Landfill decision goes to arbitrators
The fate of the area's landfill is now in the hands of three arbitrators.
Clarke County Landfill Commission and the city of Osceola presented their cases Feb. 25 on if Osceola should be allowed to withdraw from the 28E agreement presently held between the two entities for their disposal of solid waste.
The commission contends the city's withdrawal would mean an immediate closure of Clarke County Sanitary Landfill.
This closing would leave the county and other municipalities like Murray and Woodburn scrambling to find a place to dispose of their resident's waste and would trigger closure and post closure costs.
The city says the landfill doesn't necessarily have to close if tipping fees are raised.
The city's request for withdrawal came in April 2009 after the commission passed a motion to build a transfer station at the current site of the landfill. Osceola city leaders say this endeavor is too expensive and want to direct haul their waste to South Central Iowa Sanitary Landfill in Madison County.
Five witnesses – three for the county and two for the city– were called during eight hours of testimony at arbitration. Minutes from Osceola City Council and Clarke County Landfill Commission, the 28E agreement and various other documents were used as evidence for both sides.
If the city is allowed out of the agreement, arbitrators will decide when the withdrawal takes effect.
"The city's position is that we have given notice and technically we have withdrawn," said Rick McConville, the city's lawyer for arbitration. "The issue is what we need to pay and when. We believe that basically you should say we have a right to get out."
Arbitrators have until the end of April to decide if the city can withdraw.
HISTORY
The debate has been ongoing since 2007, when increased regulations called the future of the landfill into question.
Previously, landfills were allowed to line cells with clay and use tires or shredded tires on the bottom. Department of Natural Resources changed the standards to require the whole cell to be encased.
Don Reasoner, Chairman of the landfill commission, testified that these new changes were "quite costly" and the increased DNR regulations forced the landfill commission to look at other alternatives.
"The landfill was running out of space (in 2007) and we were starting to look at cell construction and what we would do from there on," he said. "We thought we had an option to buy land, but that didn't materialize."
The commission received special permission to convert an existing cell that was designed for construction and demolition waste to accept municipal waste. This would become the landfill's last cell, making the landfill's closing date December 2011.
CITY REP VOTES FOR TRANSFER STATION
Former commission member Dave Gorsline testified he represented the city of Osceola on the board for nearly a year when he voted to move forward with a transfer station in May 2008.
Three presentations were then given to the public about the transfer station, one at the request of the city.
Bids were taken for the construction of the transfer station and accepted in a September meeting in 2008. Gorsline made the motion to accept the low bid and proceed.
McConville questioned why Gorsline would vote for this if he thought there was a possibility the city didn't want it or was looking at other options.
Gorsline said he was never formally told by city council they didn't want the transfer station and had attended many city council meetings to discuss the landfill's progress.
"There was conversation in the air about the city being undecided about what would be the best choice," he said. "But I had no information that they were against transfer station."
Later he added, "We were looking at all the options. (The city) was looking out for the best interest of the community, as well as we were."
Gorsline said he based decision not just as a representative of the city, but what was best for the community.
Throughout the decision making process, Gorsline said he attempted to speak with Osceola's City Administrator Bill Kelly and city representatives about how he should vote. He never received a clear answer and said Kelly was "basically non-committal" in any decision.
"At that point, I had made three attempts to get communication or guidance from Kelly and I got none," he said. "I just had to operate on the information I had before me. It wasn't just the city we were concerned with. It was the cities of Woodburn, Murray and the people living in county to have a place to deposit their waste. I was afraid we were leaving them out on a limb."
Kelly testified he didn't have the authority to give any guidance and the city was in the process of investigating what would be best for Osceola at this time.
"The council really started to get concerned when they saw the first estimates for the proposed transfer station and it was around a million dollars, I think," Kelly said. "The council was unanimous that that was a lot of money."
MORE REPRESENTATION
A letter from Osceola Mayor Fred Diehl was sent to the commission after they decided to proceed with a transfer station. It requested the commission amend their bylaws to allow additional city representatives on the landfill board.
