SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
September 25, 2014· santaclarita.com · SantaClarita.com (SCVTalk 5.0) · Wayback capture

Looking to Expand, Local Dump Using Questionable Tactics

Image not recoveredChiquita-Canyon.jpg
While we’ve been sleeping, Chiquita Canyon has been making every imaginable move to round up support for their proposed expansion to the once-sleepy landfill.
Reminiscent of the momentary philanthropy of Waste Management some years ago, their name is appearing as a lead sponsor for events all over town. Many of these organizations have repaid the gesture by supporting the dump expansion, even before the public comment period has closed and the environmental impact report is complete. When they're not donating to charity, they’re getting on the good side of politicians. Our city council, which is famous for fighting environmental hazards around the rim of the city has been nearly silent.
Of course, the residents of Val Verde have a very different view. Just recently, a community group of over 100 residents voted unanimously to oppose the expansion. 
Some methods have been more coercive. Last week, the Castaic Area Town Council, a Los Angeles County committee formed to advise the County Supervisors, approved a contract with the dump (on a 6-4 vote) that offered money for programs in Castaic (specifically excluding Val Verde) in exchange for the members’ active support of the expansion. But that’s not the worst part. The money goes away if anyone on the board joins in formal opposition to the expansion. Not just them, but their family members, too. This even applies to the 40% of the council (and their families) that voted against the contract. 
I couldn’t believe this when I heard it, but it’s true. They’re compelling publically-elected councilmembers to give up their First Amendment rights. Money quote (emphasis added):
In the event that the CATC, any officer, director, employee or agent of CATC, including any family members or co-habitants or any person or entity whose residence or business is located in the Castaic Area initiates any appeal of any Project approval, or joins in or supports in any way any appeal of Project approvals, including without limitation an appeal to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, or filing any administrative or judicial challenge to the Project or the EIR or any Project approvals including those required by the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), this Agreement shall be voidable and of no further force and effect in CCL's sole discretion.
There’s probably a missing comma here, because this can also be read to apply to all Castiaic residents. Either way, the contract is signed. You can watch the video of the meeting here. The audio is rough (I listened with headphones) but it's worth it to see councilmember John Kunak take apart every point offered by Chiquita's lobbyist, John Musella. Kunak, an attorney, voted against the contract.
For a little more reading, see Perry Smith's piece from this weekend, and over at SCVNews, Darryl Manzer was been writing almost daily on the issue.
Image not recoveredhosts.png
How Waste Connections Makes Connections
Earlier this year, Waste Connections (the dump's owner) gave $1,000 each to the campaigns of donations to both Marsha McLean and Laurene Weste. The landfill’s lobbyist/pr rep, John Musella, donated another $500. Musella and Chicquita executive Michael Dean were co-hosts of the infamous fundraiser at Wayne Crawford's house that was also co-hosted by digital billboard lobbyists Arthur Sohikian and Hunt Braly. 
Since 2012, Waste Connections and Musella has donated extensively to local elected officals. Some, like County Supervisors, will have a direct say on the dump’s fate. From the others, a little support (or just silence) can go a really long way . Here’s the breakdown:
Assemblyman Scott Wilk: $5,500
Supervisor Mike Antonovich: $3,500
Senator Steve Knight: $2,750
Mayor Laurne Weste: $1,500
Supervisor Hilda Solis: $1,500
Supervisor Don Knabe: $1,300
Councilmember Marsha McLean: $1,000

Conflict of interest on charter school board
Earlier this year, Musella joined the Governing Board of SCVi, a public K-12 charter school located just one mile from the expanded landfill. If that weren't enough, the agenda of the most recent governing board meeting (August 21) shows a discussion and action item related to the landfill expansion, with Musella listed as the presenting board member. I understand that Musella missed the meeting, so the item (minus the action item) appears on the agenda of the board’s meeting today at 4pm.
There is no mention of Musella’s connection with the landfill on his otherwise exhaustive bio on SCVi’s website. Complicating things further is that fellow SCVi board member Greg Kimura also serves on the Castaic Area Town Council. Kimura voted against the contract between Chiquita and the CATC, yet the contract says that Chiquita can pull of its funding for Castaic programs if any of its members participate in formal opposition to the expansion.
