Spokane sues Monsanto for PCB contamination

[Heretic]

This is fantastic.

I hope they win and I hope it's just the beginning.

The city of Spokane has filed a lawsuit against the international agrochemical giant Monsanto, alleging that the company sold chemicals for decades that it knew were a danger to human and environmental health.

The lawsuit, which does not specifically state what the city is seeking in monetary damages, also alleges that Monsanto is responsible for the high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, in the Spokane River.

Marlene Feist, the city’s utilities spokeswoman, called the suit “long-term litigation,” and noted that the city will spend $300 million to keep PCBs and other pollutants from entering the river in coming years.

PCBs have entered the river by various means, including through commercial and industrial products such as paint, hydraulic fluids, sealants, inks and others.

Charla Lord, a spokeswoman with Monsanto, said in a statement that the company is “reviewing the lawsuit and its allegations. However, Monsanto is not responsible for the costs alleged in this matter.”

The Spokane River has elevated levels of PCBs, which have been found in its water, sediments, fish and wildlife. The PCBs enter the river, in part, through the city’s water and stormwater discharges. It is currently trying to meet a 2017 federal deadline to stop pollution from entering the river. It has adopted a Integrated Clean Water Plan, and is adding more levels of treatment at its water treatment plant, efforts that convinced the law firms to represent Spokane, Feist said.

Though the city does not state an amount of money its seeking, the suit said it seeks “compensatory damages,” lawyer’s fees, interest and any other relief the court deems appropriate.

The lawsuit names two companies that spun off from the corporation in the 1990s, and joins other municipalities seeking damages from the company, including San Diego, San Jose and Westport, Massachusetts.

The outside law firms representing the city – Baron and Budd, and Gomez Trial Attorneys – have experience with PCB litigation.

Baron and Budd, a national law firm with environmental litigation experience, currently offers free PCB testing to any school built between 1950 and 1980. According to the firm, it specializes in lawsuits designed to help public entities recover the cost of remediation. The company has worked with people affected by asbestos.

Scott Summy, the lead attorney on the Spokane case, has been the force behind much of this litigation, and regularly represents public water providers whose water is contaminated by chemicals. He was also involved in lawsuits arising out of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

Along with Baron and Budd, the Gomez firm is part of San Jose’s case against Monsanto.

Monsanto was the sole producer of PCBs between 1935 and 1979, and the company commonly sold the chemical under the name of Aroclor nationally. According to the suit, the company knew PCBs were toxic while it still produced and marketed the product, but concealed these facts until Congress passed the Toxic Substances Control Act, which banned most PCBS beginning Jan. 1, 1979.

Aroclor was developed by Monsanto as a coolant in electrical transformers and capacitors, but was soon used in a wide variety of household products, from varnishes and lacquers to jewelry and coatings for swimming pools.

Lord, the company’s spokeswoman, noted that the company has produced many products, and has gone through many transformations, over the years.

“Monsanto today, and for the last decade, has been focused solely on agriculture, but we share a name with a company that dates back to 1901,” Lord wrote in a statement. “The former Monsanto was involved in a wide variety of businesses including the manufacture of PCBs. PCBs were industrial chemicals, which were sold to sophisticated companies who incorporated them as safety fluids into electrical equipment, into plastics, and into thousands of useful construction and building material products. PCBs served an important fire protection and safety purpose for the electrical and other industries. The manufacture of PCBs in the United States was banned in 1979, although the former Monsanto voluntarily ceased production and selling before that.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said that PCBs are probable carcinogens, and PCBs are linked to inducing many types of cancers, including breast, liver, gall bladder, melanoma and others. Evidence suggests that PCBs impair the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system and endocrine system.

Spokane will soon be subject to new limits on the amount of pollutants that can be put in the river while still meeting water quality standards.

The traditional Monsanto company – which produced agricultural, chemical and pharmacy products – was spun off in the 1990s into three separate entities: Monsanto, Solutia and Pharmacia. All three companies are named in the lawsuit brought by Spokane.

While Monsanto said it had no responsibility for the cost of the river’s clean up, it suggested other companies may.

“PCBs sold at the time were a lawful and useful product that was then incorporated by third parties into other useful products,” wrote the spokeswoman Lord. “If improper disposal or other improper uses created the necessity for clean-up costs, then these other third parties would bear responsibility for these costs.”

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2015/aug/03/spokane-sues-monsanto-pcb-contamination/

[Warhippy]

I know some really high ranking people in federal politics that will put an end to this....

[Mr. Ambien]

I know some really high ranking people in federal politics that will put an end to this....

