SCHOOL BOARDS WORK FOR THE PROVINCE & ARE (OVERLY) WELL PAID IN ORDER TO ENSURE LOYALTY & OBEDIENCE

 

No rats allowed. No whistleblowers allowed. Preferably not too many folks at the top whose ethics and honesty will impede their ability to always be good yes men and women. This is the corporate model so why would we expect any different ? School Boards report to the Ministry of Education who are only to happy to not rock the boat as much as possible. 

Occasionally just like municipalities, a Board will get a little out of control. They will perhaps criticize underfunding or other provincial mandates and jurisdictions. The Ministry of Education will slap wrists at the Board level or perhaps threaten to send in a superviser to take charge at the Board until they see the light and come around. 

All parties have been enjoying the tax payer funded gravy train for a very long time. Respect, prestige, status, money and power, what's not to like. Well yeah dealing with those damn students and parents can be a pain in the as*.  

 Slush funds for politicians pet projects always require topping up.  Spare billions for some alleged "emergency" hopefully keeps the rats working diligently away. It's also always a bonus when as many of the rats can remain induced to work in less than ideal conditions, non unionized and as low wages as possible.  White collar unions nowadays  need to be provincial and federal workers as much as possible who clearly understand the superiority of working inside the system with greater wages, benefits and pensions. It helps keep them both loyal and quiet.

The Ministry of the Environment is similar to the Ministry of Education albeit with a much tinier budget. Laziness and incompetence can be tolerated whereas any inclination of stubborness or independence is looked upon with disfavour. There isn't nearly enough room at the top so standards must be met. Making deals with business and industry and not with the public is the way to go. Businesses are especially appreciative when the Ministry of Environment agrees that millions of dollars of remediation work can be transferred on to the taxpayers' backs. 

The system is broken but it also takes broken people to run it at all levels. 

WHY WOULD I BELIEVE ANY CRAP ABOUT STOPPING OFF-SITE PUMPING FROM HADLEY?

 

The only credibility she's got is that she hasn't been lying about the former Uniroyal site for as many years/decades as some of her colleagues. I believe the five minute  has lied since she's been attending and speaking (too much) at TRAC meetings although it is possible that some of it at least may be misinformation given to her verbally by her colleagues. 

Now based upon deception, lies and slick psuedo science she and her fellow travellors have sold to naive and or willing intelligent folks on TRAC all kinds of crap regarding "asymptotic" behaviour on graphs, DNAPL nonsense and even flip flops on chlorobenzene being a single source versus multiple sources here in Elmira. 

Hadley now has sold the wonderfully self-serving idea of fully stopping multiple off-site pumping wells. Every day they are stopped Lanxess does not pay hydro to pump the wells or hydro to run their treatment systems or activated carbon, ultraviolet tubes replacement etc. etc. Allegedly according to a lying company with three  predecessors corporations who may or may not have been worse than them, the purpose of this exercise is for Lanxess/GHD to be able to measure contaminant concentrations when the aquifer is at rest. In other words when the concentrations are not being influenced by pumping wells.

Is Hadley's request reasonable? Maybe but precious little to zero documentation, research or technical backup has been given to the public (much less TRAC?) . Based upon the history of the site and the last four owners I wouldn't donate so much as a nickel betting in favour of anything they say.  

Clean House of these parasitic, self-serving swine. Let them feed off some other community for a while 

A STEELWORKS IN CORBY SCOTLAND PLAY THE SAME FILTHY GAME AS UNIROYAL/LANXESS

 

The movie/ Documentary is on Netflix and it's title is "Toxic Town" One of the bottom lines for me was that Scottish working class men and women put our local workforce to shame. The other standout was how barefaced and unashamedly managers and owners of the steel works lied and denied almost everything. Finally yes there were torn loyalties to the company and to some of their own families.

Eveyone agreed that steelmaking is a dirty but necessary business.  After that however the company would not concede even the most obvious facts.  They smugly chose at every opportunity to ignore the mounting health damages and to arrogantly believe that they had the right of life and death over their fellow citizens and employees if that was required to benefit the company. Children were born disabled, deformed and some never made it through infancy.  

