Befuddled by landfill rate hike reactions - Beside the Point

Posted

We just went through an emotional reaction to the Back the Blue law and the byproducts of that law that increased the Lee County Sheriff's wages 45%, which in turn spawned a 10% across the board increase for all county staff.

Supervisor Chairman Matt Pflug said he would never support a 45% wage increase for anyone, and he didn't. He voted against it with Supervisor Ron Fedler.

So I was kind of taken aback last week when supervisors gave about seven minutes to Great River Regional Waste Authority Director Austin Banks' request for $90,000 more per year, an increase of about 250%.

Pflug said that if the rates hadn't been increased in more than 15 years, which is what Banks said was the case, then we should give it some thought.

Banks told the board of the landfill's plans for additional landfill cells and a possible methane capture system as something the landfill needs to prepare for financially.

But it struck me a bit odd that it didn't seem like the supervisors looked at the landfill's books, investments, financial security, or anything else before just accepting a 250% increase. And the county doesn't pass that cost on to unincorporated households. They just pay it out of the budget.

This was a $54,000 annual cost to the county as part of its Integrated Waste Services contract where the landfill assesses a $1 per household charge to governmental agencies. Cities like Fort Madison, West Point, and the rest also pay the fee, but in most cases, they pass it on to residents through utility bills.

That fee is going from $1 per household to $2.50 per household.

We're not sure how that increase isn't meant with a bit more scrutiny by the county et.al. I've sat in on three meetings, the supervisors, the City of Fort Madison, and the City of West Point and only West Point officials questioned the increase and they did it mildly.

It almost makes me think I'm just missing something. I think that would be the best explanation, but I'm not convinced yet that it is.

Can it be assumed safely, that if former director Wade Hamm felt a wage increase in the past 15 years was necessary, or even prudent, he would have asked for it? It seems very few are shy about lobbying for additional funding these days.

I haven't seen the books either, but I would assume since there have been no reports out of the landfill office that things were getting bleak, things aren't bleak.

This is a 250% increase and we're barely blinking an eye. Yet a 45% increase for our most precious resource - our people, is fought heavily at the county level. I'm concerned about the optics of this. What does it continue to say about our people, when garbage gets a pass on a 250% increase and people have to fight for 45%.

For sure the employee increases make up a bigger portion of the county's budget, but it doesn't excuse that no one is asking any questions about this increase request. We did. We're sitting with Banks on Wednesday to talk about why the increase is needed and what GRRWA's financial situation looks like. We also want to know what the future expected costs for increase capacity and EPA regs look like.

We believe the landfill is a critical infrastructure need for the county. We're not saying in any way that keeping an efficient landfill operation isn't important. It clearly is, but maybe officials should ask to see the financial picture instead of accepting it without debate.

Banks said the landfill will have to build at least two more cells before 2030 in addition to the one just completed - adding about 18 years of space to the site with all three new cells. He said the county may also have to integrate a methane capture system in 2025 due to EPA limits on landfill methane production.

So there could be legitimate grounds for asking for the increase. But shouldn't we look closer at that financial picture instead of taking a five-minute Q&A with county officials as prudent diligence.

There are options with methane capture that could help offset the costs of that new infrastructure, but either way, there will be a cost associated with it.

Putting the numbers together from area communities including Donnellson, Montrose, Keokuk, Fort Madison, and West Point, this will likely generate more than a million dollars over the next five years and well over a million over the next eight years. Lee County alone will pay $450,000 over the next five years.

Fort Madison said they have more than 4,000 homes in the city, which will push their annual contract with GRRWA to more than $10,000 per month from the previous amount. Assuming Keokuk is comparable to Fort Madison, that's another $150,000 per year combined. At five years that's $750,000, and with the county's $450,000 you get to $1.2 million, not including the county's smaller incorporated communities.

We defer to their experience and knowledge in cell construction as to what those cells would cost to develop, and maybe that increased revenue is required to keep the landfill on the right path to continued successful operations.

The EPA methane regulations will assuredly cost the landfill more money in capture, but it still doesn't change the question of why no one is looking to see if this much an increase is warranted. Landfill officials have talked about using the methane to power landfill equipment or even possibly selling it. Worst case is they flare it off, which is a suitable mitigation for the escaping gas.

Whether the increase is warranted or not, doesn't dismiss that no one is looking deeper at the need. Could it be phased in to reduce the burden on taxpayers? Don't we owe it to taxpayers to at least take a look before just approving the increase like it's a boiler plate resolution?

The other question rolls around whether there is an option to decline the increase under the contract or not. It doesn't appear there is, but a heavier dialogue about the real need for the increase could create discussion on the landfill board to phase in the increases with a target date on the next cell construction or the one after that. Something based on need.

If the need's there, let's talk about it. If it's not...what are we doing? I guess that's Beside the Point.

Austin Banks, beside the point, Chuck Vandenberg, Great River Regional Waste Authority, GRRWA, landfill, opinion, Pen City Current

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here