So to recap: in exchange for money, Chiquita has demanded that the Town Council actively support the dump expansion and it will pull its money if any member works against them. This is a huge problem when one such member is also a member of a governing board of a public school. This can’t be legal, can it?
SCVi is the school closest to the dump, and closer still if the expansion is approved. If anything, you’d expect the school to be a vocal opponent. But instead, it appears that the school might be considering supporting the expansion. It’s difficult to tell for sure, since their agendas have very little information. With one board member being paid to represent the interests of the dump, and another facing the pressure of the dump’s punitive contract with the CATC, you get the feeling that the deck is stacked. 
A public records request to SCVi sent earlier this week has gone unanswered. 



Looking to Expand, Local Dump Using Questionable Tactics

Comments (49)

  1. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 12:25 pm
    John Kunak is an attorney, he is NOT the Council President... Chiquita Canyon has done nothing wrong, nor anything any different than any other "unfavorable type" business would do... get out there, get the word out, the NOP was done in 2011!! Wasn't much opposition then, and really, there isn't much now. 112 people voted to close the landfill, that's out of approx. 2500 residents, who had ALL been notified, at their doors, with flyers twice, two different times, in the week leading up to the meeting... ♦♦♦Out of approx. 2500 residents, only 112 people are concerned enough to show up!♦♦♦ So, now... Let's think about that! That leaves 2388 (approx.) who either don't care, aren't concerned, or just know the landfill will stay open and are happy with the funds continuing and even increasing to do when more in our community! Anyone who has dealt in local politics for any amount of time, and Ramon is new to this arena so it's not really his fault, but we KNOW, people only turn out when they are against something, very few ever turn out in support of something, especially in Val Verde... People on the side of closing the landfill have already been playing with intimidation tactics, yelling, name calling, invading personal space etc. they are deplorable adults acting like pack dogs! 2388 people didn't care to show up, they obviously aren't worried, I know I've never been worried. The Castaic Town Council did what the Council is put in place to do... period. And they didn't sign anything much different that what was signed in Val Verde back in 1997 either... that agreement also said that the Leaders of the Community (back then it was only the VVCA) would not speak out against or support people who spoke out against and would in fact speak in favor of the expansion back then (that is not a quote, but it's close) I see nothing wrong with this clause either - why would a business offer mitigation funds to a group/community if the group/community is going to take the check with one hand and renounce them with the other? No one wants a High School, a MRF, a Landfill, a Bullet Train etc. in their backyards, but it only makes sense to utilize the one that's already here, that has already proven to be good to the community, and NOT JUST WITH MONEY either... they sponsor clean up days, they sponsor the road ways (highway 126) they bring HUGE TRASH BINS INTO VAL VERDE quarterly for those who don't have trucks are unable to take things to the landfill... it's not just in monetary ways they help. Oh! and as for "Our Landfill should only take our trash" which I have heard now over and over again... that is SO stupid! These things are regional! Where do y'all think your recyclables go??? They go to Sun Valley! that's where the MRF is! And if someone wants to get really pissy... the Landfill is in the County, not in the City so maybe it should only accept LA County waste. - that's the same mentality. Vanessa Brookman, Val Verde resident since 2005
  2. MikeThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 12:27 pm
    OK, I misread the website. Chair of Parks & Rec subcommittee. I'll fix. Otherwise, aren't you contractually obliged to not say bad things about the landfill?
  3. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 12:32 pm
    Me? Nope. I can say anything I want, good or bad.
  4. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 12:36 pm
    I copied and pasted part of my rant... disregard this section LOL --- and Ramon is new to this arena so it's not really his fault, ---
  5. ChristophThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 9:51 pm
    Wow! You not only LOOK like Jabba The Hut... You actually sound like him too! haha
  6. CaesarThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 9:56 pm
    Contrary to popular belief, huts are extremely intelligent creatures. Let's not insult the huts.
