| Minutes: | Joint Sunset Committee Meeting (JSC)
Thursday, February 19, 2004
House Hearing Room, 2:00 p.m.
Delaware Solid Waste Authority Public Hearing
Meeting Minutes ______________________________________________________________________________
Attendees:
JSC and Staff: Rep. Ulbrich, Chair; Sen. McBride, Vice-Chair; Rep. Hudson; Rep. Schwartzkopf; Rep. Valihura; Rep. Viola; Sen. Copeland; Sen. Peterson; Sen. Sokola; Lisa Schieffert, JSC Analyst; Walt Feindt, Deputy Director, Div. of Research; Judi Abbott, Secretary
Absent: Sen. Bonini
From DSWA: Richard Pryor, Chair; Ron McCabe, Vice-Chair; N.C. Vasuki, CEO; P.S. Canzano, COO; Thomas Houska, Chief of Administrative Services; Michael Parkowski, Legal Counsel; Toby Ryan, Board Member; Timothy Sheldon, Board Member; Danny Aguilar; Richard Watson; Willie G. Brown; Logan Miller; Lois Dowty; LuAnn Baker; Marsha Anthony; Rich Von Sutton; June Peacock; Anne Germain; Rick Thomas; Joe Kosciuszko; Jim Daimus; Virginia Greamer; Shelly Schmekl; Jodie Sleva; Libby Kelly; Pam Williamson; Steve Hicks; Wendy Bates.
From the Public: John Flaherty, Common Cause; Maryanne McGonegal, Common Cause; Dick Bewick, Sierra Club; Joe Pust; Christine Whitehead, Civic League for New Castle County; Michael W. McGrath, Town of Belle Fonte Commissioners; Cindi Anker; John M. Kearney, Clean Air Council; June Macartor; Mike Prother; Alan Muller, Green Delaware; Kim Siegel, Legislative Fellow; Hilary Corrigan, Delaware State News; Kim Bodine, Wood, Bryd & Associates; Dana Garrett, Green Party; John Atkeison, Green Party; Neenah Estrella-Luna, Public Health Consultant; Nancy C. Marker, DNREC; Jim Short, DNREC; Bruce Cabo.
Agenda
I. Overview of the Sunset Process
II. Opening Comments
III. Question and Answer
IV. Public Comments
V. Concluding Remarks
VI. Adjournment
Rep. Ulbrich called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m.
Rep. Ulbrich welcomed everyone and asked for JSC introductions. She provided a brief overview of the Sunset review process. She mentioned the Delaware Solid Waste Authority (DSWA) was suggested for sunset review by a few people last spring and since the DSWA’s last review was in 1993, it was appropriate to review the agency this year. Rep. Ulbrich emphasized that the public hearing was an opportunity to discuss issues of concern.
Sen. McBride said he received requests from legislators and the public regarding an additional meeting.
Rep. Hudson received e-mails accusing the JSC of “meeting in the dark.” She said Sunset hearings for the following week were scheduled at the same time and place. The JSC would schedule additional meetings as necessary.
Rep. Valihura said the DSWA is one of the more active Sunset reviews, but it has been done professionally and dignified, and in an open manner. Being accused of operating in the dark is unjustified.
Mr. Pryor began his presentation by thanking the JSC for the opportunity to appear and dialogue. He introduced Mr. N.C. Vasuki, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Ryan, Mr. Sheldon, and Mr. Parkowski.
Highlights from Mr. Pryor’s testimony include:
· DSWA has complied with the JSC’s 1993 Sunset recommendations.
· User fees have been held constant for 11 years.
· Prior to 1990 and the enactment of SB 424, there was not much interest in a sustainable curbside recycling program. Now there is a renewed interest in curbside recycling. DSWA, DNREC, and RPAC will produce a detailed report describing the most effective recycling system for Delaware.
· Delaware’s Recycling Rate, according to Franklin and Associates, is 22%.
· DSWA became debt free in April 2003.
· Some impediments facing DSWA include: landfill improvements and expansion; landfill gas capture; costs of landfill avoidance programs; DSWA cannot use non-recyclables as a fuel source for energy production; DSWA operates in a fiercely competitive market.
