not considered “hazardous” by law. Someone has to have the courage to say it how it is. Why can’t the Commission at least wait until EPA rules on coal ash? This stuff is dangerous and should not be landfilled without strict siting and management criteria. You represent the district where Ameren is proposing a site in the floodway of one of the largest rivers in the nation, serving huge populations downsteam. Please help us. Would also like to see you at our July 19th screening and discussion of the film Living Downstream. Details at http://www.leomo.info.
- Written by Randy Phillips about 1 year ago. Log in to Reply
  
  Thank you, PS. Very well put. This issue is exactly the kind of thing a state rep should be working on. Dieckhaus should be lobbying for OUR interests, not the interests of ALEC. People in his district did not elect Dieckhaus to end teacher tenure. That issue wasn’t even a question in his survey. This is something he appears to have been motivated to do by outside forces after he took office, while practically ignoring what his constituents told him they really care about.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Franklin County Democrats

Griesheimer Says Aging Dams A Threat To Our Area

Comments

Leave a Comment

Sign Up!

Events Calendar

Recent Comments

Links

Blogroll

Documents

Tag Cloud

Archives