  7. ErinSaturday, September 27th, 2014 at 3:54 pm
    Regardless of which side of this issue you fall, comments like this are entirely uncalled for and should be condemned by ALL. Totally unacceptable.
  8. SheffsThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 12:51 pm
    Seriously Vanessa? Aren't you the President of the Val Verde Community Advisory Committee, appointed by Rosalind Wayman, who works for Supervisor Antonivich? You make his office look pretty bad. Aren't you supposed to be NEUTRAL? Did you or did you not create alias' so you could make make comments on SCV news? And when that ploy was uncovered, you were permanently kicked off the site. Oh, and Sheffs is Susie Evans, so there is no confusion as to who I really am.
  9. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 12:55 pm
    There are certain people whom I refuse to address, at all... period.
  10. SheffsThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:03 pm
    OK, so you won't address me, but you will call me vulgar names to others and behind my back and online. Very adult of you. Just so everyone on this site knows, we have personal issues that go back to when you moved into Val Verde.
  11. Steve LeeThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:07 pm
    There are around 638 residents in Val Verde and 112 people out of them showed up, no one from the other side showed up. I find it fascinating that we have no children in this town Vanessa? I am the village idiot and even I can figure out how slanted your reply is. Well excuse me as I go pound my head against the wall.
  12. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:12 pm
    There are 698 MAILING ADDRESSES in Val Verde... that is 650+ homes I know for a fact, more than 1 person lives in most of the homes...
  13. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:15 pm
    as of 2010 the population of Val Verde was... 2,468 Location of Val Verde in Los Angeles County, California. Val Verde is a census-designated place (CDP) in Los Angeles County, California, United States. The population was 2,468 at the 2010 census, up from 1,472 at the 2000 census.
  14. Kevan SmalleyThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:18 pm
    Seriously Vanessa? "have already been playing with intimidation tactics, yelling, name calling, invading personal space etc. they are deplorable adults acting like pack dogs!" This quote from your comment exactly describes you Vanessa! How long will it be before your kicked off this site for your intimidation tactics? you have already been kick off 2 that I know of, one of them twice! Every comment out of your mouth or that you write shows that you would throw Val Verde under the bus for the smell spewing land fill, And you continue to spout out that you are neutral even call yourself "Switzerland", That proves you are one of the biggest liars
  15. Steve LeeThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:19 pm
    Good, 698 mailing addresses That would make it 3 people per home, some work and could not make it, some have kids and could not make it, we got many emails from them saying they would vote against the expansion. We then knocked doors and got 500 signatures, only two houses I am aware of said no to that. One because they are related to someone on the VVCAC board, and the other because the landfill gives them free dump days. Now many could not sign because they are under 18, so you must recalculate your figures to what reality suggest. But you want to fight for the landfill at all cost, no matter who you destroy in the process. People are sick and your team calls them liars. People can only be intimidated for so long before they get tired of being suppressed. I have never seen 100% of the people show up for any vote.
  16. SheffsThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:25 pm
    Vanessa....you have an adult son over the age of 25, correct? And you are moving out of Val Verde at the end of this month, right?
  17. Vanessa BrookmanThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:37 pm
    Mike, I hope your readers see I bring facts, others bring drama.
  18. Bonnie NikolaiThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 1:38 pm
    I attended the meeting and voted against the landfill expansion. My husband stayed home with our 3 children and let me handle it. He is just as against this expansion as I am. I know most households have children living in them and most did not bring them to the meeting. Out of the 2000+ residents how many are children or too sick to come to a meeting? I'm willing to bet a lot.
  19. Jaime BrianoThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 2:10 pm
    For those of you who don't know Vanessa, she isn't very well liked in the community. She has always taken the side opposite of the community. To my knowledge, she's quit 3 boards she's served on. I recently was given a petition to sign with well over 200 signatures asking for her removal from the CATC. From what I know she's never owned a home in Verde either.