Some of the chemicals and heavy metals involved are similar to Uniroyal Chemical such as dioxins and PAHs but there were also cadmium and chromium. The dust was spread all over the town despite senior management knowingly full well how toxic it was. 

This  Lanxess is why you and your filthy ilk can not earn back the trust of knowledgeable citizens around the world.

WILL THE LANXESS FOLK RUN FOR THE HILLS WHEN THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL FACADE COMES TUMBLING DOWN?

 

Fair enough they've got deep pockets and egos so it's unlikely they'll run for their corporate mamas at the first hints of trouble.  However as their foundations begin to quake I wonder how serious their exit strategies are. I'm referring to Hadley and Luis although there are lots of others less directly involved in the environmental scam. Allan Deal isn't there for GHD all the time but his lack of understanding of DNAPLS is actually painful. The GHD folk have come and gone but they are just as slippery as their predecessors. Same with the Ministry of Environment, Conservation & Parks. I still view the MECP as the Ministry of Expanded Corporate Pollution. It is maximum talk and speech per single molecule of  contaminant removed from the natural environment. You know in an honest organization there would be bonus and promotions not for the smoothest, sleaziest talkers but for those who actually stop pollution. Now we've got Lubna Hussain and Jason Rice. Dear God.

I am currently involved in searching for an environmental partner. A partner with motives considerably different than the Lanxess folk, the GHD folk and the MECP folk. One problem of course is total loss of respect and credibility of the MECP. Yes back in 1990 there were howls for a Public Inquiry into the Ontario Ministry of Environment. Under Jim Bradley (Liberal) they were actually laying charges and getting convictions. It needs to happen again.

Science can do a lot if it is properly funded. Laws however are constantly being written with no intent to ever enforce them. This too is why the Justice system has fallen into disrepute. Here in Elmira the polluters produce their own science at will. 

ARE "HOT SPOTS" TRULY HOT SPOTS IN THE CREEK OR ARE THEY SIMPLY VERY ACCESSIBLE LOCATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SAMPLED MORE FREQUENTLY?

 

They are more accessible locations to get into the Creek as roads and bridges cross the Creek at these spots. The roads involved are the New Jerusalem Rd., Northfield Dr. and Jigs Hollow Dr. just outside West Montrose. Clearly the consultants working for Lanxess  require vehicles to transport their sampling equipment and more literally to and into the Creek. Now I have long known that CRA and GHD on behalf of Lanxess have no qualms about leaving their thumbs on the scale when they are allegedly taking professional samples of Floodplain Soils, Creekbank Soils and Sediments in the bottom of the Creek. This is why samples should only be taken by truly independent professionals . The opportunities to fudge samples  are simply to easy to get away with.

Now I think that statistically the more samples one takes the greater the spread of results will be. If you only take three samples then it isn't likely that you will hit a home run with an extremely high result. But if you take 50 to 100 samples all from one area then the odds of getting a higher result are greatly increased. 

Other areas of the Creek where only one or two samples are taken are less likely to have a really high number. For example Sediment samples with a criteria for dioxins of .85 pg/g in some of the busiest sample areas mentioned have had results of 300 and 400 pg/g as well as over 1000 pg/g. Funny that Luis and Hadley don't mention those numbers isn't it?

Other sampling scams include using shovels instead of core samplers to get much lower sediment readings for DDT and dioxins. Also phony and inflated Method Detection Limits are an old trick they have used.If the M.D.L. is higher than the criteria then you will obtain phony Non Detects from samples. I'm sure there are other scams possible as well.

The answer to the question in the headline is probably YES and YES !

FOR THE MECP & LANXESS IT'S ALL ABOUT A SMOOTH TRANSITION COURTESY OF CHERRY PICKING RESULTS

 

They desperately need to convince the skeptical public that their government is in control. What with Global Warming and ever increasing rates of cancer, citizens are losing confidence and faith in their governments. Promised cleanups simply are not happening in any reasonable length of time. Species are disappearing as are arable land and clean drinking water. 

Jason Rice of the MECP wants to incorporate the old Control Order into a new ECA (Environmental Compliance Agreement. Of course as we have all seen both Control Orders and ECAs are paper tigers. They will be written in such a way that even the most pathetic compliance will take decades to sort out. More decades of more excuses and failures which will be blamed on absolutely everything except government and industry corruption.

Bless Hadley for telling the truth on one matter. She admitted that if the new ECA relies on pump & treat technology only that it will take more decades to clean Elmira's groundwater.  You can curse her if you wish for her comments on the downstream Canagagigue Creek. Five minute wonder Hadley is offended by the term "hot spots" She feels that the term unfairly characterizes some higher concentration areas. I do not. It merely points out where more sampling has indicated more exceedances of health criteria. Perhaps Hadley and Lanxess would prefer the term "increased environmental damage due to Uniroyal Chemical contempt for both human beings and the environment".

So at TRAC meetings Hadley, Luis and other crap simply are counting on TRAC members not remembering  all the dioxin results in the Creek SEDIMENTS. Generally they seem to prefer quoting Soil results and especially soil results not much higher than the 7 pg/g which is according to Jason Rice (MECP) is the Background screening result for dioxins. 

Both the 2017 and 2020 Canagagigue Creek sediment results far exceed  the SEDIMENT criteria for dioxins of .85 pg/g. all over the place and often by huge factors for dioxins. Of course the dishonest don't point that out.  

They are counting on the TRAC members not rereading the technical results so that they can cherry pick the ones they like.

DOES TRAC HAVE NO RECOLLECTION OF THEIR PAST POSITIONS & DETERMINATIONS? WHEN IN DOUBT ADJUST THE SCIENCE ACCORDING TO YOUR NEEDS

 

I believe that it was only six months ago or so that Allan Deal (GHD) reversed the position taken by Dr. Neil Thompson of the U. of Waterloo. Dr. Thompson was working on a Conceptual Site Model for the Lanxess property (formerly Uniroyal Chemical) here in Elmira. Dr. Thompson plainly indicated that there was excess chlorobenzene in the Elmira Aquifers relative to the quantities that Uniroyal Chemical had calculated. I believe that there was also a suggestion that some kind of isotope determination was undertaken which suggested that some of the chlorobenzene was not from Uniroyal Chemical. I am not sure of this last point because it was very poorly explained. Later evidence disputed this.

For me this was a major breakthrough as it at least partially explained some discrepancies involving chlorobenzene being discovered one hundred feet below ground surface very close to pumping well W4 near the Water Tower on Howard Ave. This chlorobenzene exhibited many characteristics of DNAPLs  yet Conestoga Rovers and Chemtura dogmatically and pig headedly refused to even consider it.

Later as mentioned Allan Deal and other mouthpieces for GHD/Chemtura bluntly reversed their positions claiming that available isotope analysis did not clarify whether it was chlorobenzene solely from Uniroyal or not.. When asked directly by myself from the gallery Mr. Deal categorically denied that there was more than one source of chlorobenzene in the Elmira Aquifers. Now Lanxess have again reversed themselves!

At the June 19/25 TRAC meeting Jesse Wright of Arcadis (on behalf of Lanxess) both stated and showed a map indicating multiple potential other sources of chlorobenzene just south and a little west of Lanxess. The map is very small but appears to have Varnicolor, Borg, Nutrite and one or two other companies contributing to the chlorobenzene contamination.

Firstly this explains why after 27 years of pump & treat there is still lots of chlorobenzene in our aquifers.  DNAPLS dissolve very slowly and are recalcitrant at best to pump & treat. Secondly I have to ask the following question: 

Today (July 2025) is almost thirty-six years since our water supply was shut down by Uniroyal Chemical and it's allegedly taken that long for our authorities to realize that Uniroyal never was the sole polluter. I don't believe that for a second. Yes they are stupid but more importantly they are dishonest and they participated in a coverup of major facts in order to make the polluter, the Ministry of Environment and themselves all look less stupid, incompetent and self-serving.