[bigbadcanucks]

Monsanto...those dirty buggers. I hope they get their @$$e$ handed to them in the court of law...but that ain't going to happen for the exact reason Warhippy makes.

Monsanto...those dirty buggers who brought you Agent Orange...chemical warfare is fine, as long as it's the Americans doing the spraying.

[Ghostsof1915]

Where do I send my donation to the the city of Spokane?

[Mr. Ambien]

Where do I send my donation to the the city of Spokane?

Just go shopping there, you pay them sales tax and help them out.

Unless you're a resident of Oregon, Montana, Alberta, and some others, then you're not worthy of paying sales tax.

[nucklehead]

Wow a municipal (or any level) gov't with a spine. Quite rare. Here's hoping there will be more to follow.

[Offensive Threat]

Wow a municipal (or any level) gov't with a spine. Quite rare. Here's hoping there will be more to follow.

Less to do with being spineless than clueless. Most other Govs in the same position as Spokane were probably startled to find out this was a viable option and will wait to see the outcome to decide if they can go ahead and do likewise. No 1 rule of suing people is never sue poor people. Check.

But seriously. "We are going to spray chemicals all over the place to kill stuff. Itll only kill the bad stuff, we swear" and then down the road we find out it kills everything. So shocking.

[MikeyBoy44]

Unless you're a resident of Oregon, Montana, Alberta, and some others, then you're not worthy of paying sales tax.

Well damn, I guess this is what it's like when doves cry.

[Warhippy]

oh sorry man

I guess that kind of shady pork barreling is worthy of a childish photo

[Mr. Ambien]

oh sorry man

I guess that kind of shady pork barreling is worthy of a childish photo

lol

So people who work for Monsanto can't work for the government in Warhippy's world.. ok.

Also, in Warhippy's world, one SCOTUS judge overrules the other 8?.. ok.

If Warhippy was in charge he wouldn't be favouring certain people from certain industries.. ok.

Hope that tinfoil hat is tight.

[aGENT]

lol

So people who work for Monsanto can't work for the government in Warhippy's world.. ok.

Also, in Warhippy's world, one SCOTUS judge overrules the other 8?.. ok.

If Warhippy was in charge he wouldn't be favouring certain people from certain industries.. ok.

Hope that tinfoil hat is tight.

It's a blatant and obvious conflict of interest not some 'tinfoil hat' and chuckle-worthy 'theory'.

[Mr. Ambien]

It's a blatant and obvious conflict of interest not some 'tinfoil hat' and chuckle-worthy 'theory'.

People from big companies who specialize in certain backgrounds and go to higher up schools are more likely to be noticed mingling with soon-to-be government officials than someone who posts conspiracy theories on the internet.

Why this automatically means conflict of interest is beyond me. It's just laughable.

[John Tortorella]

People from big companies who specialize in certain backgrounds and go to higher up schools are more likely to be noticed mingling with soon-to-be government officials than someone who posts conspiracy theories on the internet.

Why this automatically means conflict of interest is beyond me. It's just laughable.

Ambien your in the wrong.

Someone working at a chemical company then works for human safety is essentially the definition of conflict of interest. Unsure what part is confusing to you.

[Mr. Ambien]

Ambien your in the wrong.

Someone working at a chemical company then works for human safety is essentially the definition of conflict of interest. Unsure what part is confusing to you.

So people who work for chemical companies cannot work for human safety.. ok.

Where's my tin foil hat, these arguments are so overwhelmingly logical.

[Baer.]

So people who work for chemical companies cannot work for human safety.. ok.

Where's my tin foil hat, these arguments are so overwhelmingly logical.

It wouldn't be as alarming if there weren't so many representing Monsanto. The fact that so many Monsanto alumni are making it into key positions that would potentially directly affect the company is very suspicious.

But if it was say 2 or 3 alumni in the whitehouse, nobody would bat an eye.

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

If they can win and set a precedent maybe we can beat back this corporation of death one step a at time . Anyone supporting Monsanto has no idea of the death an d destruction they have caused, it takes a mere moment to type in Affects of monsanto and you will see mountains of factual evidence from people directly affected by this vile company.

[aGENT]

So people who work for chemical companies cannot work for human safety.. ok.

Where's my tin foil hat, these arguments are so overwhelmingly logical.

Sure and Tyson and Cargill execs should be put in charge of agriculture and animal rights

Even you're not this dense.

[Mr. Ambien]

Sure and Tyson and Cargill execs should be put in charge of agriculture and animal rights

Even you're not this dense.

So you're saying people who should be in charge of government bureaus are people who align with your political views.. ok.

Gets better and better.

It wouldn't be as alarming if there weren't so many representing Monsanto. The fact that so many Monsanto alumni are making it into key positions that would potentially directly affect the company is very suspicious.

But if it was say 2 or 3 alumni in the whitehouse, nobody would bat an eye.

People always post how many in Goldman Sachs take up management and financial positions in government too, including the Fed, but again, companies who people work for are not automatically a conflict of interest.

A conflict of interest is something done by action, not by merely working for a company or going to a certain school. I can't imagine the stupidity of declining someone for a position because of who they worked for in the past. Examples of conflict of interest is when George Bush had the leader of FEMA have absolutely no relevant experience to his field making decisions that hindered the ability of the people under him to do their jobs appropriately and have the appropriate tools to conduct emergency response.

Clarence Thomas went into Yale law school (they might actually meet important people, an amazing concept for our tin foil hat wearers in this thread) and became a lawyer before Monsanto was in the picture. A person he met in Yale became a Senator (again, big shocker), he became a lawyer for Monsanto. His friendship got him on the radar (friends and associations getting you noticed for better jobs? no way!) and he was later picked by George HW Bush and confirmed to be a judge before soon after being nominated to be a SCOTUS judge and confirmed/sworn in for for that.

That is his story. Hardly this big "conflict of interest" conspiracy, on top of the fact that 8 other SCOTUS judges sort of have a say too in cases. Also, the fact that someone can just arbitrarily decide that working for Goldman Sachs or Monsanto suddenly disqualifies another for a position is as utterly baseless as baseless gets.

Those of us who work in the real world well know it's our contacts and associations that help us get the positions we get, not just our experience and background. Those who are making complaints obviously have little relevant experience in the world, and are likely social shut-in's with no concept of rubbing elbows and the advantages it gives. You don't get good jobs spending your life in a cave and complaining about what other people get. The intellectually lazy, and they are many in this thread, think things should be handed to them on a silver platter, and really have no concept of how the real world works when it comes to getting jobs and why so many government employees come from similar backgrounds.

(Btw, when I say "you", I mean in general, not at you specifically)

[aGENT]

So you're saying people who should be in charge of government bureaus are people who align with your political views.. ok.

Gets better and better.

People always post how many in Goldman Sachs take up management and financial positions in government too, including the Fed, but again, companies who people work for are not automatically a conflict of interest.

A conflict of interest is something done by action, not by merely working for a company or going to a certain school. I can't imagine the stupidity of declining someone for a position because of who they worked for in the past. Examples of conflict of interest is when George Bush had the leader of FEMA have absolutely no relevant experience to his field making decisions that hindered the ability of the people under him to do their jobs appropriately and have the appropriate tools to conduct emergency response.

Clarence Thomas went into Yale law school (they might actually meet important people, an amazing concept for our tin foil hat wearers in this thread) and became a lawyer before Monsanto was in the picture. A person he met in Yale became a Senator (again, big shocker), he became a lawyer for Monsanto. His friendship got him on the radar (friends and associations getting you noticed for better jobs? no way!) and he was later picked by George HW Bush and confirmed to be a judge before soon after being nominated to be a SCOTUS judge and confirmed/sworn in for for that.

That is his story. Hardly this big "conflict of interest" conspiracy, on top of the fact that 8 other SCOTUS judges sort of have a say too in cases. Also, the fact that someone can just arbitrarily decide that working for Goldman Sachs or Monsanto suddenly disqualifies another for a position is as utterly baseless as baseless gets.

Those of us who work in the real world well know it's our contacts and associations that help us get the positions we get, not just our experience and background. Those who are making complaints obviously have little relevant experience in the world, and are likely social shut-in's with no concept of rubbing elbows and the advantages it gives. You don't get good jobs spending your life in a cave and complaining about what other people get. The intellectually lazy, and they are many in this thread, think things should be handed to them on a silver platter, and really have no concept of how the real world works when it comes to getting jobs and why so many government employees come from similar backgrounds.

(Btw, when I say "you", I mean in general, not at you specifically)

Yes and they have a conflict of interest because they have a revolving door between these companies and government while supporting legislature/laws that benefit those same companies over the people they're supposed to be representing.

It's not about their work background, or what school they went to. It's that these guys work for the company for a while, then go in to a government position where they promote that industry's interests from within over the people's whom they're supposed to be governing for and then go write back in to that industry again.

But continue putting your head in the sand, it's working out real well