  20. ErinThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 2:12 pm
    I contacted the board at SCVi regarding this issue - as my children attend and I want to make sure those involved recuse themselves from any vote. I'm still unclear as to WHY it's even on our agenda- who put it there, why they put it there, and what comes of a school being in the middle- using the much needed funds Chiquita gives and being a good neighbor to those residents who oppose the expansion. We need to do what is best for the kids, period. I'm positive the majority of SCVi parents have no idea this is going on- at least not yet. I would also venture to guess, knowing the culture of SCVi, the majority of parents would be opposed. This is the school that has been teaching my children how to compost since K/1. My son has offered a solution should anyone 'speak out' against the dump and the area lose the funds from Chiquita... he says the students will do a fundraiser to make up the money for the community. He'll lead the charge. Because frankly, that's what SCVi has taught him. I sincerely hope this agenda item is nothing- and the school remains neutral. Should the parents and students decide to speak out...so be it. Let it be a parent/student lead issue, not a board issue where there are some serious conflicts of interest.
  21. SheffsThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 2:14 pm
    Jaime, you are correct, she has never owned a home in Val Verde.
  22. VanessaThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 2:18 pm
    Ahhhh more LIES and misinformation from another one... Those pesky FACTS are always getting in their way! And they keep publicly stating it, which in the long run, might make me a VERY happy girl...
  23. Kevan SmalleyThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 2:53 pm
    Seriously Vanessa? "have already been playing with intimidation tactics, yelling, name calling, invading personal space etc. they are deplorable adults acting like pack dogs!" This quote from your comment exactly describes you Vanessa! How long will it be before your kicked off this site for your intimidation tactics? you have already been kick off 2 that I know of, one of them twice! Every comment out of your mouth or that you write shows that you would throw Val Verde under the bus for the smell spewing land fill, And you continue to spout out that you are neutral even call yourself "Switzerland", That proves you are one of the biggest liars
  24. VanessaThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 3:01 pm
    Readers, Keep in mind that pack dog correlation I made earlier...
  25. CaesarThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 4:54 pm
    I'd trust this pack of dogs over your mangey self any day.
  26. Kevan SmalleyThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 3:05 pm
    This village of "tools" - (This is what Vanessa called all of us that live in Val Verde so she is not above calling everyone names) We the "Val Verde tools" are very happy to see you leave because 2 village idiots is one to many!
  27. Ramon H.Thursday, September 25th, 2014 at 3:32 pm
    Take a look here:http://california.hometownlocator.com/ca/los-angeles/val-verde.cfm As of July 1st, 2014 the population of Val Verde was 2,492. Of that number, 2,161 were in families. The average family size was 4. Typically, families consist of a mom, dad, and children. Of course, there are several exceptions. What needs to be found is how many of the 2,492 residents are actually children. This is an important number, because we all know that children cannot vote. Once that number is found, and it should be somewhere online, then we can have a more accurate number of residents that are 18+, and we can see what percent of Val Verde actually came out to vote. Also, I agree with Steve. Never will you get 100% of people to show up. Even expecting 50% of eligible voters to show up is not a reasonable expectation. At the last election for LA City mayor, they had 23% voter turnout. That did not discredit the vote, and a mayor was elected. Lastly, let's not lose sight of the fact that nobody came out to vote in favor of the expansion. If people really want to see this expansion, you would expect at least one person to be passionate enough and vote in favor of the expansion. Nobody did. The 112 votes in opposition is a great number, but the 0 vote in favor speaks volumes.
  28. Hillary GoldsteinThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 4:00 pm
    Hey everyone, This is Hil from Buzzfeed.com, we wanted you to know that you've caught our attention and we're in the process of compiling information for an accurate article, look for it in the coming days. We'll be reaching out to Michael D. Antonovich's office for comments. Don't fret, the town of Val Verde isn't being ignored. Some good people still stand by you!
  29. ErinThursday, September 25th, 2014 at 6:43 pm
    I find it sadly ironic my 11-year old son, who is a founding student & 6th grader at SCVi and has offered to lead the fundraising, suffered an asthma attack at school today. Tell Antonovich we'll adopt one of his shelter animals if he opposes this thing & stops the expansion.
  30. Ramon H.Thursday, September 25th, 2014 at 10:21 pm
    Can we please comments on topic and non-insulting?
