It is hard to know where to begin in response to the Rutland Herald's editorial ("Spur deserves support," Nov. 21), which at the same time defends Omya's rail spur and attacks me and Vermonters for a Clean Environment (VCE), the organization I founded nearly 10 years ago.

While it is tempting to launch into arguments about the Omya spur proposed for Middlebury, the editorial writer's failure to consider that there might be two sides to the story leads me to offer a different response.

Over the last decade, VCE has worked on a wide variety of issues. The Rutland Herald has not called to ask what we are doing — the writer simply jumped to conclusions. Herald reporters only call to ask us about Omya, so it is perhaps logical for the editor to assume we are primarily focused on Omya. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Our current organizational goals include working on Omya as little as possible. Plenty of other projects demand our attention these days.

Development projects continue to be proposed, even in this weakening economy. Some raise community concerns, and our phone keeps ringing with Vermonters seeking assistance. Even the best projects sometimes lack good public process. VCE serves the public by guiding citizens through regulatory processes that are often as complicated for neighbors of projects as they are for businesses seeking permits. Businesses have numerous entities that offer help, from regional economic development corporations, like REDC, to Agency of Natural Resources permitting specialists, to Act 250 permit assistants and more. Citizens have very few places to turn to, and VCE has become a valuable resource for Vermonters.

Despite our best intentions to limit our work on Omya, this corporation makes a lot of demands on the communities in which it operates. VCE is assuring that the public interest is heard and addressed. Omya has plenty of boosters, from town and state officials to chambers of commerce and economic development entities. Citizens who are negatively affected by Omya and concerned about its impacts have VCE to help give them a voice in what happens in their communities.

VCE gives credit where credit is due, and we acknowledge that Omya has come a long way in how it operates, at least in the village of Florence. Omya, VCE, and others have engaged in a new way of working for the last three years; a "stakeholder" process where Omya's neighbors in Florence and Pittsford, VCE, ANR, Omya, the town of Pittsford and other interested parties meet regularly to get updates on recent test results and plans for future waste deposition. It can be difficult to sit around the table with people who disagree, but having diverse points of views can yield better results.

Omya deserves credit for continuing to engage interested parties in specific details of their Florence operations, including having scientists in whom the public has some confidence present to answer questions.

Those of us who have been engaged with Omya also deserve credit for donating an extraordinary amount of time to participating in the numerous processes that have taken place since Omya's waste disposal became an issue in 2002. While we currently have areas of disagreement, we also have a forum in which to have those discussions outside of the regulatory arena.

But our work on Omya is now a small part of what VCE does.

VCE has used this stakeholder process model to encourage businesses and opponents of a number of projects to cooperate in the hiring of independent experts. The end result is less contentious relationships, less expensive permitting processes, and healthier communities.

For example, we are currently part of a stakeholder process that we fought for more than a year to create and, like the Omya stakeholder process, came about only as a result of legislative intervention. Vermont's Departments of Health and Environmental Conservation, the Champlain Water District (Vermont's largest municipal drinking water system) and area citizens are investigating a drinking water disinfectant that appears to be making people sick. VCE is leading the effort nationally to encourage scientific testing of the disinfectant chloramine for human health effects. Both the state and EPA are funding the facilitation of this stakeholder process with $5,000 and $15,000 respectively.

We also work on groundwater protection and contamination, gravel pits and quarries and many other issues.

The Herald's editor should have had the courtesy to pick up the phone and call us if he had questions about VCE's stance on an issue. VCE is known for doing our homework and providing facts and information so people can make informed decisions. But for some reason he chose not to call. Instead, he took a cheap shot at people who are doing good work.

We would be happy to talk to the editor about not only our work but our concerns about his source of facts in the editorial — which says, for instance, that the Middlebury quarry is the source of "low-grade marble" while the final EIS says "Omya considers the Middlebury marble quarry to be a source of particularly high quality marble." At VCE we know that getting the facts right matters. And so does treating the "other side" with respect. That is just as true for newspapering as it is for advocacy.

We would be glad to write a commentary about the details of the Omya rail spur and why it has become a thorny issue. However, first we would like to finish reading the three-volume EIS. Your editor would be wise to do the same.

Annette Smith of Danby is executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment.