Interview with Greenaction Executive Director

<b>SF IMC</b>: What's your perception of how the local mainstream/corporate
media<br>
covered the campaign?<br>
<br>
<b>Bradley Angel</b>: Once the community began mobilizing, we were pleasantly
surprised<br>
to see good press coverage. It was factual and they (usually, but not always)<br>
accurately reported the perspective of the community coalition. Some press,
such<br>
as KTVU, refused to cover the story - except for a mini-story when the victory<br>
finally was won.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: What support or lack thereof did Greenaction and local Fruitvale<br>
residents/activists get from Oakland City Hall? How did the Councilmember De
la<br>
Fuente figure in the struggle?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: City Councilmember Nancy Nadel was very supportive and active early
on in the<br>
fight. She remained supportive but fairly inactive in the latter stages. <br>
Council President Ignacio De La Fuente was a cheerleader for IES, going so far
as<br>
to intentionally misrepresent our views and give out misinformation about our<br>
coalition. Last spring Ignacio's aide assured us that de la Fuente finally<br>
agreed that IES should replace the incinerators with non-incineration<br>
technologies, and that he was willing to work with the coalition and IES to
reach<br>
an agreement on a timetable to end incineration. Once our coalition walked into<br>
the "negotiating" meeting, the door was closed and Ignacio attempted
to twist our<br>
arms into allowing incineration to continue for years, with no end date even<br>
being offered. Our coalition unanimously rejected that position.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: The campaign was one trying to get IES to use clean technology
instead of<br>
that which emitted dioxins and other toxic chemicals. Why would IES refuse to<br>
phase out old technologies and continue operating while keeping the jobs that
are<br>
now possibly lost?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: It became clear that IES could not operate safely or within the law
and<br>
permit requirements. IES also fought to the end to keep incineration at the
High<br>
Street facility, even if at a possibly reduced level. IES underestimated the<br>
power of the community coalition, and our determination to stop the incinerators<br>
no matter what IES or the government did to support the company.<br>
Stericycle apparently was willing to pay enough money to Norcal, IES' parent,<br>
that made it worth while for Norcal to shut down the incinerators and sell the<br>
customer list to Stericycle.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: What will become of the IES incinerator and the land that it's
on?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: We understand that the incinerators will soon be removed from the
site.<br>
IES/Norcal is decontaminating the site, and has already removed all remaining<br>
waste and incinerator ash. It is unknown what will happen at the site.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: One of the criticisms that I heard about the Coalition struggling
to stop<br>
incineration in Fruitvale was that it wasn't as representative of the local<br>
community as it really could or should have been, that it wasn't really a protest<br>
from within, but instead came from organizations and professionals from outside<br>
of Fruitvale. Admittedly, I was unable to help with the campaign in person,
but I<br>
followed the story as best I could. What are your thoughts on this?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: Do they come from people who have no idea about how the campaign
was<br>
organized? I would be curious who said that. I guarantee that whoever said it<br>
never helped mobilize the community on this issue. It is completely false to
say<br>
that the oppostion was not from within the Fruitvale community.<br>
The coalition involved many community members and community based organizations<br>
from both East Oakland and Alameda. Our meetings were hosted by Latina seniors<br>
at the Las Bougainvilleas housing complex in Fruitvale, the National Latina<br>
Health Organization, the Spanish Speaking itizens Foundation, and Asian and<br>
Pacific Islanders for Reproductive Health - all Fruitvale community of color<br>
organizations. Other key neighborhood groups such as the St. Elizabeth's Parish<br>
Justice Peace and Integrity of Creation office and local teachers played a key<br>
role. Also, Greenaction has a large constituency and base in the Oakland and<br>
Alameda neighborhoods near IES.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: How can this "jobs vs. the environment" dichotomy,
that divides so many<br>
people who really have so many interests in common, be overcome? It's not so<br>
easily solved, but what are some good first steps, on the grassroots level and<br>
the legislative level?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: See what we wrote on this topic at the top of our website...in a
nutshell, we<br>
need cooperation and solidarity between the movement against polluters and<br>
unions/workers at the plant. Our coalition was a model of tailoring our campaign<br>
to attempt to protect jobs, and of reaching out to the workers and their union<br>
leaders. Unfortunately, the head of Teamsters Local 853 failed to act to defend<br>
his workers jobs. He never mobilized them when IES tried last year to move their<br>
incineration operation to Stanislaus County - it was Greenaction that alerted
the<br>
union, and it was Greenaction and Latino community groups in Stanislaus County<br>
that united to stop IES's plan - and it was our efforts that at the time<br>
protected the jobs of IES workers...the union leader never lifted a finger.
When<br>
we heard Stericycle was going to buy IES, we notified the union leader and<br>
offered our coalition's energy and solidarity to demand that Stericycle hire
all<br>
IES workers. Our offer was refused. However, our coalition publicly challenged<br>
Stericycle and Norcal to hire laid off workers, and we successfully encouraged<br>
elected officials including County Supervisor Nate Miley, Nancy Nadel and Ignacio<br>
de la Fuente, and even Jerry Brown to join this effort for jobs. Stericycle
and<br>
Norcal have hired some of the IES workers into new jobs, and we are continuing<br>
our efforts.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: What are the next steps for Greenaction?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: Greenaction has been monitoring the closure of the IES incinerators
in<br>
several ways. We are making sure IES is withdrawing their Title V Clean Air
Act<br>
permit application from the Air District; and we have confirmed that they no<br>
longer have an operating permit from the State Department of Health Services.
We<br>
are monitoring the cleanup and decontamination of the site.<br>
We will be meeting with Stericycle (with our coalition allies) to call on<br>
Stericycle to hire any IES workers still in need of a job, to stop incineration<br>
of medical waste in other states, and to continue an important reusable sharps<br>
recycling program that IES had started. We will continue working with hospitals<br>
to educate them to reduce their use of pvc plastics and mercury containing<br>
devices, and to encourage them to use non-incineration treatment for their waste.<br>
We are actively assisting communities where medical waste is still incinerated<br>
to stop this dangerous practice.<br>
<br>
<b>SF IMC</b>: Will you still be involved in Oakland, and Fruitvale in particular?<br>
<br>
<b>BA</b>: YES! At the request of local Fruitvale and Alameda residents we will
soon<br>
begin studying other pollution problems in the area to assess if there are other<br>
issues we need to address. With local residents, we are also beginning a new
campaign against the toxic<br>
pollution from the Red Star Yeast facility in West Oakland. We will be working<br>
with community and youth groups who breathe the foul odors and cancer causing<br>
chemicals emitted from this plant. </p>