No protection from corporate giant
Dear Editor:
Today Chaffee County Commissioners may make their final decision regarding Nestlé Waters.
At the last commissioners' meeting to deliberate the Nestlé 1041 application, county 1041 attorney Barbara Green made an important clarification. Commissioners cannot approve the application unless it satisfies all criteria.
If the permit does not meet all the criteria, then it shall be denied unless conditions enable compliance. She stressed it was at the discretion of the board if members want to "deny" or "approve with conditions."
Among conditions being considered is a mitigation fund to cover potential legal costs. The original suggestion from county personnel was $50,000 be kept in a fund and replenished in a timely manner as needed.
Commissioner Giese asked that it be $200,000. Why not make it $2 million just to be sure?
Furthermore, if we already anticipate a litigious relationship with Nestlé, why not flat out deny it because they obviously haven't met all the standards?
A separate fund was considered to cover the ongoing costs to the county of monitoring the project. Commissioner Holman suggested a fund would not be necessary.
The county could pay up front and then be reimbursed by Nestlé. We already experienced that Nestlé was slow to pay the $122,000 owed to the county in consultant fees.
In this case, the commissioners refused to move forward in the deliberation process until Nestlé paid its bill - a highly motivating situation.
How motivated is Nestlé going to be after the permit has been issued?
These are just two of the conditions that really concerned me. There are more than 40 altogether.
Attorney Jim Olsen, who just won an eight-year court battle against Nestlé Waters in Michigan, advises to deny the permit now and save ourselves the headache later.
Flagstaff, Ariz., didn't let the process get this far. It simply told Nestlé it wasn't a good fit.
Finally, I found it disturbing that Nestlé project manager Bruce Lauermann suggested rather than have the commissioners deliberate about the newly crafted conditions, the county staff and the Nestlé team could all sit down together and hash out the conditions instead.
Did he forget the hearing was closed to public comment - including Nestlé comments - weeks ago?
Listening to all the conditions created to ensure that Nestlé doesn't harm the environment and/or bankrupt the county, it reinforced in me the belief that with this corporate giant, no amount of conditions could adequately protect us.
It is now up to the commissioners to make the right decision.
Michele Riggio,
Salida
|