Sen. Peterson asked for an explanation of the 1994 Statewide Solid Waste Management Plan’s 35% household solid waste discard goal and the 13% residential solid waste diversion rate mentioned in the draft report.
Mr. Vasuki explained the Franklin Report’s 22% recycling rate. The Franklin Report uses the EPA standard.
Mr. Pryor added there is a difference between residential and commercial solid waste.
Sen. Peterson asked if there was a difference between residential and household solid waste.
Mr. Vasuki said no. Yard waste is not included in the 13%. 80,000 tons of yard waste is diverted in the state. If you consider that, than the recycling numbers go up.
Sen. Peterson asked if the correct number was 28% including residential, commercial and yard waste. Mr. Vasuki said it was 22%.
Rep. Hudson said 22% is better than 13% but no where near the 35% goal. She asked for comment on how to achieve 35%.
Mr. Vasuki said a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) and the Recycling Public Advisory Council (RPAC) will consider what is available for recycling, what can be collected, and how it can be collected. The report will reveal what is workable in the State.
Rep. Ulbrich asked when the report would be completed. Mr. Vasuki said 120 days or probably in June.
Rep. Hudson asked how the DSWA recovers the $3.7 million loss of revenue in recycling. Mr. Vasuki responded there is a certain amount allocated for recycling in the user fees. That pays for any loss in the recycling market. Bonds pay for capital projects.
Rep. Hudson asked how the General Assembly could encourage young people to recycle. She has had a lot of interest from citizens in the past year concerning recycling efforts.
Mr. Parkowski mentioned DNREC and RPAC are researching mandatory curbside recycling programs across the country. There will be an analysis of what can be done and an indication of necessary legislative authority to implement the program. Mr. Parkowski also mentioned the DNREC/RPAC report, at some point, will go through the public review process.
Mr. Parkowski noted a preliminary study on systems across the country has been conducted. Delaware is very unique because things can be done on a statewide basis. Other states have a tendency to enact laws mandating recycling for municipalities and counties or other political subdivisions. The costs are absorbed by the state through grants or, the most prevailing way is to tax property owners. Models seen throughout the country require a subsidy. The real mystery is to unravel the cost.
Following discussion on recycling costs, Rep. Valihura and Mr. Parkowski discussed at length various provisions in the Code pertaining to DSWA’s powers.
Rep. Valihura read the purpose of the chapter, which says that, “a program of maximum recovery and reuse of materials and energy resources derived from solid waste be established.” Rep. Valihura did not think there is a maximum recovery of recyclable materials.
Mr. Parkowski agreed. Most programs achieve about 30%. DSWA has a 35% goal. RPAC has a 30% goal. To get that, a comprehensive program is needed along with the statutory authority to implement it.
Rep. Valihura went on to read, “The Authority controls through regulation or otherwise, the collection, transportation, storage and disposals of solid waste, including the diversion of solid waste, within specified geographic areas to facilities owned, operated and controlled by the Authority.” He asked if this sentence provided the authority to mandate recycling.
Mr. Parkowski responded the Carbone decision found that the Commerce Clause was violated by the very same exercise of authority just quoted. Carbone said any attempt to control flow, exercised by the DSWA, is unconstitutional. To deal with the issue, most entities have converted to a general taxing approach. Carbone prevents the DSWA from having the broad sweep of powers suggested by Delaware Code language. He is certain of that because Delaware collectors filed a class action lawsuit 6 or 7 years ago challenging DSWA’s system. The case was litigated and settled.
Rep. Valihura asked if Carbon prohibits DSWA from telling people to put their trash in various piles before collection. Mr. Parkowski said he was responding to the provision that says the DSWA has the ability to direct where the waste goes and set the necessary fees. Rep. Valihura reads the language to mean the DSWA has the authority to impose mandatory recycling.
Mr. Parkowski disagreed. He said one thing to remember is telling people to separate their materials is not enough. The totality of the collection system should be considered. His opinion is the system is incomplete to effectively accomplish a mandatory curbside program. Legislation is needed to complete the circuit.
