You're watching Open Agenda. Here's our
host, Joe White.
>> Welcome to Open Agenda. I'm your host,
Joe White. So, we have seen the press
release about the landfill update that
was put out by the county executive and
also backed up with some information
from Mike Dunn who's the CEO of the
Greater Salsbury Committee. We wanted to
talk a little bit about the media
coverage, some of our goals, and even
some of the comments we've been
receiving particularly from the county
executive. And in order to talk about
that, I brought in Dr. Joe Venosa from
Salsbury. Thank you.
>> Thank you,
>> Mr. Jim Atkins from Mardella. Thank you
for coming out.
>> Certainly.
>> So, it was interesting on the June 30th
uh press conference for the county
executive. She talked about the the poor
media coverage about the landfill
issues, the crisis as she stated it at
the time. Uh we called this press
conference for a variety of reasons. Uh
the first that I want to address is the
irresponsible reporting that was done on
this story last week. I saw a lot of
things on Facebook. I saw a lot of
things going out.
>> She even brought up that she was unhappy
with the the way the story was being
covered.
>> And now we get this press release that
comes out on Monday uh just this past
week about the landfill. uh local uh
channel 47 did a a I would say an
article. They wrote something about it.
Sounded off a lot like the the county
executives press release. And then we
also saw a little bit about the from
from the from the greater Salsbury
committee that they think everything's
going
>> hunky dory going good now, right?
>> Um and yet at the same time, we've been
accused of using a lack of facts. Um,
and really all we're using is the county
executive statements and videos that
have been posted by her and the
administration, right?
>> Yeah. I mean, I think that's the ironic
thing here is that when we look at this
issue, obviously, but, you know, I think
we could go beyond it, we have used at
every step of the way either statements
that are in county documents, forms, or
video evidence.
>> But Jim, I mean, you you attend almost
every county council meeting. You stay
for the work sessions. you go to the
public workshops, whether it's for
budget proposals or the 10-year plan for
the solid waste that obviously a lot of
that information wasn't correct back in
the that was put out there by the
executive and her administration. I
mean, are you are you are you out to get
anybody? No, I mean we're just uh we
repeat the information that we're given
and I guess besides just repeating it,
we question it because it does not
always seem to from one council meeting
to next or from one council meeting to a
press release, the information seems to
change. And why does it change? what
happened in that period of time that all
of a sudden what they told you before is
not the same and a as you address with
with the press conference and she wasn't
happy with the press coverage over that.
So she got another local news station to
come in basically read her press release
for it but there is no investigation or
no questions asked. this just uh
>> well that that's my sort of main issue
is that I I understand that there's a
really important role for media and the
press historically anywhere in in the
world certainly in this country and
community to you know inform the public
but if the mainstream local media is
just regurgitating literally uh a
talking point of any politician what
good is it
>> I remember one thing that really upset
us on the show back in the spring was
when the county council put out a press
release.
>> That was really just a lot of rhetoric
in our mind.
>> Mhm.
>> Uh the local news organizations covered
it,
>> but we weren't satisfied with with just
the way that was put out there.
>> Sure.
>> So, this isn't an attack on the county
executive, although as she says, she
runs the county. She administers the
county, her and her staff.
>> I think that's going to lead to that.
But then then, you know, you talk about
a lack of facts. You know, our the size
of our group keeps coming into question.
number of followers. I mean, I'm not
even sure if that really matters.
>> It matters to somebody apparently.
>> Yeah. Somebody gets upset about it.
>> So, we're our our group is made up of
conservatives, Republicans, liberals,
Democrats, fiscal conservatives,
libertarians.
>> Uh I know a lot of folks just see us on
the front side of the camera,
>> but a lot of folks I mean, if you go to
a play, there's as many people behind
the the curtain as there is in front.
>> There's a lot less handsome people
behind us. Yeah, for sure. I don't know
if we have any on the camera. Joe, I
that might be not factual.
>> I'm trying to help you out.
>> Um I I I want to take a break and when
we come back I I want to give a very
factual uh example of some of the
contradictory
uh material that we're getting which is
confusing and it's hard. We're we're not
we don't we don't make any money doing
this show. Uh we're just citizens, lay
people as well, you know, all have
families. We want we don't want to pay
any more taxes than what we need to pay.
But uh talk about I want to talk about
the August 20th, 2024 work session,
which was the 5-year solid waste plan.
>> Not because I want to rehash where the
landfill is at now. What I want to talk
about is how the information that we can
get out of all of our elected officials
going to be disseminated going forward.
>> All right, great.
>> So stay with us. When we come back,
we're going to dive into some more
facts, like them or not, and we're going
to uh find out a little bit more what
you can expect as the information's
going to be rolled out to you over the
next year. So stay with us. We'll be
right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. So still in
the studio with me is Dr. Joinosa, Mr.
Jim Atkins. Thank you for sticking
around. Want to talk a little bit about
the August 20th, 2024 work session. And
at this presentation was the five-year
solid waste plan. Jim, you were there.
Yep.
>> Uh you've been at the 10-year plan.
You've been at all the council meetings
and work sessions about this stuff. Uh I
I I want to reference the plan and and
and and actually had the presentation
that they they used at this plan was
Mikey who's deputy director of public
works, Heather Langford the supervising
engineer who at times has been the
acting director of deputy director of
public works been nominated to be the
director of public works from the county
executive and also the engineer from EA
who's the current uh engineering firm
that's being used for the landfill. So,
so those folks were the ones giving the
presentation and at that presentation
specifically talking about cell 8 uh
which is the current cell we're using
having 3 to four years of of service
time left
>> plus cell 7 which they state was in the
process about to be designed.
uh relation to capacity as of June 2024
um a capacity evaluation was done which
excludes a um still potential new cell 7
um which is a final remaining cell to be
constructed. Uh the capacity timeline as
of June 2024 is estimated at 3 and a
half to four years on the high end. Um
the capacity valuation uh utilized the
permitted final grading plan and um the
solid waste operations basically to get
that three and a half to to four years
will require some modifications um to
the hall road for disposal
and then the final cell design
construction and permitting capacity.
Um, as Mike mentioned, MEES previously
was involved and they did a com a
capacity evaluation of the landfill
inclusive of cell 7 in August 2023. Um,
which identified the remaining life
roughly of 7 to 9 years, uh, which now
as of August 2024 is about 6 to 8 years.
So we fast forward just 10 months later
and we're finding out that cell 7 design
wasn't started until early 2025
>> and we're running out of space in in
cell 8 faster than the engineer the
county engineer all presented.
>> So so this this is then the question
that I would have as just a layman
looking at the issue who is trying to
find out information about the landfill.
If the executive is questioning our
comments and critiques, okay, based on
the facts, those are the facts that we
know. That session was devised or at
least it was attended and it was and the
people who testified and presented the
information were her staff and her
administration. Yes. So my question as a
Layman is this.
>> Did she or her administration lie about
those figures? Did they just downplay
them now? What explains the complete gap
>> or are they blowing what's going on now
out of proportion? That could be a thing
>> that or two is this crisis that she now
is trying to get in front of is there an
ulterior motive when we know what they
presented last August.
>> It's hard and and one of the accusations
she's made of us is that we're not using
the facts, but we like as you said,
we're using the video
>> and the facts is stated by her and and
her administration
>> and the rates that they produced.
>> Yeah. which seemed much different than
what we were finding out in June. Now,
it is possible that these numbers were
wrong, but in her statements to us on
Facebook, it's it's actually talking
about going back further than the two
and a half years she's been in office.
In fact, she she's quoted as saying no
one who actually is educated would think
this is a two-year problem.
>> I look, the the larger landscape
landfill issues aren't her fault. you
know, she was a part of Bob Culver's
administration when they were stealing
diesel there. We're not blaming her for
that. But cell cell eight and cell seven
at times have been okay and at times
they haven't been. And that's only been
in the last two and a half.
>> Well, I think that's the issue. Yeah.
You can't hide behind the fact that
landfills are big and complicated. Yeah,
they are very good. You don't have to be
an executive to figure that out. But
this specific crisis of the spacing, the
cost, and the construction, that is all
on her.
