High School Cheerleaders’ Car Wash Shut Down Because It Violates “Environmental Laws”

By: Kristin Tate
80

chr06038
The cheerleading squad at Lincoln High School in San Jose wanted to attend a national competition in April. In order to finance the trip, the squad decided to host a car wash.

This plan never materialized, however. The San Jose Environmental Services Department shut down the group’s car wash to “protect the environment.”


According to the environmental officials, the cheerleaders violated city water discharge laws.

On Oct. 18th this message was sent out to San Jose neighborhood e-mail lists:

“We had a visit from the city of San Jose Environmental Services Department who said that the car washes at Hoover [Middle School] are in violation of water discharge laws, therefore we had to cancel this and all future car washes.”

Jennie Loft, a spokesperson for the San Jose Environmental Services Department, said, “Anything that is not storm water or rain water is considered a pollutant. If it goes into a storm drain, that pollutant will harm wildlife and habitats in the creeks. Water goes directly from the storm drains into our creeks.”

The Department gave advice on how to have legal car washes.

The Mercury reported, “Conduct car washing over gravel, grassy area, or other earthen areas if possible… Ensure that wash water (soapy or not) does not run into a street, gutter, or storm drain… Wash water from paved areas should be collected and diverted either into the sanitary sewer system or a landscaped area… Use different methods to protect the storm drain system… Ensure no soap stains remain on the ground.”

The rules do not just apply to groups attempting to hold car washes — they also apply to individuals who want to clean their cars.

Loft said, “What most people should do if washing their cars at home is park it on the lawn so the water is diverted into landscape. Or go to a designated neighborhood car wash, so it doesn’t go into the storm drain.”

The Lincoln High cheer squad is still trying to raise funds to attend the national competition.

Do you think these environmental laws are justified? Tell us in the comments section below.

The following two tabs change content below.
Kristin Tate is a multi-media reporter for Breitbart News and BenSwann.com. Dedicated to fearless journalism, she regularly works on undercover stings with James O'Keefe to reveal government waste, abuse, and fraud. Tate was a Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) Chapter President and Founder. She will continue to fight tirelessly for individual liberty and free markets through new media. Visit Kristin's website at www.TheLibertarianChick.com.
Support the Truth In Media Project


"Like" Ben Swann on Facebook
  • Snowdog

    Their solutions will be revoked when they realize that anything that goes into the landscape eventually makes its way into the same rivers and creeks; as does anything that goes into the sewers.

    • gil

      they should look at the big oil and mining companies

      • Mike Martin

        What comes from the earth must go back into the earth. What ever happened to all that pollution from when the earth was a toxic molting ball of lava?

        • castello

          How many millions of years ago? Fish and other living things don’t like soap in their water.

  • James W D

    guess they will have to stop all traffic from using the roads since cars tend to leak fluids onto the road?

  • Nikki B

    As a person in college for a Water Environmental Technology degree, this makes perfect sense. The storm system in San Jose is built to run directly to a waterway, and does *not* pass through a treatment plant: thus any soap, chemicals or other “pollutants” will go directly into the nearest stream/river, and carry the soap/chemicals with it.

    While discharging chemicals into landscapes *will* make it’s way into the same sewers and creeks, the landscape (and soil below it) does a great job filtering out pollutants naturally so that by the time the water makes it’s way into the water table or runoff point, it’s much cleaner than if it just went directly there through storm drainage.

    This is a non story. So some cheerleaders can’t hold a car wash. So what?

    • secprf

      Hey Dummy! Glad to see you wasted your degree! What do you think happens to all the oil, dirt and debris on the road way or in the gutters when you get rainfall? All that oil and debris goes into the waterway. If anything, they might need more car washes so they can get more soap into the waterways to help those poor animals who are covered in oil.

      • ExpertWitness

        I think you aren’t getting the point. They clearly know that is an issue, but do not wish to further exacerbate the problem of water pollution. If they don’t like it, they can lobby to change the law or vote for someone who will repeal it.

