Landfill bill gets more debate
By Stephen Oravecz
Warren Tribune Chronicle
November 30, 2005
COLUMBUS - Both sides in the debate over construction and demolition debris landfills agree there is an issue of fairness involved when it comes to exempting certain facilities from proposed rules limiting where they can be located. The question is fair to whom, the owners or the public? Or as Sen. Marc Dann, D-Liberty, put it, the special interests or the public interest?
The issue was one of several debated at a meeting Tuesday of about 40 people with some interest in a bill that would stiffen regulations on the C&DD landfills. They included industry representatives, lawmakers, citizens, local officials, regulators and an environmental group.
The Legislature is trying to pass the bill before a moratorium on new C&DD landfills expires Dec. 31.
At the meeting, Rep. Randy Law, R-Warren, proposed several changes in the current draft of the legislation, including a proposal to eliminate a grandfather clause that would exempt six or seven proposed landfills - including facilities in Girard and Hubbard Township - from the new siting regulations.
State Sen. Tom Niehaus, R-New Richmond, countered that the Legislature has a moral obligation to owners who applied for a license before the state imposed the moratorium on new facilities July 1.
Niehaus said some of those owners have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in developing the facilities, and it is not fair to require them to abide by new siting rules included in C&DD landfill bill. He said that discourages other new businesses from coming to Ohio.
Law said he agreed lawmakers have a moral obligation, but it is to the citizens who would live near the landfills, not the owners.
Anthony A. Latell Jr., a former state senator from Girard, said he wished Niehaus had looked at how fair the bill is to people who have invested millions of dollars in their homes that will lose value because of a new landfill. He said businesses also will be hurt by having a landfill nearby.
Latell said his family has tried to invest in the small city that is struggling and the bill as it stood "would take that away.'' A new Girard landfill would be located near the Latell's family business, the Creekside Golf Dome.
Law and Rep. Sandra Stabile Harwood, D-Niles, objected to the grandfather clause because it was not included in the recommendations of a special study commission that recommended the new regulations.
In the end, the bill's sponsor, Rep John Hagan R-Alliance, said he will probably stick with some form of grandfather clause.
The discussion turned bitter at times. Latell said all the changes being made seemed to favor industry, a notion that brought a rebuke from Rep. Thom Collier, R-Mount Vernon, who is chairman of the committee holding hearings on the bill.
Law said all of the owners who the grandfather clause covered submitted their applications in June when they heard the moratorium was coming. Earlier, he had asked how many landfills would be affected by the waiting period and said he was told none.
Niehaus said Dann objects to the grandfather clause because he is targeting the landfill in Girard proposed by Total Waste Logistics LLC. Ironically, Guy Fragle, director of landfill operations for the company, said the siting regulations in the current draft of the bill would not stop the proposed landfill, which would be located between the Mahoning River and the Creekside Golf Dome.
Fragle said the grandfather clause was not put into the bill to favor him.
Law also proposed increasing the buffer between the landfills and occupied dwelling from the current 500-foot proposal to 1,000. He also wanted it to cover more kinds of buildings and businesses.
Hagan said that could be a deal killer, making it impossible to pass the bill this year with an emergency clause so that it will take effect Jan. 1 when the moratorium expires.
Hagan, whose district includes a problem landfill, said there are lots of things he would like to put in the bill, but it would never pass. He said there is not a lot of leeway in getting it through the House and Senate this year.
Another proposal from Law and Harwood called for increasing the buffer between landfills and rivers from the current 100-foot proposal to 500 feet. Fragle said that distance would not affect his plans either.
Collier said the committee is likely to consider setbacks before the bill goes to the House for a vote, probably on Dec. 13. He also said lawmakers will consider a request from the industry to give a few small landfills some relief from monitoring costs. These landfills in question would be closing because they are almost full.
Warren Tribune Chronicle
November 30, 2005
COLUMBUS - Both sides in the debate over construction and demolition debris landfills agree there is an issue of fairness involved when it comes to exempting certain facilities from proposed rules limiting where they can be located. The question is fair to whom, the owners or the public? Or as Sen. Marc Dann, D-Liberty, put it, the special interests or the public interest?
The issue was one of several debated at a meeting Tuesday of about 40 people with some interest in a bill that would stiffen regulations on the C&DD landfills. They included industry representatives, lawmakers, citizens, local officials, regulators and an environmental group.
The Legislature is trying to pass the bill before a moratorium on new C&DD landfills expires Dec. 31.
At the meeting, Rep. Randy Law, R-Warren, proposed several changes in the current draft of the legislation, including a proposal to eliminate a grandfather clause that would exempt six or seven proposed landfills - including facilities in Girard and Hubbard Township - from the new siting regulations.
State Sen. Tom Niehaus, R-New Richmond, countered that the Legislature has a moral obligation to owners who applied for a license before the state imposed the moratorium on new facilities July 1.
Niehaus said some of those owners have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in developing the facilities, and it is not fair to require them to abide by new siting rules included in C&DD landfill bill. He said that discourages other new businesses from coming to Ohio.
Law said he agreed lawmakers have a moral obligation, but it is to the citizens who would live near the landfills, not the owners.
Anthony A. Latell Jr., a former state senator from Girard, said he wished Niehaus had looked at how fair the bill is to people who have invested millions of dollars in their homes that will lose value because of a new landfill. He said businesses also will be hurt by having a landfill nearby.
Latell said his family has tried to invest in the small city that is struggling and the bill as it stood "would take that away.'' A new Girard landfill would be located near the Latell's family business, the Creekside Golf Dome.
Law and Rep. Sandra Stabile Harwood, D-Niles, objected to the grandfather clause because it was not included in the recommendations of a special study commission that recommended the new regulations.
In the end, the bill's sponsor, Rep John Hagan R-Alliance, said he will probably stick with some form of grandfather clause.
The discussion turned bitter at times. Latell said all the changes being made seemed to favor industry, a notion that brought a rebuke from Rep. Thom Collier, R-Mount Vernon, who is chairman of the committee holding hearings on the bill.
Law said all of the owners who the grandfather clause covered submitted their applications in June when they heard the moratorium was coming. Earlier, he had asked how many landfills would be affected by the waiting period and said he was told none.
Niehaus said Dann objects to the grandfather clause because he is targeting the landfill in Girard proposed by Total Waste Logistics LLC. Ironically, Guy Fragle, director of landfill operations for the company, said the siting regulations in the current draft of the bill would not stop the proposed landfill, which would be located between the Mahoning River and the Creekside Golf Dome.
Fragle said the grandfather clause was not put into the bill to favor him.
Law also proposed increasing the buffer between the landfills and occupied dwelling from the current 500-foot proposal to 1,000. He also wanted it to cover more kinds of buildings and businesses.
Hagan said that could be a deal killer, making it impossible to pass the bill this year with an emergency clause so that it will take effect Jan. 1 when the moratorium expires.
Hagan, whose district includes a problem landfill, said there are lots of things he would like to put in the bill, but it would never pass. He said there is not a lot of leeway in getting it through the House and Senate this year.
Another proposal from Law and Harwood called for increasing the buffer between landfills and rivers from the current 100-foot proposal to 500 feet. Fragle said that distance would not affect his plans either.
Collier said the committee is likely to consider setbacks before the bill goes to the House for a vote, probably on Dec. 13. He also said lawmakers will consider a request from the industry to give a few small landfills some relief from monitoring costs. These landfills in question would be closing because they are almost full.
<< Home