Rep. Valihura asked if Mr. Parkowski’s opinion had been communicated to the DSWA. Mr. Parkowski said the question he has been asked is, “What do we need to do to have an effective program?” His answer has been legislation.
Sen. Peterson asked if tipping fees could be raised to cover recycling program costs.
Mr. Parkowski said since Carbone, DSWA has had to utilize contractual removal control, called the Differential Disposal Fee Program in which collectors agree to use DSWA facilities exclusively and in return, DSWA provides them with an annual rebate. The rebate is different depending on the area—it’s $2.50 more per ton in New Castle County. Large collectors would take their waste elsewhere if the fee was increased and the DSWA would not be able to support its infrastructure.
Sen. Peterson asked why waste couldn’t be shipped out of state. Mr. Parkowski explained the short term gain is not worth becoming the victim of waste hauling companies. There is a ban preventing out of state waste from DSWA landfills. The idea is that a more stable system is in place in Delaware because it takes care of its own waste and has not been subject to fluctuations of the national marketplace.
Mr. Vasuki added truck traffic increases when states start exporting their waste to other states. NYC exports over 10,000 tons a day to Virginia.
Sen. Peterson asked if there was some legal reason why tipping fees could not be increased. Mr. Parkowski said no. Mr. Pryor said it could be done but the issue is the economic consequences. Mr. Parkowski also mentioned tipping fees may not continue to be held constant. DSWA currently has zero debt but they will have to incur debt to upgrade landfills and support other programs.
Sen. Peterson said if one landfill is filled later because of recycling, then money wouldn’t need to be spent as quickly. Mr. Parkowski said a 30%-35% recycling rate will only reduce the materials going to the landfill by 12%-13%.
Sen. Peterson asked again if there was any reason why tipping fees could not be increased to cover recycling costs. Mr. Parkowski reiterated raising tipping fees would undermine the ability of the DSWA to operate, including operating recycling programs. This is not the first time someone has suggested raising tipping fees. The nature of the competition in Delaware is that there are two private haulers collecting 90% of all privately generated waste in the State.
Sen. Peterson said the report shows 50%. Mr. Parkowski clarified it is 90% of privately collected, if taking out the municipally collected waste. Sen. Peterson asked if the private haulers would go out of state if tipping fees increased. Mr. Parkowski said they own the out of state landfills but right now, it is cheaper for them to stay in Delaware.
Mr. Parkowski added the Recycle Delaware program is loosing $3.8 million a year and that is a very simple, voluntary program without a lot of cost and there is a clean product. DSWA has loaded on other programs but if too much is added it will break economically.
Rep. Ulbrich asked if organizations similar to DSWA are totally self-sufficient. Mr. Parkowski replied solid waste disposal in other states is generally municipal and is subsidized through taxes. In places where municipalities do not provide the service, they contract for it, pay the bill, and then charge the individual property owner. Dover formed a district. The county lets a contract, one collector collects trash twice a week, and then households pay the fee through their tax bill. Outside of Dover, homeowners hire their own collection company and pay fees the companies charge. Mr. Vasuki provided two other examples of property assessments, one in Montgomery County, Maryland and the other in Palm Beach County, Florida.
Rep. Ulbrich asked if it was more commonplace for there to be an assessment. Mr. Vasuki said yes.
Rep. Hudson asked for the life of the Cherry Island Landfill without repairs and expansion. Mr. Pryor said there is an absolute life of the present cells that are usable. In 7 or 8 years, the Army Corps. of Engineers, which is using DSWA land for depositing their dredge spoils, will exhaust the capacity for that, and 10 years down the line, the land will come back on line. This puts it at 2007 or 2008. Then there is a period of waiting for the Army Corp. cell to come back.
Mr. Vasuki said assuming there is no growth in New Castle County, Cherry Island will reach its limits under the current design by the end of 2006. Rep. Hudson asked if their goal was to make changes before 2006.
Rep. Valihura asked for clarification—was it the design or the permit? Mr. Vasuki said it is the design. The permit would allow a height of 175 feet.
Sen. McBride mentioned the Reclamation Center at Pigeon Point, the 1994 Solid Waste Management Plan, and several other DSWA related activities. Sen. McBride thought a change in direction was necessary. He asked if Mr. Vasuki thought recycling was working in Delaware. Mr. Vasuki responded voluntary recycling in Delaware is working better than anywhere else in the country. Those who want to recycle do. The problem is those who don’t want to do it.
Sen. McBride recalled a presentation at another meeting where Mr. Canzano said 20% of people would not participate in recycling. Mr. Vasuki said opinion surveys indicate 15% to 20% would not recycle under any circumstances.
Mr. Vasuki said their goal has been to encourage more people to recycle on a voluntary basis. The contamination rate is low with voluntary recycling. With mandatory recycling the contamination rate goes up. He added, in some states, garbage police look at bins to see whether people recycle. Recycling rates are high initially and then drop off. This was the case in Seattle, which then began imposing fines on homeowners and businesses if they did not recycle.
Sen. McBride asked if a policy change concerning recycling was necessary. Mr. Vasuki said it was necessary to find a funding mechanism to support a recycling program.
Sen. McBride asked if Mr. Vasuki supported mandatory recycling. Mr. Vasuki said yes, if a source of revenue and a source of enforcement are built into the mandate. Sen. McBride then asked if mandatory recycling would increase recycling percentages. Mr. Vasuki replied somewhat.
Sen. McBride asked Mr. Vasuki to discuss banning yard waste. Mr. Vasuki said yard waste is part of the recycling mix, but it needs to be diverted somewhere. Mr. Pryor added
8 or 9 years ago, DSWA tried to find a site where yard waste could be diverted, but that became practically and politically unpopular. Composting smells more than landfills. Sen. McBride agreed. Mr. Vasuki noted Seattle charges $3.50 to pick up yard waste. The 650 subscribers to DSWA’s voluntary recycling program in Brandywine Hundred pay $6.00/month for recycling and $3.00 more for yard waste. DSWA surveys say 95% are happy with that set up. DSWA does not break even on the program but could if 10,000 or 20,000 people participated.
In Sen. McBride’s opinion, the DSWA is not impeding recycling, rather encouraging it. However, recycling is not where it should be. A radical change in policy is needed and he is looking to the DSWA for guidance and suggestions.
Mr. Vasuki reiterated the MOA between DNREC and RPAC will outline necessary changes to law. Rep. Ulbrich clarified the report’s June deadline.
Sen. Copeland inquired about Pay as You Throw (PAYT) systems. Mr. Vasuki said PAYT systems work when there is a municipality controlling waste collection. The City of Dover has a PAYT system. Customers get a 96 gallon container. If they want a second one, they have to pay more. DSWA cannot implement such a system with the current mix of private/public collection.
Sen. Copeland thought the DSWA has the regulatory authority to tell private haulers how to function. Mr. Parkowski said several attempts have been made, not necessarily by DSWA, to disrupt the current private collection system and the collection industry has indicated they like the way things are operating now. He added the DSWA could get involved in the collection business. The question of whether to use our manpower is a big issue. DSWA’s enabling legislation directed it to use the private sector to the extent possible.
Sen. Copeland said statutory language provides DSWA with the authority over collection, not necessarily directing DSWA to do the collection. DSWA could require private haulers to run systems under DSWA regulatory approval; therefore charge for a second can.
Mr. Parkowski responded the Carbone decision made that type of control unconstitutional. Sen. Copeland said mandating the collection method does not necessarily imply mandating a delivery source of that collection method. Sen. Copeland thought the PAYT system would be an incentive mechanism for the 20% of the population who said they would not recycle.
Mr. Parkowski indicated the DSWA could not control the economics of the private collection business. A PAYT system would require DSWA to do that. It works best when there is a common control of collecting both trash and money.
Sen. Copeland asked if Mr. Parkowski’s position was that current Code language would be found unconstitutional if challenged. Mr. Parkowski said the existing statute does not allow DSWA to tell the collectors how to treat their customers and how to charge for it.
Mr. Parkowski discussed some lessons of the past related to trash collection districts. He said Kent County’s collection system is more an anomaly. One collector in the district is more cost effective than allowing 15 different competitors. But the political will to adopt this system has not been present.
Rep. Valihura asked to clarify “political will”. Mr. Parkowski said DSWA “doesn’t have a dog in that fight”. Mr. Vasuki said there could be a mandate to impose rules but without enforcement, it is meaningless.
Rep. Valihura noted DSWA has no long term debt and asked if now would be the appropriate time to do something. Mr. Vasuki said yes. Rep. Valihura asked for the operating costs of Cherry Island Landfill if it were shut down today. Mr. Vasuki said Pigeon Point costs $300,000 a year to maintain. Cherry Island would require about 35 years of continuous care because it is a young landfill and has a lot of degradable material in it.
Rep. Valihura and Mr. Vasuki then dialogued about where haulers would take their trash if Delaware closed its landfills. Rep. Valihura noted Morgantown, PA would probably be the first place. Mr. Vasuki thought maybe Virginia. Rep. Valihura pointed out Mr. Parkowski’s statement that hauling Delaware’s trash out-of-state could risk changing the fee structure.
Rep. Valihura said he did not support hauling Delaware’s trash out-of-state. Another concern is siting a new landfill. Mr. Vasuki said the only locations are below the canal where 500-600 acres of land could be acquired. In Mr. Vasuki’s opinion, it could take 10-15 years to find a site and that comes with political problems. Rep. Valihura clarified 10 to 15 years to find a site and get it ready for use.
Rep. Valihura asked for other options. Mr. Vasuki said it was prudent policy to expand the existing facility and simultaneously look at options to reduce what is going to the landfill. Mandatory recycling will help but adopting other technology such as waste-to-energy, or anaerobic digestion, or large scale composting would really help reduce waste going to landfills.
Rep. Valihura inquired about the composting site by Cherry Island. Mr. Vasuki said material is shredded and stored there but not really composted. DSWA would need over 300 acres for composting. Rep. Valihura asked if the material could be shipped out of state. Mr. Vasuki said yes, but it has to be separated first. Mr. Vasuki said farmers are accepting yard waste in Delaware. He also pointed out the garbage collectors have no economic incentive to bring yard waste to DSWA. They have to charge extra to separate it and take it elsewhere.
Sen. Sokola was on the JSC when the DSWA was last reviewed in 1993. Recycling was also an issue back then. Sen. Sokola said the DSWA’s response to recycling is usually, “if revenue, if revenue”. He recognized the cost of other options: waste to energy capital costs would be $200 million; Cherry Island expansion would be $66 million; $300,000 to maintain Pigeon Point and significantly more for maintaining Cherry Island once closed. Sen. Sokola suggested DSWA reconsider their fees.
Mr. Vasuki said there hasn’t been an incentive to raise rates.
Sen. Sokola noted, during the last Sunset review, DSWA said there was little interest in mandatory recycling and that was why DSWA went with the Recycle Delaware program. Sen. Sokola thought there was interest in mandatory recycling, but many who supported it were willing to let the Recycle Delaware option have its chance. It’s done well but more needs to be done. Mr. Vasuki agreed.
Sen. Peterson mentioned another option is to tell existing haulers to separate their trash before bringing it to the landfills. Mr. Parkowski said haulers may have to find an alternate place for disposal if the trash was not separated. This would cost the haulers more. Sen. Peterson said customers would separate trash or else it would not be picked up.
Mr. Parkowski said DSWA does not have the comprehensive authority to tell homeowners how to segregate their trash and place it at the curbside. Legislation is needed to do that.
Mr. Parkowski said when DSWA was created, it was intended to be an entity that dealt waste disposal--it can license haulers, operate landfills and other facilities. Code language regarding collection does not suggest control over individual households.
Sen. Peterson asked if DSWA had the ability to say, “don’t bring it in unless you separate it”. Mr. Parkowski said yes, but when the homeowner does not separate their trash, then there is a crisis because the haulers need to dispose of it elsewhere.