>> Yeah,
>> that is her albatross. or at least that
the information wasn't disseminated for
many many months or even maybe several
years, right?
>> Yeah. I mean, you've got uh engineer
manager who was the acting
director of public works
>> for a period of time in John Pod's
administration. So, she over overlapped
from Poda into Giri. Mhm.
>> So she was aware, should have been aware
because the original memo came out in 22
>> with the engineering plans for for that
site. So
>> September of 22.
>> September of 22. So she's got knowledge
from one administration to the other
that she should have brought forward.
You also have the person who was the
administrative director for Culver
>> and Poda who is now the consultant for
the landfill. So why does that person
not know
>> Wayne Strawber?
>> We actually had brought back Wayne
Strawber who was the former director of
administration. Brought him back on
contract.
>> Wayne Strawber and Heather Langford are
the two consistent pieces in this little
>> they go from one administration to the
other. So that
>> where's the knowledge there? I mean you
know this is not a two-year anybody with
an education should know
>> but the people who were there prior did
know. Well, and and look, the the the
fact is our efforts on the show have
been to use the the presentations and
the footage as they were presented in
real time. Then mistakes will happen,
>> but own it to to a large degree. I mean,
that was one of the things we were
saying about last week's work session.
>> Once again, um you know, I understand
the deputy director of of uh public
works could not be there, but our
director of administration, Bonnie
Luffman, could have been there. Uh Julie
herself could have been there. I I know
they had plans in DC, but sometimes you
have to
>> you have to switch around and
>> we all like to take field trips, but
sometimes like when you're actually
required to present your case to the
council on an issue that you yourself
have been banging about and saying
>> and and when you have your press
conference on June the 30th and you say
we or the administration is going to
meet with the council
>> Yeah. on July the 15th to work on this
problem.
>> Yeah.
>> Knowing you're not going to be there,
>> right?
>> Not being there and then saying that the
problem is because the council and the
administration do not communicate with
each other.
>> When we don't communicate and
collaborate, this is what happens. You
get reactive legislation that has to be
amended because it's in violation of our
state law now, our state permit. she had
planned to uh present this to you um
that way we could have a work session in
the middle of July.
>> Well, in order to communicate with each
other, you both have to be in the room.
>> The council was in the room that day cuz
I was there and saw the presentation.
>> So, one half of the formula was there.
>> The other half chose not to be. We've
had so many special sessions in the last
two years. Uh FOP negotiations, uh
budgets, uh moving budgets back further,
>> uh and uh when the tipping fees were
going to be raised, they had another
special legislative hearing. There
there's all kinds of other options,
especially if you're have knowledge of
this crisis. the only there was only one
of her staff that was there in August of
2024 meeting that was also there in in
the July of 2025 meeting and it was the
newest person on that staff, the one
that we feel like has got the the most
knowledge of this. Thankfully, they were
there. Yeah.
>> But they were new at the first meeting.
>> Wasn't Mr. Langford present in 24
meeting?
>> She was, but she wasn't she wasn't part
of the presentation in 2025? No, not in
2025, but she was in 24 when everything
was hunky dory and no problems,
everything's moving along fine.
>> But correct me if I'm wrong. It's my
understanding that she was actually in
the audience at this most recent
>> work. She was there. She was there. She
just wasn't part of the presentation.
>> Now, talking about facts and and and
Facebook posts and that sort of thing. I
mean, obviously, uh, one of our goals is
to at least get the public to to get
their own information about this and and
obviously we're expressing our views and
but we're using video to back up our
views. The county executive has stated
that she has 160,000 followers and one
of her rebuttals to us. You know, we
found that she has over 5,000 followers,
which is more than we have. You know,
that for whatever that's worth.
>> Well, some people live offline, too.
>> Well, yeah. and and and and we're not
we're not in an elected position and
we're not trying to be famous by any
stretch, but she doesn't have 160,000
followers. The you know, the gentleman
she has aou with in the past for
communications, he has 160,000
followers.
>> The big blogger guy
>> it is. Yeah. And and you know, when the
press release came out on Monday that
said, well, everything's okay, and we're
going to talk about that press release a
little bit more later. uh it went to
that site first and by clicking on that
link that's how those links are
monetized. So any any citizen out there
who wanted to learn more who clicked
that link
>> that that you didn't have to pay
yourself but that's how that that page
gets monetized. So that's see that to me
is really troubling, right? Because if
you're having our county executive
leadership, our government of our
county, right, that we are citizens and
taxpayers for and it's only
disseminating information to a private
blogger that can be monetized. That's
really troubling.
>> Well, and then you also have
>> and then bragging about it, too.
>> Well, and part of this press release
group uh was the Greater Salsbury
Committee. And again, that's a group you
have to pay over $2,500 a year to be a
member of.
>> Not everybody is invited. and they don't
have open meetings.
>> I want to take a break and when we come
back, I want to play a little bit of uh
the interview you and I had with John
Cannon a couple weeks ago when we're
talking about the budget process and I
want to talk a little bit about how the
Greater Salsbury Committee's
>> hand in this landfill thing, how this
really does muddy the waters of
transparency. So stay with us. We'll be
right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. I'm your
host, Joe White. Still in the studio
with me is Dr. Joe Venosa from Salsbury.
Thank you for sticking around, Mr. Jim
Atkins. So, Joe, a couple weeks ago, you
and I uh we we interviewed uh President
John Canon from the county council. Uh
we were we were talking at the time
about completely different subject, but
we we we also I got to ask him
specifically about the the budget and
the fiscal year uh that just wrapped up
2025 wrapped up in June.
Well, when you when you go back and and
listen to the the county executive's
budget proposal from back in March when
she was starting to host her own uh
public outreach,
>> right?
>> Some with the some with the board of ed,
some with just the the general public.
>> She she mentioned breaking the revenue
cap for education. And then in a later
show on another show, she mentioned that
it was more of a bait and switch,
>> right? What's your feelings on the fact
that maybe from her own words she said,
"Hey, look, I did a bait and switch from
the county council, are you less
inclined to to to believe that going
into the next fiscal year?"
>> Well, uh, to begin with, uh, for the
county executive state to state publicly
that she is very proud of it and to
gleefully admit that probably one of her
greatest successes was pulling a bait
and switch on the county council in
reference to the busting the revenue
cap. I I found that abhorrent. I could
not believe that that statement was even
made. That wasn't a statement against
the county council. That was a statement
against the 107,000 citizens of Wcomaku
County. All the people that attended
that meeting and were told you have the
four option plan.
>> Right.
>> I found that that very unusual public
hearing uh very uh one-sided. So much so
that I made sure that I got up in front
of the group before anybody spoke in the
public to tell them, "Listen, folks, you
don't have to bust the revenue cap and
get property taxes to pay for your uh
board of education. You got $70,000 in
your income tax receipts that can help
cover the difference, right?"
>> And I made that so that they wouldn't be
misguided.
>> Yeah. But the whole premise became that.
>> I think that's part of the general
strategy at least regarding this county
executive is that and this is just my
own um view of it. And you know just to
be blunt I think there are forces around
the executive who very much want to use
her position to eventually get rid of
the revenue cap. But I still don't
understand how you would would publicly
want to state that, you know, uh, I was
very proud that I pulled a bait and
switch
>> because I don't think the the electorate
I don't think they want to see the
constituents don't want to see uh, their
governing body um, admittedly um,
telling everyone that they believe in
deception and trickery as a way to
manage the government.
So, the the interview he talks about the
bait and switch that the county
executive was really kind of gloating
about uh talking specifically back in
March and April when she was saying
we're going to have to bust a revenue
cap, raise taxes
>> or at least not lower as low as they
were supposed to go on folks
>> that that this was just a bait and
switch to to get at the council. Mhm.
>> Is there is there any reason to believe
that maybe some of what's going on with
the landfill could possibly be a bait
and switch? Again,
>> it's highly plausible.
>> Okay. I mean, Jim, you again, we said it
before. You've been at all these
meetings. Is there just enough things
that just don't make sense that you're
just not sure about?
