Trash Talk Dominates City Council Meeting

Contentious Meeting Results in Fee Rejection

By Doug Dalager

Trash Talk Permeates City Hall

By a vote of 6 to 4, the Superior City Council tonight voted down a proposed ordinance that would have added a $9.75 per month garbage fee for residential and small commercial premises beginning January 1, 2016.

After a long presentation by City officials, leading up to a sometimes raucous debate between councilors, capped off by spirited disapproval by several citizens, the City Council turned away an attempt to impose a $9.75 garbage fee, 6 to 4. The Council also voted against an amendment that would have lowered the rate to $7.75 by a vote of 7 to 3.

Councilor Dennis Dalbec, 9th District, led off the discussion by strongly advocating in favor of the proposed $9.75 charge by stating that the fee is definitely needed in order to avoid uncontrolled costs from the private sector. He went on to say that a failure to vote for the measure will cause the sale of the landfill and that monthly fees for garbage pickup in Superior could be raised as high as $40-$60 per month should the City be forced to accept a private hauler. He also advocated for saving the jobs of the five landfill employees, and that by adopting the $9.75 fee the City could protect those jobs.

Mayor Bruce Hagen maintained that the problems at the landfill were “nobody’s fault” but instead were the result of the 1993 revision of the Clean Water Act of 1976, which brought in new regulations and has put “tens of thousands of landfills out of business.”

The current cell in use at the City landfill is set to be full by 2022, and one of the decisions to be made is whether to add another cell, or close the landfill once and for all. According to Mayor Hagen, it would cost $2 million to build a new cell, plus an additional $500,000 for wetland mitigation. An additional $2.5 million will be spent capping the current cell. Once the cell is capped, the City will be on the hook for $150,000 per year for 40 years, the period of time that it must monitor the cell after closure according to EPA laws.

Due to recent changes in environmental law, the City of Superior must pay the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources $1.7M to “use our own landfill” each year. The WDNR has increased the “tipping fees” over the years from $1.50 per ton to the current rate of $13 per ton. The City has no control over this due to state and federal regulations.

Councilor Dan Olson, 1st District, introduced an amendment urging that the monthly fee by reduced to $7.75, over the objections by Finance Director Jean Vito. Vito stated that the $9.75 fee is necessary according to calculations made by the City with the assistance of Dr. Bob Larsen, a Superior native currently employed in Texas, who donated his services as a consultant to assist the City in it’s analysis.

The $9.95 proposal was the result of an Internal Review Committee that consisted of Councilors Tom Fennessey (2nd District) and Jack Sweeney (4th District), Jean Vito, Todd Janigo (Public Works Director), and Darienne McNamara (Assistant to Ms. Vito). Councilors Fennessey and Sweeney both spoke forcefully in favor of the proposed ordinance, stating that it was fiscally sound and required.

Janigo went on to say that it is now too late to seek permit for expansion of the landfill, something that should have been done in 2013 if it were to be done. He also said that the cost of a new cell would be $10M to $13M He broke this cost down as follows: $500,000 for permits, $500,000 for wetland mitigation if done in-house or as much as $2.7M if done through private contractors, and in the range of $10M for construction. Ms. McNamara warned that wetland mitigation could well run into resistance from various sources, and went on to say that it was not uncommon for proposed mitigation to fail in projects encompassing less than six acres. New cell construction at the Superior landfill will require mitigation of 30 acres, a larger than average amount.

One of the reasons that the City recommend against reducing the proposed ordinance to $7.75 per month was because that would not allow for a reserve fund should the landfill begin to run deficits due to unforeseen expenses. The Mayor stated that having no reserve fund is fiscally irresponsible.

In urging a reduction to $7.75 per month, Councilor Olson pointed out that 13.2% of city residents live below the poverty line, and that the cost “shouldn’t be paid for on the backs of the tax payer.” At $7.75 per week, he pointed out that was only $1.79 per week, and that “it’s a cup of coffee…it’s less than a bottle of beer.” The Mayor advised that the $9.97 rate was only $2.25 per week, or an additional 46¢. He didn’t offer what that amount would buy.

Councilor Graham Garfield, 6th District, advised the council that his district “looks different than a lot of districts in the City,” and that the proposed fee would affect low income residents and seniors at a disproportionate rate. He advocated a graduated or sliding rate for garbage pickup. He asked that the council table the City’s proposal and Olson’s amendment for two weeks in order to provide for more time to discuss and consider. His proposal met with loud applause from some in the audience of approximately twenty citizens.

Mayor Hagen responded by saying that the proposal could not be put off since the City must present a balanced budget no later than the end of November. Garfield then urged the City to consider offering exemptions for low income residents.

Dennis Dalbec, speaking via speaker phone, rejected Garfield proposal out of hand, stating that rates must be the same for everybody. He went on to say, referring to Councilor Olson, “Danny, I assume you don’t have an accountant degree…you have fiduciary responsibility, you have to have a reserve.” Garfield later assured Dalbec that although he didn’t have an accountant degree, he could understand the numbers.

Councilor Jack Sweeney was insistent that “this is tied into the general fund, and we have the power of time and volume on our side if we enact this today.” He went on to say that the number was recommended by the professional consultants, and was based on sound accounting.

Third District councilor, Warren Bender, reminded the gathering that 70% of students at Northern Lights Elementary are in the free & reduced lunch program, and that perhaps an allowance needs to be made for those who can’t afford this fee.

Councilor Esther Dalbec, 10th District, stated that she could not support either of the proposals because the “working poor struggle and this is too much…I can’t go along.” Her comments were meant with applause from the audience.

While he recognized and validated Esther Dalbec’s sentiments, Mayor Hagen stated that “putting emotions into decisions makes for weak decisions.” Councilors Mike Herrick, 8th District, and Bob Finsland, 7th District, also comments, Herrick pointing out that the projections suggest that the $9.75 fee would probably stay static for three years, and Finsland insisting that the issue be dealt with tonight because it was delayed from the last Council meeting two weeks ago due to lack of a quorum.

Public input was given at the end of the evening by several attendees. Darryl Hoekstra, Public Services Representative for Waste Management, spoke briefly urging the City to consider their plan for taking over the landfill, pointing out that they allowed for sliding fees for garbage pickup based on the size of the container, and that they offered a senior citizen rate of $8.01 per month. He was followed by Dan O’Neill, a former city councilor, who spoke passionately against the proposed ordinance, and asked the City to stop going to the “tax payer tree” for more money.

Dee Fetters expressed her disappointment that she had no knowledge of this proposal until the last minute. She stated that “we were not part of the process…didn’t get the memo, weren’t asked for input.” She also advised that she has rental property and that she can’t in good conscience pass this fee along to her tenants since she believes she is already charging the most she can reasonably charge for rent.

An impassioned John Mahan accused the City of violating Wisconsin open meeting laws by allowing a walking quorum, which brought a swift rebuttal from Mayor Hagen who was adamant that there was at no time a walking quorum during the preparations for this proposal.

After public input, the amendment by Olson to lower the rate to $7.75 was called for a vote, failing by 7 to 3. Then the question was called for the $9.75 rate, which failed by a vote of 6 to 4. The role call was as follows: