Spokane7
58°
January 7, 2011 in City
County proposes garbage summit
Officials seek accord for regional system
Public officials are seeking a “fast-track” decision on who should control the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System.
County commissioners Thursday accepted Spokane Mayor Mary Verner’s call for an agreement within 30 days.
In turn, commissioners proposed a two-day summit to outline a framework.
If Verner and elected officials of the county’s other cities agree, the Solid Waste Summit might occur Feb. 2 and 3 at the CenterPlace Regional Event Center in Spokane Valley.
Commissioners and Spokane Valley City Councilman Gary Schimmels suggested hiring a facilitator to guide the meeting, and giving the facilitator a list of “deal-breaker” issues by Jan. 21.
Commissioner Todd Mielke suggested the summit when Commissioner Mark Richard expressed doubt an agreement could be achieved in a month.
“We’re not going to take food or water until we come to an agreement,” Commission Chairman Al French joked.
French said he hoped a quorum of all 10 city and town councils in the county would attend the summit. Otherwise, it would be difficult to achieve a quick and durable agreement, he said.
Verner didn’t want to comment on the idea until her staff briefs her this morning, spokeswoman Marlene Feist said.
Although Verner’s goal is to reach final agreement on a new governance structure within 30 days, Feist said the mayor isn’t sure the city can wait that long to extend a contract for operation of the Waste-to-Energy Plant.
Despite a host of complicated details, the issue is simple: Spokane wants to retain ownership and control of the system while commissioners and officials of other cities want it to be run by a health district-style coalition.
Existing contracts give Spokane ownership of the Waste-to-Energy Plant even though everyone in the county helped pay for it. City officials fear the plant could become a “stranded asset” if a coalition decided not to use it.
Feist said Verner is “very committed to ensuring that the ratepayers’ interests are not at risk and are protected – and, by that, she means all of the ratepayers.”
Richard said it “wouldn’t be prudent” to abandon the electricity-generating trash burner just when its construction bonds are about to be paid off, but long-haul landfill disposal might be cheaper in the long run.
Already, a substantial portion of the system’s garbage is sent to a landfill.
Russ Menke, the city-employed director of the Solid Waste System, said he doubted landfill disposal would be cheaper overall, but expanding the waste plant’s capacity with a third boiler “doesn’t make sense.”
“Personally, I can’t envision the third boiler ever being built,” Menke said. “With the capital investment, I just don’t see it penciling out.”
Recent stories by John Craig
County districts nearly equal in population after latest adjustment December 27, 2011 1- Prosecutor defends decision-making December 14, 2011 44
- Man ignites fuel tank with torch, burns house December 11, 2011 9
- Fire forces temporary shelter evacuation December 11, 2011
- Murder trial delayed months while judge, prosecutor feud December 11, 2011 8
Teseract on January 07 at 1:33 a.m.
The county should tell the city of Spokane to take a hike, negotiate a contract with the company that disposes of all the ash from the incinerator as a short term plan while finding a location and working out the EPA red tape for the creation of a county landfill.
Considering the insane cost of the incinerator ($98/ton, going up to $109/ton when the city annexes it and plops a huge tax on it) I think it’s the only intelligent solution. Given the costs of improvement to the facility, loss in money from electricity revenue when the existing contract to buy the power expires, and the tax hike, we’re looking at $145+/ton tipping fees in the next few years. The national average is $64/ton!
Let the city ride it’s own sinking ship to the bottom, without taking the county with it.
johno on January 07 at 11:43 a.m.
There should be a long hard look at alternatives instead of jumping into a renewal of this expensive system. Take the time to do the study to see if a modern landfill, that would also have the ability to harvest methane gas for power generation, would be more cost effective. The region would also be better served by not having the incinerator exhaust being spewed over the entire region. Make a short term agreement to keep the status quo while an informed decision is made!
Dazzeetrader11 on January 08 at 1:22 a.m.
I’d cancel it. Let the City manage it, support it, lose money on it and hire a full time staff to run the day to day. County doesn’t need the headache and the county gets nothing from this. The plumes are full of contaminants.
Verner picked a fight and she shouldn’t get one. Let her spend the city dry prior to her campaign. Besides, this is outdated technology. Let her and her greenies figure out some expensive green solution. The County has bigger , more important fish to fry.