>> Well, it's it's not as much as they
don't make sense is that they change
every two weeks. You've got a different
number. You've got a different amount of
months that the landfill has
availability to accept trash. You have a
claim by the county about the tipping
fees in this county being so low
compared to all the other counties. And
come to find out, the variance is $2. to
justify
raising rates, uh, tipping fees at the
disposal facility here. They completely
misqued nearby landfills and what they
charge. It was said on record and on
recording that Delaware charges $100 per
ton. They've never charged $100 per ton.
They charge $80 per ton. I have that
with me. There's also a rebate program
where you get 10 plus dollars back for
every ton. I don't understand why people
that we hire or elect at a public level
are allowed to misconrue data like that.
And I've heard it today where things
that I know not to be true were said
today.
So, I'm just worried about that. And I
don't have anything against anybody
there either. I just want the best thing
for the county. And I when I hear
arguments being misrepresented, like
things being misrepresented to you guys,
it's it's concerning to me. as a user of
the landfill and servicing tens of
thousands of people in this county.
>> So that's all I meant. It's I'm actually
in support of the council. I just I'm
worried you guys are being to be
dramatic lied to.
>> Well, I want to run a scenario, Joe.
>> Okay, let's just say for instance that
there I mean there's obviously some out
ofount trash. I think it was brought up
as 5 to 10% at the last work session. It
was said it's maybe up to 26% at times.
But what if we eliminate the out of
county trash like the council's talking
about doing in this emergency
legislation?
>> But cell 8 actually does have more than
just 12 months in it. It it's always had
more. Maybe it does.
>> Are we looking just a year from now that
the county executive can just sit back
and say, "Well, look, I saved us."
>> I I think and again, we may never know,
but that's why we ask questions and
that's why we do what we do. Um
everything that she has ever done has
had a political motive. We we have to
acknowledge that. I think, you know,
this is the only time I'll say it. Julie
Jordano is good at something and that's
being a politician. That doesn't mean
it's good for regular people or our
budget or the future and safety of the
county or citizens, but she is really
good at playing politics. And I believe
that a lot of the landfill issue right
now, even if she legitimately did in
fact, in my opinion, screw up the
schedule and really is has just been at
fault for this problem, she's going to
nevertheless use the crisis
to reorient it as the election
approaches. And I think that it's this
is going to all happen around the time
of the primary and then the election
next year is very telling. Well, we saw
in the press release that came out this
past Monday that the greater Salsbury
committee, particular the CEO, Mike
Dunn, yeah,
>> did a tour the week before and and and
done a tour since I was there and now is
saying everything's under control.
>> That to me that's the tip off.
>> Okay. Now, just just for folks out there
who don't know, I mean, Mike Dunn used
to serve on the county council as a
Democrat,
>> still is.
>> And Julie uh is is a Republican. Yeah.
Now look, we just touted earlier that
we're we're of different political
spectrum,
>> but is this more transactional? I mean,
why why would why would a Democrat like
Mike Dunn carry the water on the
landfill issue for a Republican like
like Julie Grodonna?
>> Well, I think they have mutual economic
interests.
>> You're the first county executive who
has talked about the elephant in the
room. That all by itself deserves
applause. Thank you for that.