  31. CastaicClayFriday, September 26th, 2014 at 11:36 am
    What about "New Condition #46" from the 1997 expansion approval, signed by all parties? It states the "total capacity shall be 23 million tons. Landfill closure shall occur when this capacity is reached or by November 24, 2019, whichever occurs first." It's in writing. Why is this even up for consideration?
  32. MustangGtIsACarFriday, September 26th, 2014 at 11:46 am
    Because of people like this: http://ihopeyousleepwell.tumblr.com/image/
  33. Coastal SageSaturday, September 27th, 2014 at 3:33 pm
    @ Mike Devlin I read the language as it's written. It's more than just a comma missing. I think the lawyer who drafted the agreement for the Town Council to sign intends that if ANYBODY files an appeal or litigation that the dump owner doesn't have to "contribute" a dime. "In the event that the CATC, any officer, director, employee or agent of CATC, including any family members or co-habitants or any person or entity whose residence or business is located in the Castaic Area initiates any appeal of any Project approval, or joins in or supports in any way any appeal of Project approvals..." It always amazes me that adults who have graduate from high school do not read what they sign when it's something important to them.
  34. anonanonMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 11:10 am
    Dear Awesometown: Not so awesome. Home invasions, crime, problems and DUMPS next to elementary schools. LAME. THIS IS WHY PEOPLE ARE LEAVING. Cannot wait. #CaliforniaRearViewMirror
  35. ErinMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 12:32 pm
    Oh come on... you'll find these things in EVERY community in the US. Even the safest. I grew up in the very nice 'burbs of Detroit, but instead of being close to a landfill we had every plant dumping toxins in the river, or the ground nearby. Welcome to America! Give me a town in the US and I'll give you similar crime stats-unless you, being anonymous and all, aren't familiar with facts and stats. BTW why the Anon? I have issues taking anyone seriously who can't sign their own name to their ideas or comments.
  36. SheffsMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 11:51 am
    Vanessa, is that you? I knew you couldn't wait to get back online and comment about us....you left, stay away and please stop these attacks from beyond. You are still the President of the Val Verde Community Advisory Board from what Antonivich's office said. You should have been booted by the powers to be a long time ago from any community board around here. I hope you don't cause the same problems in the Antelope Valley that you did here.
  37. Vanessa BrookmanMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 1:02 pm
    Here I am... don't make assumptions Susie, just makes you look like MORE of an a**! There is no reason to ban me from anywhere, people like you, just don't like the truth.
  38. Natalie TateMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 1:44 pm
    We will all have to wait and see if history repeats... I really like how this site lists some of the historical articles connected with this issue from past. http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/chiqui
  39. Greg KimuraMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 1:46 pm
    I would like to post a few facts about the Chiquita Canyon Landfill. - Los Angeles County gave the landfill a permit to operate a landfill operation in 1997 (called a CUP) - In the CUP, the landfill is not allowed to accept sludge - The community of Val Verde signed a contract with the landfill in 1997 - In the contract, the landfill is not allowed to accept sludge - On more than one occasion, the landfill has bid on sludge contracts - On at least one occasion, the landfill has won the bid and has a contract to accept sludge - The landfill accepted sludge from Santa Barbara's Cater Water Treatment Plant - The sludge was banned from Toland Landfill in Santa Paula, prior to being accepted at Chiquita Canyon Landfill. - The landfill accepted this sludge for a year and was paid $165,000. - Los Angeles County gave a Notice of Violation (NOV) to the landfill for accepting the sludge - In the NOV, the landfill was warned that they were in violation of their permit and would be shut down if they didn't comply. - At our community meetings (VVCA, VVCAC, CATC), the landfill rep, claimed that there are numerous definitions of sludge - The EPA, California Code of Regulations and Waste Connections (Chiquita's parent company) all have similar definitions of sludge. - The definition of sludge is any water treatment plant waste product. There is no gray area in the definition - The material the landfill took in is sludge. The NOV states this as well. - The landfill claims to have attempted to change the words on the the invoice to no longer read sludge - The landfill rep has made public statements that the sludge is safe and only consists of sand and gravel. - The landfill rep claims that the landfill tested every load of sludge and it is safe, however they will not release the