EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- You and Your Family Are Guinea Pigs for the Chemical Corporations
- After Boston, Eyes-Wide Open Hope?
- The Life and Death of Words, People, and Even Nature
Popular content
Today's Top News
Gavin Newsom Hopes to Leave His Sludge in San Francisco
Last month, I wrote Chez Sludge, the first inside report on the sewage sludge scandal unfolding in San Francisco, based on internal documents obtained by the Food Rights Network and now online in the Toxic Sludge wiki on SourceWatch.
San Francisco, under its "green mayor" Gavin Newsom, has since 2007 perpetrated a greenwashing scam upon city gardeners. The city, known for its environmentally sound practices and commitment to a precautionary principle approach to dealing with environmental hazards, has deceptively and fraudulently been giving away free "organic Biosolids compost," that is actually nothing but toxic sewage sludge from San Francisco and eight other counties, "composted" by the giant waste handler Synagro.
This issue hit the news in San Francisco first last September and gained national media attention in December, 2009. On March 4, 2010 a protest in Mayor Newsom's office that also received national attention, led by the Organic Consumers Association, forced the Mayor to put the program on temporary hold, at least during the political season. He is currently the front runner for the office of California Lieutenant Governor and come December Mayor Newsom is likely on his way to Sacramento. And, apparently, he wants to leave his sludge, if not his heart, in San Francisco.
In the face of the controversy, and the dioxins and other dangerous contaminants found in their sludge, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission spent $25,000 to conduct some very limited and inadequate testing of their free "organic Biosolids compost." Like most sludge industry tests, this one examined a minuscule sample of the mountain of sludge, and only searched for a small fraction of the thousands of persistent chemicals and substances, and none of the biological contaminants, in sewage sludge.
It was designed as a PR stunt and worked well in that regard when the results were fed to the San Francisco Examiner and San Francisco Chronicle. Both papers filed stories on July 28th, and both papers reported that the SFPUC staff would be bringing this controversy before the five citizens who make up the SFPUC Board of Commissioners, appointed by the Mayor, and who have never, despite the year-old public controversy, taken a close public examination of the sludge-to-gardens issue in any of their frequent meetings. But with two PUC commissioner meetings scheduled for August -- the 10th and the 24th -- that would soon change, the articles implied.
John Upton wrote in the Examiner:
"Sewage-based compost given out by San Francisco is laced with contaminants such as heavy metals, which exist in comparable levels in commercially available soil amendments, the City found. ... SFPUC staff plan to meet publicly with commissioners to seek guidance on the biosolids compost program, which could be canceled or continued depending on the public mood."
Peter Fimrite of the Chronicle wrote:
"The report is expected to be presented to San Francisco's utility commissioners next month (August). A decision could then be made on whether to continue the compost program."
In fact, both the newspapers were misled by the PUC staff and their PR maven Tyrone Jue. The Mayor and the PUC staff appear desperate to avoid any public showdown on the toxic sludge issue. The August 24th meeting of the SFPUC commissioners has been canceled, and the August 10th meeting of the commissioners will not have the much touted sludge tests on its agenda.
The two San Francisco newspapers fell for a classic government PR ruse: promise transparency and a public investigation, but then sweep the issue under the rug and out of the light of day and hope the press doesn't notice.
Why would the City of San Francisco behave so poorly? Simple. The sludge issue is a huge embarrassment to the Administration of Gavin Newsom. He is the front runner in the California Lieutenant Governor's race, and he has no intention of letting this issue muck that up. The longer his allies can push this issue down the road, the closer he gets to his November election. By the time the sludge hits the fan, he and his closest staff will be in new state offices in Sacramento and the wrongdoings of the SFPUC and his own Office of Mayor of San Francisco will be a headache for the next Mayor, and for the commissioners he appointed.
The internal documents we are investigating show deep and disturbing collusion among the city government officials in Mayor Gavin Newsom's office, the SFPUC staff, and industry promoters of growing food in toxic sludge. To say the least, the city officials have engaged in very bad and deceptive behavior in their handling of this issue. Announcing an August hearing of sludge-gate before the five PUC Commissioners, getting this printed in San Francisco's newspapers as a PR stunt, then making sure that sludge is off the agenda, is just the latest.
It is clear that far from this issue being decided in the interests of San Franciscans, the staff of the PUC are working hand in hand with the powerful national sewage sludge lobby led by the organizations and individuals belonging to the Water Environment Federation. The sludge industry wants to take the San Francisco scam -- "It's not toxic sewage sludge, it's free organic compost, grow your food in it!" -- and spread it nationwide as the latest way to greenwash toxic sludge and help the thousands of towns and cities with sewage plants dispose of their sewage sludge as biosolids fertilizer, out of sight, out of mind, and away from liability.