Sen. Peterson said she would like to see more energy put into making recycling happen as opposed to throwing up roadblocks. Mr. Parkowski responded the June report would lay everything on the table. He said he would propose something that works and provide legislation that fits whatever model is considered by DNREC, RPAC, and DSWA to work in Delaware.
Sen. McBride said part of DSWA’s role is to manage solid waste and solve solid waste management problems. He suggested DSWA bring a package of legislation in June when the DNREC/RPAC report comes to the Legislature.
Sen. McBride suggested DSWA sell collection districts like they sell their other programs. Districts would reduce costs for constituents. Mr. Vasuki said a proposal to create districts was developed four years ago but there was no support from the Governor.
Mr. Vasuki responded to Sen. Sokola’s earlier comment regarding costs. DSWA has controlled costs—about 2% over the estimated consumption costs.
Sen. McBride said his frustration, which he shares with many of his constituents, is that there are so many haulers in his neighborhood. Mr. Vasuki said there are roughly 40 small businesses in garbage collection so there would be an impact on those businesses if the collection system changed.
Sen. McBride said the role of the DSWA is to bring legislation to the General Assembly, even if there is no support. Mr. Vasuki said he has done that many times.
Sen. McBride asked about the landfills in Delaware. Kent County’s landfill has over 60 years of life remaining. He asked if that landfill could be used.
Mr. Vasuki said Kent County receives 130,000 tons of trash each year. New Castle County’s waste adds another 600,000 tons. Sen. McBride said some of New Castle County’s waste would be reduced before it was moved. Mr. Vasuki said air quality standards limit the amount of waste movement. Transfer stations have been built to reduce the total number of trucks on the road, which has had a measurable improvement on air quality.
Sen. McBride asked if land along the Canal had been explored as a landfill site. Mr. Vasuki said that was the first landfill site selected in 1978. DSWA considered 700 acres of land where the Veterans Cemetery now stands.
Sen. McBride asked if legislation will accompany the June report. Mr. Vasuki said yes, part of the package is to develop legislation accomplishing whatever is selected to be the most ideal system. The proposal will be subject to public scrutiny.
Sen. McBride asked for comments regarding waste to energy (WTE). Mr. Vasuki explained WTE is one of the world’s most reliable systems to reduce landfill waste, even after recycling. Lee County, Florida, had a landfill problem in 1989/1990. They proposed building a WTE. There was opposition but the county commissioners decided to build it. Later, the plant expanded with little opposition from the public. Had Lee County not built the plant they would have transported 500,000 tons to another landfill elsewhere. Lancaster and York Counties in Pennsylvania also have WTEs.
Mr. Pryor added all three counties in those examples have aggressive recycling programs. Mr. Vasuki said they also have property assessments. Rep. Hudson asked if recycling was voluntary. Mr. Vasuki thought mandatory.
Rep. Viola asked if Delaware accepts out of state trash. Mr. Vasuki said no. Mr. Parkowski said there is a statutory ban against it.
Sen. McBride mentioned electronic goods. Mr. Parkowski said there is an exemption to the ban for recyclable materials, such as electronic goods, for economic reasons. He added landfills have to be policed sometimes to keep out-of-state trash from being disposed in Delaware.
Mr. Viola asked if Mr. Parkowski was referring to the two big haulers. Mr. Parkowski said it is the small haulers operating in both PA and DE.
Rep. Viola commended DSWA for holding tipping fees constant. His problem was with the haulers who collect trash at the same time and same price range, but the difference between what he may be paying and what his neighbor pays may be over $20.
Mr. Parkowski said there are no price controls on the hauler business. He pays $13 a month for twice weekly collection in Kent County; outside of that it’s $20-$25. The other side to districting is the impact on small businesses. Big companies initially could undercut small ones. Comprehensive districting poses a real threat that the whole collection business will change.
Sen. Copeland asked if it was possible to increase the price of waste disposal in Delaware to a price where a hauler would be ambivalent to dumping in state or out-of-state, or slightly above that so that they would take the trash out of state. As a result, Cherry Island would not need to be expanded.
