Show Transcript
Disclaimer: The following transcript was auto-generated and may contain spelling or contextual errors.
You're watching Open Agenda. Well, I
think I would say um until there's a
crisis, there's really not a need.
Welcome to Open Agenda. It is July 2025
and we are hearing word that the county
executive is planning to shut down the
landfill in phases starting with
Saturdays on August 1st. To talk about
these issues, I brought in Dr. Joe
Venosa from Salsbury, Mr. Mike Goldberg
from Delmare. Thank you, gentlemen.
Thank you. So, the county council does
have a uh a county council meeting on
July 1st, 6:00 meeting. Uh they're going
to introduce emergency legislation to
codify the operating days, the hours,
the landfill so that it stays open. But
the county executive in June, we found
out, actually proposed uh a phase
shutdown, and then she just had her
press conference uh on on Monday, Juneh
30th. 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. The first thing that I
want to say is that the legislation that
has been put out by our county council,
which is in the brief book right now,
and the story that was covered was that
this emergency legislation was done to
stop some sort of plan that the
executive was doing. That is not the
case at all. One of the issues that we
came across was the lifespan of the
landfill. We actually had brought back
Wayne Strawber who was the former
director of administration, brought him
back on contract. Our landfill, if you
don't know, if you think about an aerial
shot of the landfill, is divided up into
sections, what we call cells. When I
came into office, we were in the middle
of building cell 10. We then were going
to be building cell 8, and then we were
going to be moving on to cell 7. and
that would complete the entire footprint
of what we have left of our current
landfill. We also found out that we were
a year behind design in cell 10. Cell 10
was open and we're moving forward. We
started the construction of cell 8. When
we started the construction of cell 8,
what we discovered was that there was
trash as we started to dig. When we
discovered that there was trash in cell
8, where do you think that trash had to
go? Cell 10. So, we're moving from one
area to another, filling cell 10 a
little bit quicker than what we thought.
We've also seen an increase of trash
influx coming into our landfill at an
increase rate of 26%. The other thing
that we wanted to touch uh on with the
legislation is there's a lot of
operational decisions that are being
made within that legislation, which also
violates our charter. So the executive
branch, whether you like the executive
branch or not, we are here to stay and
we handle the operational part of this
county. The appropriations part comes
from the legislative body. So gentlemen,
I want to ask you, I mean, Joe, what
what's your feelings on u this uh the
way this information's come out? Well, I
would use dumpster fire as sort of the
seems appropriate but but it's a lot
taller than a dumpster. I mean, it it
really is ironic that these kinds of
scandals involve a landfill. Um, look,
we're in a bad spot. Nobody disputes
that. I think there's I think we all
agree that there is a consensus that the
landfill has some real problems with
storage with the cells and delay on new
cells opening. Here's my concern. Uh,
Executive Jano has been in office for
two and a half years and basically
seemed fine for at least the majority of
that. Now, we're being told, "No, no,
no, no, no, no. It's sort of stage four
cancer. We have to uh get ready for the
very quick closure. And here's what
we're going to do right away. Oh, and by
the way, I'm not going to tell the
council. I'm not going to really tell
the haulers. I'm not going to tell the
businesses about this plan to basically
ration service, but not actually reduce
the the volume of Well, just a little
background for maybe someone who who
wasn't following this before. I mean,
the last two years, the county executive
has proposed large increases uh to
tipping fees from from $65 up to 78 to
to even $100. I budget is crafted
um at $100. The uh amendments being
proposed will bring it down to the 84.88
number. That still gives a minor profit
to this division. Sometime in January
1st of uh 2026, we're going to see it go
up around 88 or $90. Correct. However,
at no point in time were we talking
about closing the landfill, right? U and
Mike, you attended her press conference
yesterday on on Monday, June 30th. Uh
you were there. You were able to ask
some good questions. The presentation
actually had a lot of information. Uh
we've been making outreach to our hauler
community since last year uh with
several public workshops also engaging
the council as it pertains to our
tipping fee which I've stated publicly
before had remained too low for too
long. Our airspace we always you always
want to be doing an airspace calculation
based on a flyover survey. Uh prior to
the fire survey that I had requested in
March of 2025,
um we looked at the previous data that
was provided to us that said we could
any anywhere from 3 1 to 7 years. So
with the most recent flyover data that
we did and our trend analysis with that
increase of significant tonnage up to
26% and 165,000 tons coming into our
landfill in 2024, we knew we had a
problem. Um what we tried to do from
there is look at engaging the hauler
community and the council and we
appreciate a lot of the council's
comments about the idea of diverting
waste away from our landfill and the
concept of not allowing any material
that's outside of Wcom County to come to
us. However, the legislation that was
brought to bear and will be heard
tomorrow night is is got is got some is
flawed is flawed. I will say the main
thing is that the council introduces
legislation that will codify the
allowance of trash from outside of
Wakcomo County. That is in direct
conflict and a violation of our state
refuge disposal permit. our state refuge
disposal permit, all pertinent
supplemental documentation, and
including our 10-year solid waste
management plan that was recently
adopted by county council resolution and
approved by the state of Maryland in the
spring of this year, late winter, spring
of this year, says that our landfill
only takes intrajurisdictional waste.
