I wish to thank the Mayor and the Council for their support and defense of the Toxic Right to Know Charter Amendment program against the many attempts to overturn it since it was passed by Eugene voters with a 54% majority in 1996.

I am writing to urge you to defend it once again by voting to support the proposal to fund the program by charging all manufacturers, under SIC Code 20-39 having 10 full-time employees, a fee of $8 per employee per year if they use any amount of reportable hazardous chemicals covered by the Charter Amendment. This proposal is closest to the original funding mechanism. The bottom line is that the public should not have to pay for finding out what toxics are being released into their environment. Because of the judge's ruling on the original funding mechanism, the taxpayers have already had to pay for three years of the program's operation.

The accusation has been made that the proposed rule is "unfair" because companies using less than 2,640 pounds of the designated chemicals, and that were not charged a fee under the original law, will now be charged.

What is truly unfair is that toxics of any amount are allowed to be released into our air, water and soil. What is truly unfair is that the victims of these health hazards must bear the resulting medical costs. What is truly unfair is that when toxic contamination is found in an area, it is the taxpayers who most often must pay for the clean-up (Exxon has yet to pay the bill for Valdez). What is truly unfair is that chemicals are allowed to be used and released before their toxicity is fully tested.

Just last week, "60 Minutes" reported that MTBE, a gasoline additive to make gas burn cleaner, has severely polluted waterways all over the country. Though any chemist could look at the formula and know it was highly water soluble and could easily get into water supplies, no testing was done, though testing in France had found it to be carcinogenic in rats. The EPA totally failed in its responsibility, and even though this problem has been known since 1996, nothing has been done to remove MTBE from gas, nor any work been done on cleaning up the water (and who will pay?). Since we obviously can't rely on the EPA, local laws like Eugene's toxic law are essential

Later in the week we learned that 9,700 pounds of a carcinogenic wood preservative and pesticide is seeping toward wells in Springfield from a defunct Weyerhaeuser facility. Weyerhaeuser IS paying for the clean-up and claims the technique will work, but note that this wood preservative and pesticide could not be listed on the Eugene toxics list because of prior legislation. Thus, Baxter Wood Products, which uses 6 million pounds of it annually is exempt. That's not fair either.

In the last month, I have learned that four of my friends have cancer, one only in her 30s. Cancer researcher Dr. Samuel Epstein predicts that one out of every two men and one out of every three women will get cancer in their lifetimes -- that's three of the men on the Council, and maybe one of the women.

Biologists Sandra Steingraber and Theo Colburn have put together the statistics relating cancer and other illnesses to the toxic soup we have made of our environment, and it is very clear that what would be fair is an end to any sort of chemical release. Industry needs to keep their use in a closed system, reduce their use, and find safe alternatives.

There has also been an accusation that the public ought to pay for the toxics program because it "demands" these products. The average citizen has no way of knowing what chemicals are in most products. Even if one undertook the onerous task of carrying the long list around to compare to product labels, labeling is not required for many chemicals, and for many products the chemical is not in the product, but used in the manufacturing process. One would need a degree in chemistry to be a truly knowledgeable consumer.

Please vote for the proposed funding mechanism for the Eugene toxics law.

Sincerely,

Wanda Ballentine