This request was denied.
"I thought that our existing landfill commission was adequate," Reasoner said. "The commission considered the request and everyone voted it wasn't necessary, except the city voted in favor of it."
James Kimball, who replaced Gorsline on the commission, said the city felt it was only fair to have more representatives on the board since Osceola contributed over 50 percent of the landfill's waste.
"We were really disappointed with the commission that we had one vote out of five," he said. "It was quite apparent that they were voting as a block against us. It didn't make any difference how we voted, they were going to do what they were going to do."
DIRECT HAUL
After the city told the commission of their intent to withdraw from the 28E agreement, the commission canceled construction on the proposed transfer station.
"We had no choice," said Gorsline. "We had to notify bidders we were canceling the action because knew the city was going to pull out."
A penalty of $11,000 was paid for the county to get out of the contract.
A motion was then made in October 2008 commission meeting for all entities in Clarke County to direct haul their waste to the same landfill the city was planning to use.
"We were running out of room and a decision needed to be made fast," Reasoner said about the decision.
The city didn't participate in this vote, which confused commission and led them to believe that wasn't what the city wanted.
City leaders say this wasn't the case.
"We hoped that everyone could go (to Madison County) because it would make more sense to do it as a community," Kimball said.
"They shouldn't have been confused," said McConville. "It was (the city's) position to continue with Winterset whether (the city) voted for it or not. You told them time and time again that's what you wanted."
Although the motion passed, a contract was never drawn up with the Madison County landfill.
WITHDRAWAL DATE
Osceola still plans to join the landfill in Madison County if the city can withdraw from their current agreement.
Kimball said the city doesn't have a written contract with the facility, but they have a "verbal commitment" to the Madison County landfill.
The commission's lawyer Jim Brick of Brick Gentry Law argued Iowa Code mandates every municipality has to belong to either a comprehensive plan or a 28E agreement and only deposit waste in that designated landfill.
"To do otherwise is a violation of the law," he said.
Kelly said the city intends to enter a 28E agreement with South Central Iowa Landfill, but was waiting until the arbitrators made a decision.
A major issue that will be determined by arbitrators is if the city can legally withdraw from the 28E agreement, when does their withdrawal go into effect?
Brick gave these dates for consideration: April 21, 2009, the day the city signed a resolution to withdraw; June 2010, the month the last $40,000 bond payment is due; Nov. 1, 2010, the day the original comprehensive plan was to expire for the landfill; and Dec. 31, 2011, the current closing date of the landfill.
Brick stated Iowa code stipulates no one can withdraw at the detriment of any bonds.
CLOSING COSTS
At the time the landfill closes, closure and post closure costs are due. These are estimated to be $224,00 for closure and $680,000 for post closure of cells one through six.
These figures aren't fully funded to date.
In post closure, DNR requires the landfill be monitored for up to 30 years. January financial statements show the account has an estimated $488,000 set aside for these costs.
Commission representatives say Osceola's withdrawal will result in a huge loss of revenue and the landfill would have to close.
"It's no longer viable if Osceola leaves," said Tim Buelow of Barker Lemar Engineering Consultants. "(The commission) would be out the revenue by half without decreasing operating costs. It just wouldn't be cost effective."
Kelly argued that the landfill could survive.
"They could theoretically still operate, but they would have to raise the tipping fees and they would be the highest tipping fees you've seen outside of America, except for Europe," he said.
COMMUNICATION
Also under attack at the arbitration was how well the city and commission communicated.
"We always had a very good working relationship with the city until the past year when we got into this discussion about closing the landfill," Reasoner said.
Osceola City Council also felt there was a lapse in communication, which led them to their decision.
"We couldn't get any communication from them that was meaningful, and we felt as a council our only option was to withdraw," Kimball said."Osceola is paying out a lot of money to take care of the landfill. We hoped they would recognize that they ought to talk to us and give us recognition that we are a big source of their money stream."