That means that our landfill serves the
population of Wcomamico County and no
other. very very diligently right now to
ensure that we get cell number seven
open hopefully by no later than May of
2026 so that we do not have to go into a
crisis situation where we are shutting
down our landfill. Once we get cell 7
open, as soon as cell 7 opens, we start
groundbreaking across the road for our
horizontal expansion, which we've
already been in the process for years,
this county has, of the hydro geologic
uh evaluation on that side of the road
in preparation and preliminary design to
make sure we never run into this problem
again. We have to stop taking trash from
other counties. We need legislation that
codifies a full prohibition with
enforcement tactics and that's something
we were already working on before this
legislation was introduced. 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. Hoping that
the council will withdraw the
legislation being introduced tomorrow
night. Um that way we have a full scope
of what is going on. We would love to
share the information that we have that
we've gathered from Maryland State
Department of Environment working
handinhand with our county attorney
making sure that we are following every
state guideline that we are supposed she
had planned to uh present this to you um
that we we could have a work session in
the middle of July. Um, you've been in
office for about two and a half years at
this point and to the best of my
knowledge this is the first time that
we've heard of any kind of landfill plan
that's been released to the public and
actually the plan the comprehensive plan
was put in front of them in January that
the county developed a solid waste plan
submitted it to this council and
submitted I assume to the state and it
says the Nuland Park landfill is
adequate to meet the proposal in
January. and in in January.
He's talking about a plan that came out
in October of 2023
and again in October of 2024.
So 3 months or a year and 3 months
before they submitted this plan. He's
now saying they knew that the Newland
Park landfill was not adequate, but they
told the council and they told the state
it was. We are not finding out that
there's an actual crisis as the county
executive described it until now. I mean
there she has not presented any prior
plans to address the uh diminishing
space remaining in the landfill until
now other than the tipping fee increase.
Well, but the tipping fee increase
doesn't necessarily
have a direct impact somewhat of a
deterrent. It's somewhat of a deterrent,
but ultimately with uh incounty trash at
least, you're going to get the same
volume. With respect to her proposal to
um to disallow to prohibit um trash
originating from outside the county,
frankly, I agree with that. I I think
that is appropriate. I think it is
prudent. you know the and this goes to
the crux of the crisis which and again I
I'm using that word intentionally
because the executive finally uttered it
at her press conference but in a very I
thought troubling way. I mean what was
the exact term? She she didn't want to
play or she did not want to notify
anybody until there was a crisis. Right.
So don't inform the public about the
crisis until there's a crisis or I mean
on on June 3rd there was a budget
meeting regarding the landfill tipping
fees. At no point was this brought up
right now at the press conference
yesterday and Mike asked this really
good question I think and he he's done
some follow-up work we we whether or not
the permit would allow out of county
trash and and the response was that the
permit says no right permit Adam Corey
and and Miss Girando stated that the
permit does not allow outofcount trash
but there seems to be some question
about that um it seems that that may in
fact not be accurate. I want to bring
John Cannon in after this segment and I
want to ask him those questions. I mean,
he's obviously going to take this
legislation up tonight as the as the
president of the county council, but
these are questions we should be asking
of all of our elected officials. Uh the
fact that the county executive just a
month ago didn't bring this up then only
to have it on the last day of the month
to to to be brought up as a reason to
start this phase closure. Well, le let's
bring John Cannon in. Mike, will you
stick around? Sure. We'll we'll bring
John in and we'll ask him some of these
questions and then I'd like to circle
back with the three of us and just see
because we had some questions coming out
of the press conferences if we can't get
them answered with John Cannon, but
we'll we'll leave them out there as
questions to still be uh followed up on.
Okay. Great. Outstanding. Thanks. So
stay with us. When we come back, we're
going to bring in president of this
county council, John Cannon, and we're
going to find out his take on the
landfill closure proposed by the county
executive. So stay with us. We'll be
right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. I'm your
host, Joe White. To get more insight
into the potential issues at the
landfill, I wanted to bring in President
of the County Council, Mr. John Cannon.
Thank you. Pleasure to be here. Thank
you. Mike, thanks for sticking around.
Of course. So, uh, obviously you're
you're going to consider emergency
legislation this week, uh, to codify
parts of the landfill. And I just really
wanted to ask you why why did you what's
your response to the fact that the plan
that the county executive had to had the
phased closing without having met with
the county council in work session about
that specific item? Right. What what
what part did that play into your
emergency legislation? Well, we'd had a
not long ago uh prior to this
announcement being made, we'd had a
meeting with public works and that that
discussion was primarily focused on the,
you know, increasing the the the rates
at the landfill. So, the conversation
sort of went back and forth as to
whether there was the purpose was for
funding for the landfill or whether it
was to create sort of a deterrent. So,
we really weren't sure of how that was
proceeding, but the council at that time
chose not to implement an increase in
July. this that as of you know July 1st
of this year we decided to wait until uh
January 26 that we thought that would be
um uh more advantageous for the haulers
as well instead of you know hitting them
all at once with with several fees
because we've had about four increases
in the or three increases in the last
four years. Yes. So anyway, so that was
uh that was where most of this started
and then it came to our attention about
I guess maybe a week afterwards that
there was uh a meeting that the
executive branch held with the with the
commercial haulers. Okay. And at that
meeting, what was a real surprise to me,
I found out about it through a text
message with the screenshot. Okay? You
know, and I'm I'm on the county council,
right? I I should be aware of some of
these things. So point being is it it
what really surprised us that there was
a recommendation to close the landfills
just close the landfills on Saturdays on
August the 1st which is in less than 60
days. Yeah. Which is like immediate.
Yeah. And after that uh on October 1st
it was going to be to close it on
Saturdays and Mondays. And then it was
going to be February 1st they were going
to uh pick another day. Yeah. And then
July 26th it was going to be uh
considered the possibility of closing it
all together. So it would be closed for
ultimately three days during the week
and then completely closed by July 1st
of next year. Yeah. But I would say by
July 1 of next year, you may have
already put all these people out of
business. I have no idea. So the point
being is that we found that was it was
very surprising and we felt in all
honesty uh we thought that we needed to
take some type of action on behalf of
the public in general and secondarily on
behalf of the commercial haulers. This
could really threaten their livelihood.
and we felt it it was very much it was
very impractical as to how this was
being approached. So you have a you have
a circumstance where you close the land
and I get it. We're running out of room.
I understand but you know when those
type of things happen I think you have
to get together and you have to
collaborate and you have to evaluate
what your issues are, what your
solutions might be and you also I've
always said you have to engage the
industries on which you're passing some
type of legislation. Did you have
flashbacks to the recycling centers
close? I know. I mean, and and that is
the issue really. I think that I think
that where where we actually find
ourselves getting into such conflict in
Wcomo County, which is so terribly
unfortunate,
is such as that, Joe, where unilateral
decisions are being made and we're
seeing no
forget the fact of whether or not the
council was informed on that. I'm more
concerned about whether the public was
informed on that and being given fair
input as to what whether or not they
wanted to move forward as such. Right.
Yeah. cuz there's a I mean there's a
hurt there whether it's an industry like
the trash haulers or just individuals in
the community trying to get the
recycling to the most convenient center
next to their house. Sure. So, do you
you feel like this emergency legislation
um obviously you all as the council has
to still go through and and discuss it
in open session and and vote on it, but
as it's as it's in being introduced,
does it have the opportunity to at least
uh get that input that you you're
looking for from the industry and the
and the citizens to to plan or at least
protect them in the short term? Well,
uh, several council members have had a
lot of discussions with the industry as
as a whole to try to evaluate what they
feel may or may not be, uh, in their
best interest. And we recognize we also
have to look out in the best interest of
the public as well. And we've had those
discussions. But when you're dealing
with emergency legislation, we we found
this would be necessary part of the
process, whereas normally we we would
maybe have another work session such as
we just had a couple of weeks ago with
public works and, you know, try to feel
them out for what the heck was going on.
