Borough Mayor's veto of landfill rate decrease holds

PALMER — For just the third time in his six years as Mat-Su Borough Mayor, Vern Halter issued a veto on Ordinance 21-054 that withstood a vote to override at the June 15 meeting of the Mat-Su Borough Assembly. Ordinance 21-054 sponsored by Assemblyman Mokie Tew drastically changed the rates and manner in which residents could pay to dispose of their garbage at the central landfill. The ordinance originally passed 4-3, but was vetoed by Mayor Halter and came up under unfinished business on the agenda. Public Works Director Terry Dolan estimated nearly $2.5 million in losses due to the changes that had passed in the ordinance.

“We believe yes, we’ll go back into the red not only in terms of our capital costs but also on an operating basis we’ll have an annual accumulated deficit when you include capital. I think it’s right around $2.5 million or so of a deficit on an annual basis,” said Dolan. “The loss if you’re counting the number of trucks really escalates when trucks get more and more full, so it is very difficult to predict exactly how this will come out but we’re pretty satisfied that the number of occurrences under these rates at each of the locations, I’ve got a really lengthy hard to read spreadsheet on it that lays it out but we’re very convinced that the actual amount of the loss is within $100,000 of $2.4 million.”

Current prices require a $17 minimum fee as the landfill charges per cubic yard. The scales do not weigh trash under 200 lbs, making the fee for one cubic yard the lowest fee available. The changes in 21-054 dropped the lowest price possible per visit to $10 for a level pickup truck load. A pickup truck filled above level would be $15 with additional trailers to be added for $5. The $2 charge for two garbage bags or cans was upped to four.

I believe that our citizens need a break on the landfill throwing away their garbage,” said Tew “These numbers and what I’m hearing, something’s not working.”

Tew drew initial support from Assemblyman George McKee, who believed that it was a problem that warranted further investigation. Tew continued to question the math of the deficits caused by the ordinance until Dolan went line by line, detailing the impact of each cut. The per ton rate just for Construction and Demolition material would cause $1 million in loss, with another $519,682 in taking the lowest charge from $17 to $10.

“My intent never was to work on biohazard or asbestos or anything else, it was to work on transfer stations that don’t take biohazard and for the citizens to be able to bring their garbage to the transfer stations and then include the landfill,” said Tew.

Tew also drew support from Assemblyman Tim Hale, who said that he considered moving for a reconsideration of his vote after voting in support of the original ordinance. Hale also supported examining ways to lower costs at the landfill, as did Assemblyman Jesse Sumner.

“Without some reduction in expenses down at the landfill we’d be operating at a substantial deficit and I really think that the result would be if not next year, then maybe a few years down the line an even larger increase in the dump fees,” said Sumner. “I don’t know that that’s responsible. If we can identify savings or ways to reduce costs at the landfill or especially the transfer stations then I’d be on board with that, but I think just cutting the revenue, it just forstalls the issue. I mean cheaper rates now are going to be doubly higher rates in the future so I don’t think we should do this.”

The vote to override Halter’s veto failed 6-1 with only Tew voting in support.

“I think this is my third veto in six years so I just don’t throw them out loosely. This is a policy decision to me. When I first got on the assembly, the landfill was running in the red I think it was two to two point five million consistently in the red. It was just not a good way to run the business of it,” said Halter. “It’s a policy thing not going back to where we were when I first got on the assembly and it just seemed like it was the biggest problem the borough had at that point in time, and we still had the port we had other problems going too we had the ferry we had some big problems but that was the biggest one and it was corrected and I just hate to see us go back there that’s the reason for he veto.”