Monroe County will explore selling its operating landfill near Norwalk after a steep loss of waste deliveries left the facility facing an uncertain future.
The County Board voted 10-2 during a special meeting Sept. 9 to move forward with a potential sale. Officials will also investigate whether the county has any legal way to direct more locally generated waste to the landfill or otherwise recover enough tonnage to keep it operating.
The board had its second detailed discussion of the problem in two weeks. Solid Waste Director David Heser first presented the landfill's declining revenue and long-term options to supervisors Aug. 26. Board members discussed seeking more information about the costs and consequences of keeping the landfill open, closing it, or placing it on the market.
The board's action does not authorize a sale. It begins the process of determining what the landfill is worth, what property and equipment might be included, and what obligations a buyer could be required to assume. Any request for proposals would return for county review before release, and supervisors would retain the right to reject every bid.
No easy choice
The three options presented to the Monroe County Board were:
"There aren't any real good options," Doug Rogalla said before one of the votes. "They all are terrible."
The landfill has lost roughly three-quarters of its revenue as GFL Environmental redirects waste to other facilities. Heser said the county billed GFL approximately $35,000 for material delivered in August, about $200,000 less than it would normally receive.
That loss has broken the financial plan the county expected to carry the landfill through approximately 13 more years of operation. Revenue collected during that time was supposed to pay for construction work as it occurred, including the eventual shaping and capping of open cells.
Instead, the facility is losing an estimated $150,000 in revenue each month and is projected to run a deficit of about $750,000 in 2027. Heser said the landfill could exhaust its available operating cash by approximately August of next year. After that, the department may have to seek support from the county's general fund to pay its bills.
What if it closes?
"Keeping the landfill open requires more waste. Closing it requires millions of dollars," said Heser.
Heser estimated closure could cost as much as $7 million, although the county has asked its engineering consultant to develop a firmer number. The county has approximately $950,000 available between facility reserves and current cash flow, along with $3.4 million reserved for expenses that continue after closure.
According to Heser, that second account is not extra cash. It is intended to pay for long-term environmental monitoring, leachate removal, and maintenance after the landfill stops accepting waste. Spending it on immediate construction would leave the county looking for replacement money later.
Leachate, the liquid that drains through buried waste, currently costs the county about $400,000 a year to haul away. Those costs should decline after the landfill is capped and rainwater can no longer enter the waste, but the reduction would take time.
Supervisors first considered a motion for what members called a "slow closure." The county would continue accepting enough material to shape the current area for a final cap while working toward permanent closure. That proposal failed 11-1, and the board then turned to a possible sale.
A private company or another public entity could purchase the landfill and take responsibility for future operations. The county does not yet know what the property is worth or which liabilities it could legally transfer.
The facility has about 500,000 cubic yards of permitted disposal capacity remaining in planned Phases 6 and 7. That space could be valuable to a buyer. Its actual worth would depend on future tipping rate, operating expenses, environmental obligations, and how much of the surrounding property it includes. A tipping rate is the price a landfill or transfer station charges to accept waste, usually calculated per ton.
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources would also have to approve a transfer of ownership and operating responsibility.
Some supervisors argued that the county could no longer afford to wait to decide and should move forward with sale. An appraisal, legal review and bid process could take months. Heser said bids might not be ready to open until next summer even if the county began the process now.
The approved motion directs officials to
The modified sale motion passed 10-2 with Supervisors Habhegger and Gomez voting no.
Sparta disputes blame for losses
During the County Board's discussion, some supervisors suggested Sparta's decision to have GFL transfer waste to Eau Claire instead of using the county landfill contributed to the landfill's sudden loss of tonnage and revenue. The City had been a significant source of material delivered by GFL Environmental. Once that waste stopped arriving, so did the tipping fees collected on it. Some supervisors appeared to believe Sparta accepted the savings without fully considering how its decision would affect the landfill or Monroe County taxpayers.
City of Sparta officials say they sent municipal waste elsewhere to save taxpayers money, not to force the Monroe County landfill out of business.
They also say the county never came to them before the landfill's financial problems reached a crisis.
Sparta signed a 10-year refuse contract with Modern Disposal in 2022. GFL later acquired Modern Disposal and took over the agreement. According to city officials, the contract allows Sparta to choose where it disposes of its garbage.
GFL offered to take the City's waste to Eau Claire for an estimated annual savings of $40,000. Co-City Administrator Mark Sund said accepting those savings was part of their responsibility to taxpayers, especially as local governments face tight budgets and limited revenue.
"If somebody says we can save you $40,000, it's our city's duty to spend the tax money the best way possible," Sund said.
Sparta officials repeated that the City did not renegotiate its refuse contract when GFL took over Modern. They said GFL assumed the existing agreement and later offered the City a less expensive disposal option.
"The county had raised its tipping fees," said Sund, "while the Eau Claire arrangement reduced GFL's costs and allowed it to charge Sparta less."
City officials said they believed that representatives of the county Solid Waste Department and GFL had met. Sparta was not included in those discussions, they said, and county officials did not approach the City afterward to explain how the City's decision could affect the landfill.
That lack of direct communication remains the City's central complaint.
"If us taking our garbage to Eau Claire is so financially stressful for these guys, how come they haven't walked 47 feet across the street, come in the front door and sat down and talked to us?" one official said.
Sparta officials said they did not learn the full severity of the landfill's condition through a direct warning from the county. They learned about it through news coverage, despite county discussions about declining tonnage going back several months.
The City does not want to see the landfill close, they said. Closure expenses could ultimately fall on many of the same taxpayers the City was trying to save money for in the first place.
There may be room for a compromise.
One official said Sparta could consider returning its waste to the Monroe County landfill if the county offered a tipping rate that still produced meaningful savings for city residents.
"If we can still save $20,000 and take trash there, and that helps them and keeps that open for the entire county, that's still a win," Fahning said.
City representatives cautioned that Sparta's decision accounts for only part of the decline. They believe GFL is also redirecting waste from other municipal and commercial customers.
County officials made a similar point during the Sept. 9 meeting. Heser said GFL isn't bringing the landfill much beyond material its transfer stations cannot accept.
Sparta officials said the next move belongs to the county. They want county representatives to meet with them, explain what rate would make the landfill viable, and determine whether the two governments can agree.
"We want to be good neighbors," City Administrator Booker Ferguson said. "But they have to be good neighbors to us."
Meanwhile, county administrators will continue gathering information. Supervisors expect more precise closure costs, an estimate of the landfill's market value, and legal guidance on flow control. They could present an update in October if the information is ready.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here