      • Nikki B

        First, insults make you look weak. If you can’t state your point without personal insults (when you don’t even know a person) then no one is going to take your point seriously.

        Second (and to your point): Yes, there is oil, dirt, and debris on all the roads that run into the storm system, which goes directly into the waterway. And it’s a problem.

        But the solution is *not* to add thousands of gallons more alkaline laden water (soap – which is toxic to fish) to the run off.

        By your logic, they should just have put millions of gallons of Dawn into the Gulf during the BP oil spill. That would have fixed everything, right? Wonder why they didn’t do that.

    • BambiB

      Clearly you got one of the “no math” Water Environmental Technology Degrees. Quick: If they held 100,000 car washes a year, and each time used a quart of soap, how much pollutant would make it into the nearest stream before breaking down into harmless components?

      I’d be less worried by the amount of soap going into creeks than the amount of greenhouse gas emanating from the city council. Maybe they should shut them down?

  • Christian

    They should just use a hemp soap it’s is safe for the environment.

  • Heather A Burns

    Considering they are fracking in the area of the water table, I highly doubt that a bit of Dawn dish washing liquid is going to hurt the already decimated water table.

  • Ken

    I can safely mark off San Jose as a city to live in the future. I assume they also ban 8 year old boys and girls from selling lemonade on their front lawns.

    • Jesse Farmer

      I bet most of your “understanding” of the world comes from assumptions.

      I also bet if you’re not moving to San Jose because you oppose civic efforts to keep the water supply clean, then San Jose isn’t going to miss you one bit.

  • TheVoiceOfReason

    I honestly don’t see anything unreasonable with the city’s request. They’re trying to keep pollutants out of rivers and streams that belong to everybody! What’s the problem with asking them to move the car wash to a location that doesn’t drain into wildlife habitats? They didn’t say “You can’t have a carwash.” They said “You can’t have a carwash that drains into our lakes and streams.”. There’s a big difference.

    This story is the kind of biased and one-sided reporting I was hoping to not see on Ben’s site. Let’s try to reign in the insanity here.

    • Derek

      I disagree. It’s a very balanced article that gives both sides of the story. It even explains everything that you’re mentioning. You’re just being oversensitive.

  • MJ

    Yes! Lets park our cars on the grass in order to wash them. That way, when we get done washing them and the ground is wet, nice and soft underneath, the non 4-wheel drive cars get stuck causing property damage and inconveniences! GREAT IDEA!

    • BambiB

      Not to mention all the greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere when the grass dies.

  • secprf

    Only in Kalifornia would such a stupid ass law even exist. Water hurts the environment because it flows through a…get this…a storm drain. So every time it rains the EPA shit’s itself in San Jose because it’s mass pollution on a biblical scale? Where is Lex Luther now when he wanted to bomb the San Andreas fault?!?

    • ExpertWitness

      Apparently you can’t read because the EPA is not mentioned anywhere in the “article.” This site is a joke.

    • Faith Mary

      I agree that it was ridiculous that they were shut down…but I hope you know that it’s actually spelled “California”

    • Notanidiot

      Reading Comprehension is not your strong suit I take it. It’s not the water that they had a problem with. It was the chemical solvent used, i.e. soap, and all other potential contaminates on the cars that was the problem. If the storm drains led to a treatment facility, similar to most home drains, this wouldn’t of been a problem but, because they dump directly into rivers, creeks, and streams the environmental agency was afraid of the potentially negative impact that could have on the wildlife that depends on those water sources. This is why they suggested having the car wash over gravel, dirt, grass, etc. All of these act as a mechanical filter to remove contaminates before the water reaches said streams. It’s a very simple fix for these cheerleaders. All they needed to do was have a change of venue and they could of continued their fund raiser.

      This site is really beginning to become a propaganda spewing, one sided, train wreck of a site, that is slowly but surely tarnishing Benn Swann’s name when articles like this get published.

  • Whats New!

    San Jose is pretty strict nowadays. Formerly being in water treatment myself I can understand the concerns EPA would have. Moving to a graveled area would make good sense, just find a new area end of problem.

  • Jesse Farmer

    How hard does Kristen Tate have to search for these nothing stories? Ladies, if you have some nice T and A, and no brains and absolutely no ethics, become a right-wing, neo-Confedefrate reporter. You have all the qualifications.

    You can’t just pour anything into the water supply that you want. There are OTHER people in the world. Sorry Libertarians. It’s not “Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness.” It’s LIFE, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness. You are not allowed to poison others, even if you can make a buck on it. Cry about it.

    • ExpertWitness

      Don’t lump us all in with this garbage. This site is a complete joke and only good to laugh at the comments. I consider myself a libertarian (small “l” noteworthy) and cannot imagine how people jump from small government to “I do what I want without repercussions.” It seems as if a local government is doing their job here, nothing to get worked up over. Further, it seems that they even gave these girls other possibilities to comply and still have the car wash. This “story” baffles me.

      • Jesse Farmer

        Libertarians (big L) make that jump, because that is the content of the American Libertarian political movement. That is the content of the Austrian School and the Chicago School (invented by the same bankers).

        People think that because it is the content of Ron and Rand and Heidi Cruz’s husband’s political platforms.

    • Greg Gaugler

      Libertarian here. But Kristin Tate’s brand of journalism is garbage. Its basically Libertarian sensationalist writing. Simple and easy for idiots to rally behind. Its all, here’s a situation, lets blame the cops first… lets find somebody who must be oppressed because the law told them no. Even though the law makes sense and is created by local government. This is another non-story, even for libertarians.

      • BambiB

        Of course you’re wrong.
        It may not be government crap on the scale of Obamacare or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but an arbitrary rule created and enforced by government is part of what all libertarians should be fighting against.

        • Jesse Farmer

          You think it’s arbitrary not to pour poison into shared waterways? Are you an idiot or are you evil? Either way, get phucked.

        • Nikki B

          It’s not an “arbitrary rule”. And it’s not the city of San Jose that made the rule, although they must enforce the rule.

          If the cheerleaders’ parents don’t like the rule, there is a system in place to change it.

          Just because the cheerleaders don’t care if they pollute the nearest waterway, I’m sure the residents nearby *do* care.

          Libertarians stand up for the *rights* of all those who would not infringe on the *rights* of others.

          Polluting a waterway so you can go to a cheer competition in April is not a right. In fact, Libertarians should be cheering the city of San Jose for not allowing the cheerleaders to infringe upon the other residents’ right to enjoy clean watershed.

      • Jesse Farmer

        I think that this is Libertarianism. I think you are something else more intelligent, rational and less selfish that deserves another name and some distance, from what I think, Libertarianism is designed to be. Certainly some distance from some of these evil and/or selfish idiots.

      • Jordan

        Well said Greg I believe the people of San Jose have to right to vote in as many laws as they want just as long as they don’t interfere with the Constitution and they people can vote them out if they’d like. I am starting to get tired of Kristin Tate’s weak articles too. This isn’t new’s; news would be if the people of San Jose disagreed with the law and local government was suppressing their ability to democratically change.

    • BambiB

      Poison? You mean like the transmission fluid, oil and anti-freeze that routinely finds its way into storm drains from the road?

      Guess the inmates at San Jose will have to stop driving their cars. Let the city council be the first to do without.

      • Jesse Farmer

        Poison like degreaser and detergents and aluminum cleaner and vinyl cleaner and tire shine and all of the crap that comes off the car in a concentrated way when you wash it.

        How stupid are you? You can’t just dump that crap into shared waterways. Ever. Enough talking about it. Shut up. If you are too stupid not to poison yourself AND OTHERS, then the nanny state is going to have to FORCE you not to. Because you’re too stupid.

        • Grey Wolf

          did you know they use dawn to clean up oil spilled in the water ways…humm seems dawn is safe to put in the water to clean oil spills then why not let them use it to clean cars that have oil btw coming off of them 24/7 and the rain takes it to the drains every time…you do know this stuff does not just dry up and go away when its not raining don’t you..so EPA uses dawn Detergent to clean up environmental spills but you cant use it to wash your car….really…living in fantasy land aren’t we

          • Notanidiot

            They do not use Dawn to clean up oil spills. They use a variety of methods including absorbent pads, surface skimming, fire, etc. Dawn is used to clean up animals covered with oil. Not the water itself.

          • Grey Wolf

            news flash i was part of the clean up here in the gulf and yes what we used before and after burning was the same chem make up as dawn…want to argue this point….find out where i work before opening your mouth and sticking your foot in

          • Jesse Farmer

            Dawn? Who said anything about Dawn? Talk about living in a fantasy. You make up some nonsense about Dawn, and then go off on it like you’ve just split the atom.

            Also, I get the feeling that you’ve never been to a car wash or washed a car. You definitely don’t know anything about environmental haz mat clean up.

            So please, be quiet. You’re just being an idiot. You can’t mix, as I have said, detergents, and degreasers, and tire shine, and aluminum polish and all the crap under the wheel wells into a concentrated chemical slurry and pour it into shared waterways.

            Again, if you Libertarians are too stupid to realize this, then it must take some kind of nanny state to stop you huckleberries from poisoning everyone.

      • Jesse Farmer

        And yes, nitwit, like tranny fluid. You can’t pour tranny fluid into a lake. You can’t pour degreaser into a lake.

        If you have your tranny blow up, so the fluid comes out, the State Patrol 100% definitely does a hazmat clean up.

    • TequilaMockingbird

      I’m incredibly liberal so I’m tempted to support you here, but I can’t do it because there’s so much stupidity and sexism in the premise of your argument.

      When male reporters are idiots, people just call them idiots. When female reporters are idiots, they’re somehow leveraging their sexual assets to offset their womanly mental deficiencies.

      • Jesse Farmer

        Wow, you are liberal. You pulled that very convoluted feminist argument out of what I said.

        Please don’t tell me what I would say about a male reporter or anything else. Your insipid assumptions make you come off like a lot of these Libertarians.

        Furthermore, you’re rabid feminist perspective has led you to some radical misconceptions about the world.

        Kristin Tate RELIES on her T and A. She’s a honey pot for stupid Libertarians that works at Subway. Right? She’s an advertising ploy.

        She 100% damn well is “leveraging [her] sexual assets.” Now why this has to include her “womanly mental deficiencies” has EVERYTHING to do with you, yourself, your assumptions, and the particular brainwashing you have succumbed to, because I never said anything about that.

        You have invented that in what I have said, so you could counter-argue against that invention. Sort yourself, or again, you’ll be no more use than these backwards Libertarians.

        Nonetheless, Kristin Tate is here to titillate silly Libertarian boys, and that’s just how the world works.

        • TequilaMockingbird

          First, nice ad hominem attack! You must know your original point was a load of crap, so instead of defending it you just spent a few paragraphs ranting about how I’m a feminist libertarian. You disagreed with Kristen’s article, but instead of making a cogent argument against it you essentially said “Argh, just another woman waving her tits around.” I’m completely positive that, had the author been male, you would have chosen a different rhetorical path.

          Second, you’re a terrible writer. It’s fairly obvious that you wanted to appear educated relative to the other commenters, but instead you just came off sounding hilariously pretentious. Don’t worry though, I’ll give you some pointers. For free, because I’m a pinko liberal socialist!

          1. “Your” and “you’re.”
          2. In this context “libertarian” is not a proper noun.
          3. Some other pluralization/usage/spelling errors.

          4. Called my argument “inspid,” but failed to elaborate further. I suggest employing a dictionary to help you with adjective usage.

          5. What did Subway employees do to you? This is another dumb ad hominem attack. I get it, you don’t like libertarians or fast food, please address the actual topic at some point.
          6. It would be nice if you substantiated any of your criticisms of the author. For example, you claimed “Kristen Tate RELIES on her T and A,” but you can’t seem to produce any evidence to support that beyond your own ire.