The elephant in the room. We have in our
GSSE 2030 plan, we address the revenue
cap and all we ask for is that a blue
ribbon panel just like the one that
we've assembled to come and talk to you
tonight made up of community leaders
takes a look at that public policy that
was implemented more than 20 years ago
and simply ask the community, is this
still appropriate public policy? So
maybe it is time to look at the revenue
cap and is it the best policy? Is it the
best thing? And
>> good evening, Barry Bechum, county
resident. And um as far as the um I
guess the elephant in the room here,
everybody's talking about, you know, we
need funds and the funds or lack
thereof. Um I'd say the elephant in the
room is the tax cap. And I'm just
curious, how many people here would be
willing to have their taxes, their
property taxes raised
>> to support these properties
>> to support any property because because
and that's that's really what we need to
to really look at and, you know, for me
to say, hey, I'm in favor, you know, of
of a tax increase. I'm really no one
wants to hear that. But but the what I
really like to see everyone in this room
that I looked at raised their hand and
they don't mind property tax cap, you
know, being taken away or revenue cap,
I'm sorry. Yeah. So, so, you know,
basically I I would say that that's
where we're going to have to look. As
much as no one wants to talk about it,
and I certainly don't want to be the guy
to raise my hand and say it, but really
that's that's where we're at. And again,
I'm saying this, of course, as sort of a
lifelong Democrat, but I think in a lot
of ways, Julie Jordano actually is a
liberal in the sense of this. She
certainly spends like it. Her budgets
are sort of a Ted Kennedy-esque
dream of spending. Um, she has routinely
expanded the size of the government in
terms of positions that may not exist,
but she wants to exist. Yeah, the the
the growth of government intrusion into
our activities and lives. And what's
interesting is a lot of very left-wing
liberal people who don't follow the
specific politics hear, oh yeah, she's
she's a Democrat. Now, again, if you
talk to the social issues, maybe her
views on race or sexuality or other
things, that's where her magist comes
out. But I think in the economic issues,
if you follow the money, there is no
difference between a Jake Day, a Mike
Don, or a Julie Judano.
>> Well, and and Jim, you asked me a
question off camera uh earlier today
about, you know, we've been covering
also the city council and and the SU
politics with their budget and the lack
of transparency there. Uh you know, one
of our goals with the show was really
just to kind of open the door for other
people to ask their own questions.
um when you're when you're watching,
you know, these like you said, the the
numbers change.
>> Do you feel like there's any level of
transparency here? Is there is there any
any way where you can kind of orient
yourself and and and get back to, you
know, real numbers?
>> Yeah. Real numbers.
>> Yeah. No, I I don't think so because I
think what has been shown in the past 2
and 1/2 years is that uh until there is
a crisis, there's no need to tell the
public.
>> Yeah.
>> And I think that's what we have seen
with a lot of things. Until there is a
crisis, because we'll go back to the
bait and switch in the board of ed, you
when she had the budget hearing on that,
>> you could she could defund M
>> departments in the county.
>> Mhm.
>> She could break the revenue cap. She
could raise taxes.
>> It was a four options that were rolled
out and we didn't go with any of those
four options.
>> No, we didn't go with any of them. And
it it was like
>> it was a true bait.
>> It it was you went to a budget meeting
to hear about the budget of Wakcomo
County and what was going to happen in
in the county.
>> Well, and I would to circle back to our
friends in the greater Salsbury
committee. I do think the one thing
policy-wise that they all align on is
they all want to get rid of the revenue
cap.
>> And they referred to this as the
elephant in the room. I mean, we can go
back.
>> Barry Bechum has said this. Julie
Jordano has said this. Mike Dunn has
said this a few dozen times, right? They
have to come up with a better set of
>> Well, it makes it easier for me to track
when I'm trying to pull these videos.
So, it's true.
>> I hope to continue to use that.
>> It's true. But my my belief is that um
if she is reelected and that there are
four allies on that council, they will
indeed try to get rid of it by other
means.
>> So you can you legally because of Norm
Conway used to be our our our state
delegate. You can you can break the
revenue cap for education. Now, we've
seen our state government do this where
you just simply underfund education,
>> fund all the other departments where you
want blow blow their budgets up in an
upward fashion and then use that
loophole to backfill education with
busting the revenue cap
>> or you go to your delegation and say,
"Hey, we want more loopholes," which
could it be used for roads? Could it be
used for
>> a whole host of things? Um, and I think
uh I I think that that's really going to
be one of the areas that is a little
scary as we're going in. You know, it is
election season in essence a year ahead.
>> I brought up at the last show uh and
Jim, you were at the at the meeting last
week, they did move $2.5 million of
unused funds, a half a million of it was
from paving roads in our county uh into
a pion.
>> To a pension. Yeah. And then said they
will do this every year.