results. - The sludge is still buried in the landfill Some concerns with the community are: - The sludge very likely contained Arsenic - The community put "no sludge" in the contract, with the belief that the landfill would honor it - Knowing that the landfill has bid on sludge on more than one occasion leads us to believe that they do not care about honoring the contract. - Since they have not honored this part of the contract, what else have they done? - Since the landfill rep has attempted to deceive the community, we now wonder what other lies he has told us. - Based on his deception, trust is non-existent. - Many groups have given their approval of the Draft EIR document - Due to the size of the document and the complexity of the information, the community wonders how can a group support something they haven't read and don't understand? - The concern is that the landfill rep has asked for support of this document and has asked them to trust him. Thank you. Greg
  40. Greg KimuraMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 2:23 pm
    I forgot one more fact. On September 11, 2014, the VVCA Landfill Committee held a meeting with the community. The purpose of the meeting was to listen to the resident's feeling about the landfill expansion. 125 residents showed up and the vote was 112 against the expansion and 0 for it. The landfill put out a flier the day of the meeting and hand delivered copies to each residence in the community. The flier is very deceptive and the landfill made it look like it came from the VVCA, as our name was printed in large letters at the bottom of the flier. The name of the landfill was not on the flier. We feel this is very deceptive and shows the lack of ethical business practices. Due to this, the VVCA sent a notice to the landfill requesting them to no longer send out deceptive fliers with the VVCA name on it.
  41. ErinMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 4:17 pm
    Greg since you are commenting on this article - and also sit on SCVi's board- could you speak to that connection? I'm somewhat comforted as a parent to see both sides sit on the board. John has told me he would not vote in a conflict of interest matter - although I am still unclear why the board would vote on anything at all. Maybe you could clarify?
  42. Greg KimuraMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 6:07 pm
    Hi Erin, My comment to the article above are as a resident of Val Verde. I am not speaking for the SCVi Board. Due to our regulations, I will not speak about the meeting, outside of the meeting. I will refer you to the meeting minutes, which will be posted to the SCVi website. Thank you. Greg
  43. WowMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 6:09 pm
    Thanks for being the only one here who stayed professional when things got heated a minute ago. The people of Val Verde are lucky to have you.
  44. MikeMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 5:05 pm
    What happened at the board meeting last week?
  45. AngelBeautyQueenMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 4:44 pm
    You people have all been dropped on your heads? The needs of the many outweigh the few. Castaic needs the money, the health of 600 people? REALLY? That's all you're concerned about when CASTAIC is clearly hemorrhaging money and that money has to come from somewhere. You can't be picky. The kids of Val Verde may get asthma, but they'll have money for scholarships. Then maybe they won't end up stupid like their parents who CHOSE to live by the landfill. And one last note: whoever is putting up those slanderous, libelous pages about Vanessa B. online, I hope you get sued. You people terrorized her into creating those aliases. It's not her fault. And she ISNT receiving money from the landfill. Don't be ridiculous.
  46. Bonnie NikolaiMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 5:45 pm
    I have indelible rights. The Bill of Rights states I have the right to LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. No corporation or town council has the right to violate my rights. I think raising the cancer rates, asthma, or any other life-threatening condition is a violation of the right to life. My child has the right to breathe freely. Someone's sports programs or scholarships don't trump that.
  47. vanessaMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 5:13 pm
    It is not me.
  48. SantaClaritaDotComMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 7:17 pm
    Guys & Gals, Discuss the issues, stay away from personal attacks, or you'll get kicked off the site. Keep things civil, or discuss elsewhere. I'll delete comments or ban people to keep things civil on here.
  49. SheffsMonday, September 29th, 2014 at 8:09 pm
    I am wondering why Vanessa's comments are still here under Vanessa Brookman, AngelBeautyQueen, anonanon, and Vanessa are all still there? Including the one where she calls me an a**, but the responses to her and the aliases she used are gone. That is a little one sided in my opinion,

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support