Dear Editor: I was taught to believe that whatever is in writing is the truth and that the information has been verified as the truth. A writer can selectively choose what information to include in a story, hoping to gain a selective audience. In my opinion, a writer should include all the information, so that readers may form a non-biased conclusion.

I would like to clarify some information in the April 14 article in another paper covering the meeting of the Newton County Board of Commissioners. Its purpose was to clear up the misinformation communicated on the expansion and methane gas issues at the Newton County Landfill.

Residents expected to be able to ask questions and receive answers on the issues that affect their health and community. The residents in the affected area were prepared with information, and a report stating that the landfill operations were being neglected. The report stated methane gas levels were found to be over the state's lower level explosive limits. It also stated there are crushed veins, broken gages at well sites, no records on two of the well-monitoring systems and, most importantly, no one knows how long the main release flare value has been out of operation. That valve burns off confined gas that can acculturate or penetrate the ground. These are the issues that the residents thought the meeting would address.

Instead, residents were given very detailed information on the credentials and experience of the county scientist, engineer and their friends (colleges attended, previous employment and specialized training in the area of waste management). The presentation gave the distinct impression that these individuals were employed for the production of energy from methane gas for the county. The county offered technical graphs and charts to show how the landfill operates presently with some of the corrective action plans that are needed for the county's future plan for this particular site.

In past years, the county and the residents of the affected area worked together on issues dealing with the landfill. Residents were given the counties word "verbally," and they trusted that the county would stand behind its word. The county told residents of the area notification would be given of any activity concerning the landfill. Residents received word that the county was planning expansion of the Lower River Road Landfill in early 2007 and again later in 2007.

A group of the residents inquired several times about reports of the expansion. They contacted the proper persons with the county and were told each time that there were no present or future plans for this site. In the month of February 2008, a public notification ad was placed in the newspaper informing the public of a meeting concerning the expansion of the county landfill. A group of residents attended this meeting and were acknowledged in an arrogant manner. At this point the residents began to question and distrust county officials.

After further investigation, the residents discovered three major problems at the facility. First, the landfill operations were being neglected and the period of time for this neglect was unknown. Secondly, the planning for the major expansion modifications application was filed with the EPD in the latter part of 2007 and no notification of future plans were given to the residents. Thirdly, no safety precautions were given to the residents after the county was made aware of the high levels of methane gas and neglect to the maintenance at this site.

The residents of the affected area were portrayed as radical and disrespectful individuals. As a resident of this area, I feel our search for answers to questions on the floor were deliberately avoided. The questions asked about the maintenance neglect, methane gas levels and missing monitoring reports were not answered. Deliberately avoided questions led to a communication breakdown between the parties. The concern for the health, the community heritage and patriotism of the residents was not one of the county priorities.

If the people of this area do not voice their concerns, who will? Who is to blame for this dilemma? It is apparent that this community is being environmentally discriminated against.

Charles Wayne Johnson

Covington