          I could go on, but the tl;dr is that you produced an awful piece of writing. Everyone who read it was sad and bored, and possibly suffered some mild brain damage.

          • TequilaMockingbird

            And because I don’t feel like I made this clear enough, I think this article is absurd. The government should stop people from pouring deadly toxins into shared waterways. The fact that there is contention over that is like some sort of terrible joke. Seriously, what?

            But that’s exactly why I take issue with you focusing on the author’s gender and appearance. The logic behind this pieces is so insane and stupid that a child could dismantle it. Why bother mounting personal attacks?

          • Jesse Farmer

            Why pretend like every observation about the uses of sexuality to influence others is some kind of cosmic attack on the female gender?

            Get a grip on reality. That is what is going on here. Period. That’s what Kristin Tate is here for. This article would not exist were it not for Tate’s physical assets to help sell it.

            I have a problem with Tate (and her backers) using her sexuality to influence impressionable males.

            I am looking at this entire piece of propaganda and commenting on it. You’re nitpicking others grammar and throwing an insult-filled tantrum because, again, of some deeply-held personal prejudices.

            So to answer your question, why bother with “personal attacks”? Because the personal attack I made is relevant and factual.

            Why cry about it?

          • Jesse Farmer

            You know, this isn’t some undergraduate class on literary formalism. This is political propaganda, and you need to wise up quite a bit to begin to understand it.

            |Though what I am saying is pretty simple and obvious, your particular prejudices have blinded you in ways. Grow. Don’t spout off about how I want to seem smart or your other assumptions. Just grow.

            I’ll help:

            Sarah Palin. If I said, Sara Palin was selected as VP because, at least partially, men of a certain demographic like her T and A.

            Not a particularly controversial statement there. Unless your brain is totally rotten, you have to agree with that.

            Kristen Tate is no different. Same method. It’s prominent among Libertarian brainwashing operations. Same with the evening news.

            Let me ask you, is the lady on the TV selling the news pretty or ugly? Does she have a nice rack? Please don’t bother digging for the exception. Just acknowledge the rule.

            How hard is this stuff to figure out? This is how the world works. It’s too bad, for you, that you have this broad moral objection to it, but I think it’s time to grow and apply a little intelligence. Try to understand the world as it is.

            So, to answer your question, the reason I made the comment I made was to educate people like YOU. It’s for you. You’re welcome.

          • Jesse Farmer

            I did completely defend my original point. Did you not understand that? Can you not see that I return to and expand on my initial point in my second post?

            And again, Kristen Tate is waving her tits around to get the attention and admiration of ignorant Libertarian males. That is just what is gong on. Quit crying about it, and quit with your ignorant assumptions. I’m not going to argue your assumptions about me with you. Ever. It’s stupid.

            I do not know my first post was a load of crap. It’s 100% spot on, and I have defended it here and in my 2nd post. Nagging and nitpicking every little tiny typo isn’t going to change that, though it does reflect very poorly on you. Feel free to send me notes on my Disqus, Facebook, and Twitter posts. I could use a proofreader because it’s very very very important to make sure one’s grammar is 100% correct on the Internet.

          • TequilaMockingbird

            The primary focus of your criticism is the author, not the story. When men have opinions, people attack the opinions. When women have opinions, people are much more likely to attack the woman. You are a textbook example of that, and there’s really nothing else to say. Also, if I had pointed out every flaw in your writing my post would have been much longer. Your inability to write at the level of an 8th grader reflects poorly on you.

  • John Landry

    If the city was really concerned they would have a water treatment centre built. People use more soap and shampoo in a year than they do car wash soap. On top of that all the crap cars drop onto the road ways eventually makes it into the water system. Get a water treatment centre if you really care, Bozos!

    • Rob

      The drains in people’s homes go to a water treatment center. The water collected in storm drains goes directly to the natural watersheds of the area. The purpose of a storm drain is to prevent flooding by controlling the destination of rain water. Nothing more, nothing less. You probably shouldn’t call people names when you don’t have anything approaching a clue of what you’re talking about.

      • Grey Wolf

        where do you think the oil leaked and gas spilled while filling a car goes when it rains? those things are oil based and soap is what is used to help clean up oil spills in the ocean by the epa so where is this an issue when it comes to cleaning a car that will have oil come from it along with soap that is used the same way to clean oil spills…..good for the goose is good for the gander…might want to do some research your self because you have less of a clue also…

        • notanidiot

          Yes because unnecessarily adding to the already contaminated waterways isn’t an issue at all. Since our cars are already contaminating the waterways every time it rains, what is the big deal in polluting it even more? Why attempt to minimize the impact our actions cause? Again, the EPA does not use soap to clean up oil spills in waterways. Soap is primarily used for cleaning animals, mainly the birds, that are covered in oil. As little as 5 ppm concentration of detergent in water can/will strip the external mucus layer of most aquatic animals resulting in their deaths.

          Do you actually think before you spout off your nonsense?

        • John Landry

          Water runs down hill. If there is a sewer system, allowing run off to first enter the sewer system is very simple and purges the system when it rains. In the odd heavy storm the sewer system may not be able to handle the bigger load, so then the overflow goes to catch basins, creeks and rivers. And you won’t find car wash fund raising when there is a heavy rain. Simple foot valves can prevent back flow of toxins. It’s not expensive, it’s not hard and every city should be designed that way. I’d be surprised if San Jose is not designed this way and the environuts are just trying to scare people. Like I said, “Bunch of Bozos!”

      • John Landry

        In out area all the water goes through the water treatment centre, unless there is a big storm and the facilities can’t handle it. Under normal circumstances all water is treated before being relaesed. If it can be done here it can be done everywhere.

        • Nikki B

          It *can* be done, but how many millions of dollars in tax money are you willing to pay to make it happen? Some one has to pay for it, right? Will you be the first to raise your hand and go vote for a bond to build a plant big enough to handle all residential, commercial, industrial AND storm water?

          • Carlos Sousa

            If it’s being spent on that instead of killing and subsidies to corporations, I’m sure it would be paid for quickly

        • Henry Chris Larsen

          SoCal is a desert there is only rain fall a few months out of the year having the drains go to a treatment plant would be a massive waste of money.

          • John Landry

            All the pollutants that drip from cars are then washed into the storm sewers when it rains a few times with higher concentrations than a little bit if it rained more frequently. The environment is damaged more with high concentrations at fewer intervals than it is at lower concentrations at more frequent intervals. Nature can respond more easily to low concentrations. If anything, people should wash there cars more frequently rather than less, but of course a centre that recycles the water is best. Still, the odd fundraiser is not going to harm the environment, that’s just silliness.

  • LibertyChick

    Obama’s limo always looks washed and polished. Do his vehicle caretakers adhere to these guidelines?

    • TequilaMockingbird

      Probably. It’s not like they’re difficult guidelines to adhere to.

      • Daniel Sheffield Sr.

        Because after I spend all that time into my lawn, the first thing I want to do is drive my car on it. Then I better hope my neighbor doesn’t call the city or county and file a complaint that my car is on my lawn.

        The question is not to the difficulty of the guidelines, but rather, the authority for their existence.

        • TequilaMockingbird

          Your neighbor filing a complaint about your car being on your lawn would be ridiculous, and also pretty unlikely unless your neighbor is insane. Asking you to do your part to maintain the waterways we all share, which in this case just means minimizing how much poison you dump in them, is not ridiculous. This isn’t a question of individual liberty. You want the freedom to wash your car over a drain? What about my freedom to go for a swim without being poisoned?

  • LibertyMonger

    Yes they are justified if they were having the car wash directly over any type drain. Seems like it should be common sense to not pour chemicals directly into a drain.