But due to the fact that August 1st is
the is the first date and we really
concerned about that to a great extent,
um we thought it was necessary to
initiate um emergency legislation right
away, which means the emergency
legislation has to come first, which is
what we're going to do uh on on on
Tuesday. Yeah. And but the the county
executive in her press conference on
Monday, June 30th, stated that she was
planning on having a work session with
you in the middle of July. Uh let's just
say that was going to happen. Is that
enough time to have a work session with
the county executive when she has
already put out there that the phase
closure is going to start on August 1st?
Well, it's a good point and there are a
lot of mixed messages coming out right
now as far as uh whether you know the
count the executive and the council are
all on board with one thing or another
thing and then you know we'll hear that
statement being made and then we'll hear
statements that are contradictory to
that probably within 24 hours. So, as as
far as that's concerned, Joe, um the
intent may have been that the executive
says, "Well, we're going to be their
intent was to meet in July, but when you
put out a mandate, you know, as was done
probably about, I guess it's been about
three, four weeks now, you the council
has to react." Yeah. Unfortunately.
Yeah. And so, yeah, because the, you
know, the train's already left the
station. Yeah. And so, we have to take
our measures that in place because keep
in mind that even though we passed
legislation, it takes time to enact. And
even the way that we're doing it, we
will have a an introduction. Then we
will have a work session. So there will
be the opportunity for a work session
with the executive branch with public
works and and for public input as well.
So that's what's so important. That's
what's been left out completely. Yeah.
And also input from the from the uh from
the contractors. Following that, we will
uh we'll have to, you know, we'll we'll
have another meeting where we'll vote on
it. Okay. And then of course, you have
to go through the um the uh time period
for a veto. So we're figuring um worst
case scenario we'll be able to land on
this bill as being in effect on
September 2nd. Okay. So there may be a
period of time where the landfills
closed on Saturdays. Exactly. And that's
why there's sort of the sense of urgency
because we feel that you know we want to
try to come back to some common sense
ground where uh the public and the uh
and the um the haulers themselves all
have really gotten a fair shake out of
this. Well, speaking of contradictory uh
information that's out there, uh Mike
Goldberg and some others have done some
research. Yesterday, the acting uh
superintendent of the landfill, Adam Cy,
said that the Maryland MDE permit does
not allow uh trash from outside the
county to come to the to the landfill.
Mhm. Our state refuge disposal permit,
all pertinent supplemental
documentation, and including our 10-year
solid waste management plan that was
recently adopted by county council
resolution and approved by the state of
Maryland in the spring of this year,
late winter, spring of this year, says
that our landfill only takes
intrajurisdictional waste. That means
that our landfill serves the population
of Wcomamico County and no other. It's
black and white in Comar issued to the
Wcomakico County Executive. That
operational charge rests in this elected
official's hands. We have found nothing
in the permits that we can research that
that see that. Do you have an
understanding of whether or not our
permit is in violation if we're taking
out of county trash? Uh, no, Joe. It's a
good point, but we we've already
reviewed that. We had Mr. Benson look at
that. Yesterday, the county executive
and her staff held a uh meeting with the
press to discuss the landfill issues.
During that meeting, it was represented
that that the Wcomo County has a uh
refuge disposable permit with the
Maryland Department of Environment and
that and that that refuge permit uh
related or had language in it that
restricted Wamo County's ability to c
take out of county solid waste. Have
reviewed the uh that permit. There is
not any express language in the permit
that restricts Wakcomo County from
accepting out of county refuge or solid
waste. In addition to that, I spoke to
the chief of the solid waste operations,
lands and material administration of the
Maryland Department of Environment and
expressly asked him whether there was
any language in the refuge permit that
restricted W County from accepting out
of county uh solid waste. and he assured
me that there was nothing in the permit
that had to do with um solid waste, out
of county solid waste. In addition,
there was a representation that W County
has a uh 10-year comprehensive solid
waste management plan and that there was
some language in that in that plan that
restricted uh out of county solid waste.
that solid waste plan the was um
presented to the council in January of
2025.