>> Well, or could do it every year. And
will they not tell us there's a a crisis
with the pension until
>> we're 12 months from it imploding like
the
>> till it's there. But
their thoughts on the revenue cap really
confuse me because
how can you convince the public that you
want to break the revenue cap when at
the end of every year
>> you have all this money for roads and
landfills and other things that you
haven't spent. I think the argument, not
the argument, that's the wrong word, but
I think the perspective or the issue is
that to a lot of outside lay people, and
I could say this sort of, you know, as a
relatively newer resident, is when you
hear that we have a revenue cap, it it
it conjures up the image of we
intentionally keep our taxes low and
therefore we don't invest in the things
that we need to invest in. So to a lot
of people that don't know any about
anything about the minutiae or the
policy, what they hear is, "Oh, we're
not investing in our schools or we're
not investing in roads because this this
darn revenue cap is limiting what we can
do,
>> which is only 30% of our budget."
>> Correct. But but that's the thing to the
the lay person who's not actually thrown
their lives into it like we have. but
they're not spending the money that
they're being given
>> to do projects and ending up at the end
of the year with that money. And you
know, that was that was one of the the
big things
>> that that the council looked at and even
on her budget presentation, it had
>> property taxes.
>> Mhm.
>> And income tax.
>> Income taxes. Yeah. were the major
contributors to the budget in this
county. Yeah.
>> Not
>> the revenue. Yeah.
>> Well, it's it's most of it's from income
tax and we pay the highest amount of
income tax allowed in state law. It's a
little over 3%.
>> Gentlemen, I I know we we've had a
summer schedule for our shows and we're
supposed to be doing uh shows on
sanitary district which we think is
important. Joe, you and I have one more
show uh to do for SU and the students
there. again, we talked referenced it
earlier. Their their budget's being cut,
but their tuition's not going down and
they're getting less services for the
same or more money.
>> Uh we we we want to get off of this
landfill issue and and we intend to do
so. Uh but we will continue to follow
whatever uh information and and
presentations that were given us. And if
we do find things that are inconsistent,
we're going to at least ask the
question. I'm not promising you we're
going to be right. And folks out there
are most certainly willing to disagree
with us.
>> Well, ju and just a uh public service
message to the people who are watching
this
uh effective August 1st, the landfill
will be closed on Sundays,
>> Saturdays.
>> Saturdays.
>> August 5th.
>> So, the trash that's there that day that
won't be collected, it'll magically go
away or
>> Well, it it's going to sit somewhere
overnight apparently before it gets
picked up the next day and taken to
work. But I mean, you know, that was
something that when we talked to
Councilman Merritt last week that the
council just really wasn't sure because
they weren't going to have another
council meeting before August 1st and
weren't really sure how the executive
was going to go because she wasn't at
the meeting to ask.
>> So, here's where it goes.
>> Here here the press release comes out
yesterday and lo and behold, it's going
to be closed.
>> And it's things like this, right? this
kind of policy that is unilateral, that
is based on a lot of um
I would say uh bad ideas when you see it
in action, it it ultimately comes across
as inappropriate, unprofessional, and it
really undermines sense of safety and
dignity of all the county residents and
the taxpayers. Well, the other the other
point that's that's never been addressed
that I've heard
is the effect this will have on the
employees of the landfill.
>> Mhm.
>> Because the landfill will be closed.
>> Yeah.
>> The garbage collectors, the disposal
companies, because their employees that
work
>> on Saturday will not be out picking up
trash in the in the county on Saturday.
It's it's almost as if, and maybe we're
wrong, but it seems like she is
simultaneously for a political act that
doesn't actually have much benefit, is
cutting the paychecks of many of her
employees, her employees, as well as
allowing businesses to suffer with, you
know, trash heaps.
>> I think I mean, who benefits from this?
>> You just kind of mentioned it. We may be
wrong, but if we're wrong, it's only
because we haven't been given that
information. We we'd love to be wrong in
it, but until we can operate 9 days from
now,
>> we'll see.
>> Not available to ask.
>> Clock is ticking.
>> Well, thanks for joining us for this
episode of Open Agenda. We'll be back
next week with another new episode.
>> I'm trying to help you out.