    • berky

      Also seems like common sense not to have your drains go directly into creeks…. but hey, it IS California…

      • Notanidiot

        Almost all municipal storm water management systems drain into local waterways. Storm water management is nothing more than directing the flow of water to avoid flooding of an area.

  • Rob

    I can’t believe that people are even upset over this. The essence of the EPA’s message to the cheerleaders was to move their event to a place that doesn’t drain into the storm drains. What’s the big deal? Jesus…

  • Tough Choice

    These types of policies have been in place for years around the San Francisco Bay Area. Many storm drains are marked “Flows to Bay” warning people about run off into the ocean. It’s unfortunate that there wasn’t more oversight of this event by the school. Really, they should have known better.

  • kev in AB

    I bet if they used a phosphorus-free soap they could have gone ahead with the car wash.

  • huy

    If i recollect… schools in California have grass fields….seems simple enough of a solution

  • Paul Ferry

    My only question is what do Car Wash companies in that same area do? Do they have a separate drainage or does it just go into the storm drains like all the other water?

    • Nikki B

      Car washes (generally) have “pre-treatment” facilities that remove the pollutants and chemicals from the water and then either release it to the storm systems or divert to a waste waster treatment plant.

      Those that don’t pretreat (generally) flow as industrial wastewater to a treatment plant.

    • Jesse Farmer

      Is that a real question? Car wash’s are required to have special drains and filters. You have no clue about this kind of thing??

  • Bill Goode

    Another reason to just shut down city government agencies. San Jose city government should be limited to Mayor, City Council, public works for street maintenance and courts to prosecute fraud, theft, etc. Shut down everything else.

  • csh7

    The hypocrisy of the ruling is what is obnoxious….. They come down on a little car wash confined to a specific spot, yet they ignore the MASSIVE amounts of barium and aluminum (along with other dangerous chemicals) being dumped in our skies on a daily basis by way of chem trails, which is resulting in the poisoning of our ground, plants, water, air, animals, water, birds, fish, and of course people…… but they are silent on that, and the puppet media stays quiet as well, because the federal government, with intent, is the perpetrator !!!!

  • Ninjajp

    GO KRISTIN TATE!!! Nice work, however…..if ALL city occupants are made to obey these laws and corporations are demanded to have special filters and such? whats the real beef? Might as well just write an article so that a proper fundraiser can be started, and these girls can experience their dream!!

  • Owlisen

    This was one of the most stupid things i’ve read in a long time…
    Ofcourse they should be allowed to earn some cash to be able to compete.

  • Maverick

    you know what? I remember learning why its worse to wash a car on the grass than on cement in the 8th grade. You see when you have fertilizer, oil, grease, gasoline, and other pollutants getting washed onto natural water sheds, they end up in rivers ANYWAY! Also what is even worse than these pollutants ending up on watersheds is that they wind up sinking through the ground into groundwater(well-water) where it gets pumped back up and into peoples wells, which they were assuming to be clean. You might be thinking that oil won’t mix with water, but when combined with soap, oil and water mix quite well. These soaps are also harmless to the environment since they are designed to be environmentally friendly; you could drink some of these car wash soaps and never feel anything apart from a bad taste. If you do not combine the oil and water with soap and let it sink into our groundwater,(which is where most places get drinking water) then the oil sits on the lawn. Where it kills the grass, and thus the property value, which in turn affects your neighbors property value. If you make a comparison between everything above, and washing some soap and oil down the regular storm system, where oil that is on the street goes anyway, the numbers add up in favor of having car washes on pavement. (the E(n)P(t)A(g) is a bunch of over-reacting bigots that ignore/don’t understand statistics anyway.) Note- In 8th grade one of our lessons/ chapters was on the watershed system and water cycles. we actually build a working model of this system. Its not hard to figure out so do you research first.

    • Maverick

      Disclaimer- Don’t just drink chemicals (read all labels, since there are still some car wash soaps that can be hazardous. ) Also the individual speaking is not an expert, just an individual reciting knowledge from a course completed in 8th grade

      • TIMedWork

        A course taught by the state’s school system, based on scientific knowledge and facts.