Mr. Parkowski said it is difficult to set price controls. DSWA adopted a system of economic flow control through exclusive five-year contracts, with a fixed price, so that marketplace swings can be avoided. This set up allows for stability and certainty for both DSWA and the collectors signing the agreement.
Sen. Copeland was not suggesting altering day to day disposal. He suggested reviewing disposal costs and adjusting numbers on a quarterly or semi-annual basis, to mitigate wild cost swings, yet allow market economics to play a role. Exclusive contracts lock DSWA into a monopolistic arena.
Mr. Parkowski thought there were too few competitors for Sen. Copeland’s suggestion to work. BFI, the landfill owner, gets into business plans with varying managements and sometimes disregards local market price conditions.
Mr. Parkowski explained DSWA has a landfill issue to deal with but the collection system is stable for those using it. He also mentioned Delaware is often viewed nationally, as a model.
Mr. Parkowski went on to say DSWA’s system has captured the major players and entered into long term contracts with them, which helps the consumer and assures DSWA will be able to cover their budget. DSWA has an A+ bond rating and although there is no debt now, there will be some soon because the landfills need work.
Mr. Pryor commented on the efficiency of the trucks. They are in and out in 10-13 minutes which is not the case with landfills over the line. He also mentioned Cherry Island. The Board may make a policy decision expending dollars for two or three generations. In his opinion they would still be saving money but would have some built in costs for stabilizing and so forth.
Rep. Valihura asked if mandatory recycling legislation had ever been brought before the General Assembly. Mr. Vasuki said this would be the first. Rep. Valihura asked why. Mr. Vasuki said he approached past Governors to see if there was support and there was none.
Public Comments
Rep. Ulbrich opened discussion to the public. She noted the record remains open and there would be another meeting during the evening hours. The meeting would be open to the public.
Sen. McBride asked that questions be sent to him or Lisa and maybe other committee members. Rep. Ulbrich said staff would direct questions to all committee members and the DSWA.
Mr. McGrath, President of the Town of Bellefonte Commissions and member of the Fox Point Civic Association Environmental Group, expressed concerns with Cherry Island odors. He and a small group met with DSWA and DNREC regarding the odors, but he did not think the agencies were finding solutions. Mr. McGrath mentioned everyone in his community is willing to entertain mandatory recycling. Mr. McGrath thinks DSWA is in a crisis and encouraged the JSC to take a very tough stance with them.
Rep. Ulbrich thanked Mr. McGrath. She asked that speakers following Mr. McGrath make an effort to avoid redundancy. Rep. Valihura suggested speakers keep the topic to the DSWA.
Mr. Kearney introduced himself as a staff attorney with Clean Air Council in Philadelphia and Director of the Clean Air Council in Delaware. Clean Air Council is a non-profit environmental group supported by its members. Clean Air Council was established in 1967 and has over 7,000 members in Delaware and Pennsylvania.
Mr. Kearney said DSWA already has the authority to do mandatory recycling. He suggested the JSC legislatively mandate recycling, ban yard waste from the landfills, and increase tipping fees. He did not think incineration should be an option because of dioxin, a toxic substance, which is emitted from WTE stacks and found in leftover ash. Mr. Kearney urged the JSC to hold hearings in Wilmington where there are 35,000 people within a two mile radius of Cherry Island, 62% of whom are African-American. He also had concerns with odors.
Ms. McGonegal circulated a letter from Common Cause outlining their concerns with the DSWA. She said she supported Mr. Kearney and Green Delaware and the others who have asked for additional public hearings. Common Cause asked for responses to the following:
· Board member length of service. One has served since 1975; two since 1979; one since 1989 and one since 1997. The two most recent additions were a result of one member’s death and another moving out of state.
· Analysis of travel expenses. A 1998 trip to New Zealand cost $42,000. This information should be open to the public for at least the past five years.
· DSWA’s adherence to a nonpublic status. DSWA’s website says, “though created by the State of Delaware in 1975, the DSWA is not a state agency.”
· Promotion of incineration on its website. This issue was settled by the General Assembly. Common Cause views with alarm the DSWA’s defiance of the laws of Delaware.