Stay tuned. Despite the PUC staff's efforts to keep this issue off the agenda of the appointed commissioners, I will be attending the August 10th meeting as a public citizen, and putting it on their agenda. The PUC staff tells me I will have no more than 3 minutes to speak before the Mayor's Board of Commissioners, but luckily for me I talk quickly!- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

12 Comments so far
Show AllIn 1882 Henrik Ibsen wrote a play named "En Folkefiende" (An Enemy of the People). Stauber is Dr Stockmann, the protagonist who found that the towns main industry - a spa - is contaminated. He is the enemy. Newsom is the folk. Ibsen's argument is timeless. God protect us from the people.
This must be a pretty important battle to get the attention of John Stauber, a great advocate against the short sightedeness and ignorance of the "folk".
Timeless also is the Hans Christian Anderson tale, "The Emperor's New Clothes". Could anything better describe the brainlessness of America's current political discourse?
Stauber is right to call attention to the political dimension of the situation in San Francisco.
But just what should we do with our sewage? We create it; if it has toxic heavy metals or pharmaceuticals, we put them there – it wasn’t extraterrestrials, illegal immigrants, or Muslim terrorists.
Anyone downstream of our cities’s sewage will suffer from our filthy habits. Forbidding the recycling of sewage won’t fix the problem, only protect a small number of people from the consequences of wider social, political and economic systems that remain unseen and unregulated.
Excellent point. We need to deeply regulate our entire industrial economy to STOP adding toxins to our food, to our waste, to our bodies, to all the living systems of the Earth.
Well-composted human shit ("biosolids") SHOULD be excellent safe returns to the systems of life on Earth. The fact that they are contaminated is what needs to be addressed, and can only be addressed by going upstream to where the toxins are produced or released into our industrial economy and food supply.
Stauber's work on "toxic sludge" is excellent, but only seeks to call attention to a SYMPTOM, not to the deeper systemic problem.
Gavin Newsom is one of the more scurrilous and smarmy politicians in America.
It is not even ironic that he is here coupled appropriately with 'sewage,' 'sludge,' and eco-waste.
He has successfully co-opted the "Green" label in the same way he he has used "Gay Rights." He has integrated them both as PR 'talking points' into a neo-fascist agenda at the behest of the privileged oligarchy he procures for.
These political 'lollipops,' formerly legitimate issues, are now as vacuous and bereft of substance as Gavin Newsom's vapid constituency– the yuppie bourgeoisie which so readily consumes them as badges of 'cool,' life style products of privileged consumption.
Now, through the efforts of those like the rebarbative Newsom, when one hears the word "Green," or "Gay Rights" one turns up one's nose in contempt and intuitively senses the true fascist politics behind them.
Say Vashkar, I just did some research on my state of North Dakota. Here's something interesting on my state's economy. It has a state owned bank, state owned mills, and growing strong in wind energy even though coal dominates as the main source of electricity. We can still vote for third parties too. Don't they call all this socialism? I've been hating socialism all along. What about California? I thought you guys were more liberal and progressive. Why is my state red while yours is blue? I think I'm getting more confused or something's not right. Maybe you should move to North Dakota and reconsider what you thought about America? Is it possible that red states have more socialism than blue states? I'm starting to feel like a kid again.
That was a decent comment. Who flagged this comment? The usual thought police suspects I guess? Give the young man a chance. I hope the CD moderators read it carefully and remove the flag.
Nice comment.But my answer for not moving to North Dakota is simple: WINTER.Same reason I never consider moving to Chicago, which is a great city, and is much better run the San Francisco. Come to think of it,there are a lot of cities that are better run than San Francisco.The place takes itself way too seriously, and has been punching above its weight for years.
Gavin Newsom ( call him noisome) makes me puke, always has.I dislike everything about him, starting with his hair gel.Rather than bore CDers with a laundry list of all the things that make him suck, allow me to say that I'm voting for Maldonado, so that I can have the opportunity of not voting for Noisome. That will be the second time in my life that I've voted for a Republican. The first time was twenty years ago when I voted for "Dynamite Dick" Burke, who was running for Warden of the Boro of Stonington Ct. He was a demolition expert, and an artist with dynamite, He was also a drunk: my kind of Republican.
As with New York state, San Francisco and California are too crowded and expensive to get anything fixed. If San Francisco is so bad, just move out to the Great Plains and start a new life. We got plenty of room out here and it's clean too. Leave your sludge cities behind and make yourselves at home in the Great Plains ! Fargo's a great place to start.
Again, some thought police poster hating MG must be messing around with the flag button. Do you flaggers have a life? I don't this comment offensive in any way.
I'm with Michael on this one. No amount of regulations will offset the fact that the population is too high in SF to sustain. No mayor could possibly fix the sludge problem no matter how many rules and regulations get put in place and enforced.