· DSWA has not updated its Statewide Solid Waste Management Plan since 1994. Common Cause thinks the Plan should be updated to reflect new waste management practices including mandatory recycling. Common Cause asked the JSC to require an explanation from the DSWA regarding their lack of action on mandatory recycling.
· Analysis of legal fees paid by DSWA to what firm and for what purposes.
· An explanation of the Cherry Island Landfill expansion and explain why public hearings were scheduled after public outcry and then scheduled at the same time.
Common Cause suggested the JSC actively seek public input especially from environmental and good government groups.
Mr. Bewick is the Conservation Chair of the Sierra Club. He thought mandatory statewide recycling, along with banning yard waste and other recoverable materials, is essential to reducing landfill usage. He mentioned a recent RPAC meeting in which a resolution was passed by a 6-1 vote to implement a 30% residential solid waste diversion rate. DSWA voted no. He is concerned there is not an adequate facility for proper handling of recyclables and has concerns with plans to harvest energy from methane production in Kent and Sussex Counties. He mentioned DSWA may not be following the Administrative Procedures Act.
The Sierra Club recommends the JSC consider:
· Either consolidating DSWA into DNREC or convert DSWA into a separate state agency.
· Require the revised agency produce a plan with a specified diversion rate, collection, recycling, and disposal of solid waste that will function for future generations.
· Create an advisory group or subgroups for each county, made up of Delaware citizens, industry and local government to work with DNREC or the agency.
· Quality of life issues. Delaware should be kept clean in the most effective way possible without abusing taxpayers.
Sen. McBride asked Mr. Bewick to repeat the RPAC vote. Mr. Bewick said RPAC’s proposal was to divert 30% of waste from landfill by July, 2007. It passed by a vote of 6 yes, DSWA voting no, and two abstained (one from DNREC and one from the Chair).
Sen. McBride asked why DSWA voted no. Mr. Vasuki said because the MOA report is not completed.
Ms. Luna is a public health professional and advocate. She serves as the Director of the Urban Health and Environmental Learning Project. She provided a letter to the JSC from the community she represents.
Ms. Luna’s main concern was the location and time of DSWA public hearing. She encouraged another meeting in Wilmington. Other concerns included the lack of public involvement in the Cherry Island expansion. The expansion affects 35,000 people, 80% of whom are African-Americans and additional 5% are Hispanic. Thirty-five percent are children under 18. There are health and quality of life issues that need to be addressed. She does not favor waste incineration.
Mr. Garret supports mandatory recycling so future generations will not have to deal with the same problems.
Mr. Muller represented Green Delaware. He began his testimony with issues specifically concerning the Joint Sunset Committee. At this point, Rep. Valihura asked for a motion to restrict Mr. Muller’s comments to the DSWA. By hand vote, 7 voted in favor of the motion(Reps. Ulbrich, Valihura, Hudson, Viola, Schwartzkopf; Sens. Copeland and Peterson); 2 voted against (Sens. McBride and Sokola); one absent (Sen. Bonini).
Mr. Muller discussed incineration in Delaware including the controversy leading to the incineration ban. He thought the JSC should listen to other points of view when evaluating the DSWA.
Rep. Hudson asked why Mr. Muller put her name on a website as an advocate for incineration. She has not gone on record advocating anything. The visit to the incinerator was part of an effort to educate herself so she could better understand the issues.
Rep. Ulbrich noted some of the JSC toured a landfill and an incinerator not to advocate for any one method of waste management, rather the group was doing their homework to fulfill the JSC’s responsibilities.
Rep. Viola noted his name was on the bill banning incineration and he attended meetings with the public when that bill was being considered.
Rep. Ulbrich thanked the Committee members, staff, and those who attended the hearing. She reminded everyone the record would remain open. She mentioned the Sunset reports and other related information are on the JSC’s website.
Sen. McBride asked when the second meeting for the DSWA would be scheduled. Rep. Ulbrich said during executive session following adjournment of the hearing. Sen. McBride added the website provides staff’s contact information, so if people cannot access the information they need, he should be notified.
Rep. Ulbrich adjourned the meeting at 5:20 p.m. and the JSC entered executive session.
DMS #1441420155 |