If you review that uh plan which is on
the website, county solid waste plan
states the Newand Park landfill is
adequate to meet the projected demands
for the foreseeable future. However, the
county should begin to explore their
possibility of expanding into adjacent
areas at the Newland Park site or
identify possible locations for a new
facility. Uh the relevance of that is
that in January of this year, uh the
executive and the landfill uh informed
the county and the state that the
Newland Park landfill was adequate and
there was no need to make modifications
except to consider expanding it. And
from his interpretation of the statute,
it simply allows Wcomo County the right
to refuse. It does it, but it doesn't
set down any parameters or any mandates
that you know it no outofcount services
can he said that three different times.
I mean he he he didn't double down, he
tripled down on that statement. So, I
mean, is that just it's it's an option,
but it's definitely not cuz they were
almost seeming like the the the county
executive's names on this permit and if
we violate this that somehow she is
directly in trouble with the MDE. Is
that I I have no idea how the how
they're trying to present this. Uh we're
just taking advice from our legal
counsel that says as as is written with
the legislative bill, we can move
forward as we're doing right now. Okay.
And I don't believe that the permit says
Julie Grodano, county executive. I
believe it only says the county
executive. Yeah. So, you know, she's
tried to make it very personal, but it's
not. It refers to simply the executive
branch of the county government. I'm
pretty sure that when we uh we when our
county executive filed suit against us
about the appointments that were made,
um we we all paid for that bill. So, I
don't think it's any any one
individual's ever been held accountable.
Um, at least not so far. Right. U, do
you feel like the life of the landfill,
the expected life of the landfill has
changed since 2022? Do you feel like
it's more or less still the same? I
think there's serious concerns about
what's happened to the landfill. I think
there's I just I can only presume uh
that in the past few years that there's
been a a miscalculation
as to how quickly the the the landfill
itself, the current cell uh has filled
up and the additional cells. Part of
what I've sent a request out to the
executive branch is at this meeting
that's coming up that part of what we'd
like to discuss is having an actual
overhead of the entire area and letting
the council know. So, we have new new we
have new council members. We got some of
that council members probably don't even
know where each of the cells are
located, but a geographical overlay of
where all the cells are and what the
status of, you know, which cell is
currently being used. Uh how far are we
moving forward with the next cell and
the cell after that, the permitting
timelines, the the length of service,
the length of use we'll get out of that.
So, I think it's going to be a good me a
good, you know, exchange to try to, you
know, enlighten the council of exactly
where we are in in the um in the play
because we always assumed that we had
several years left, 15 years left. Well,
in 2018, it was put out there that the
remaining useful life of the landfill
was 22 years, I believe, and I think
that's 2040. Here it is just a few years
later, seven years later and suddenly
the uh executive department is is
claiming there's only four to seven
years. That variance is so wide. Was
there reason are you aware of any reason
to believe that the prior studies that
were done in 2018 or before were that
far off? I mean, it it's it's just such
a a wide gap between the two uh
estimates that it leaves me suspicious.
And that's true, Michael. I mean, and we
don't really know. I see I I think
sometimes, you know, when you're dealing
with an executive, you're dealing with a
legislative form of government. Uh the
legislative branch of course um isn't
always um that hands-on, you know, uh
and so we we sort of have to try to pay
more, you know, put more of our focus on
the legislative. It matters as opposed
to micromanaging the landfill and trying
to find out, you know, how much time is
left. It's like if you don't know, you
don't know to ask. So we just assume
based on probably with what you say on
the 2018, I was under the impression
that yes, it was going to be it was
going to last quite a while. And over
the last year and a half, I haven't seen
where any huge alarm bells have gone
off, you know, saying that that that
number wasn't sufficient, wasn't
adequate. The last time I checked, over
the last year, we've had several public
works meetings where they have given
updates of what's going on with public
works. The comprehensive plan was put in
their hands. It's accessible online. You
can go see it. Um, so anytime that they,
you know, had questions about the
landfill, they very easily could have
reached out at that point in time.
requested a work session to deal with
this specific issue. This specific
issue, we were we were at a point where
we felt most comfortable after meeting
with MDE, after meeting with our
attorney, and this takes a little bit.
This takes a little bit of time to put
something together to really figure out
the best course of action. So, actually,
the request was supposed to go in
because we were going to be meeting in
the middle of July for a work session.
Came out, it sort of came out of nowhere
is what I'm trying to say here. Well,
one of the pieces of information we got
from the county executives press
conference on June 30th from from Adam
Corey was that when they were preparing
cell 8, they were finding some trash
that maybe was there that wasn't
supposed to be there, and they were
having to remove that and put that into
cell 10, which is the one they're using
now, which was filling it up faster. But
that was the very first time I've ever
heard that. And I attend or watch almost
every county council meeting. First time
I've heard it. And if it's the first
you've heard of it, then how would you
know to anticipate that? This is
obviously something that they've seen
before and kept it to themselves. Well,
and I I really, you know, I can't say,
Joe, I really can't say. I mean, we're
we're looking at the same sort of
circumstances with the dredging where,
you know, it's now going to cost us $7.2
million to uh to remove the spoils from
Sharps Point that we just put down
there, maybe seven years ago. $7.2 $2
million to reserve to remove those those
spoils so that we can put then put more
in. So you know it's a it's an awful
huge price tag uh you know for playing
in these in the sand trap so to say and
I'm I'm just curious as to how that that
process even came about whereas
mitigation of other properties hadn't
been considered quite some time ago. I
would when I attended the meetings back
in April and they needed the the initial
2.3 million just to remove the first
100,000 cubic yards from Sharp's Point.
They literally needed an answer the next
day, right? That is achen to emergency
legislation. And then when you hear just
from her press conference on the 30th
saying that it was irresponsible the way
you all are acting where things have to
be done so quickly. Then then you're I
agree with you. We spent another 7.2
million in this fiscal year, the one we
just started today actually uh to remove
the other 300,000 cubic yards. It just
seems so so um it it information is
being held on to. And actually a quote
she said in her in her press conference
yesterday is we didn't need to bring it
to the public until it was a crisis.
Well, I think I would say um until
there's a crisis, there's really not a
need. How from a conservative
standpoint, how how do we possibly plan
and and keep for from busting our
revenue cap and and raising taxes on
people if we're going to wait till
crisis mode? Well, that's the purpose of
government to avoid crisis. But and
there's nothing worse, you know, whether
it's government or private sector, than
crisis management. You know, your
planning should be so that you avoid a
crisis. I just find it very vexing, you
know, that the council isn't being
informed of a crisis, by her own
description, a crisis, until she calls
it a crisis. And then it puts the
councils back up against the wall and
putting putting y'all in a position
where you have to take quick action. I
think the problem here is and and I've
talked about this before is when you
have very last minute issues and just a
couple of them just to bring up is the
funding of Fruitland Primary, the the
negotiations with the Fraternal Order of
Police, uh the COLA, some of the
information that was held back from the
uh actuarial data, uh the liquor bills
just 6 months ago. To me, that was kind
of a certifiable debacle in many ways.
Some of that had to be rescended later.
the kennel legislation just didn't go
very well. It It's not good when you
have to do things last minute, but I
don't think you're having a choice. And
the and the and the reason is is this
bait and switch stuff. Okay. So, the
county executive just 5 weeks ago
admitted on another show that she did a
bait and switch over the revenue cap.
Now, this revenue cap was put in by
people who signed a petition to put it
on a referendum, passed it. It is really
not a political football. Uh anybody who
thinks they're a conservative and wants
to get rid of the revenue cap, I
question you. I I do openly.
But when you look at things like Sharp's
Point, Fruitland Primary,
these are these are items that came to
you all last minute and needed to be
approved the next day. The first funding
for Sharp's Point, you needed an answer
that day for the next day for $2.3
million. But then we came back and need
another $7.5 million.
And we couldn't even wait to November
for the bond market. Again, a bait and
switch. Things were moved out of out of
capitalization into PGO
just because this is really terrible
planning. This landfill, we do need a
bigger picture drawn, but you need to
protect the the the the citizens of
Wakamako County now and you need to get
this done. It appears what frustrates me
more than anything is the fact that the
council in all honesty, we're only we're
we're doing our due diligence. And I've
said that before. I said that when there
was a discussion on the capital
improvement program in Baron Creek where
they wanted to put 1.75 million in into
the 2027 CIP. I'm like, well, what is
that? You know, it's a placeholder, but
where's the description as to what what
exactly are the county taxpayers funds
supposed to be rep how are they supposed
to be represented in that 1.75 million?
It's so almost arbitrary. And we, you
know, we have just some reservations
towards acting just in an arbitrary
fashion. We like to see the issues, the
facts, and the figures, especially when
it's, you're talking millions of
dollars. And when you're talking about
millions of taxpayers dollars, and it's
legitimate, it's a concern. 1.75 at
Baron Creek and then 2.75 over at the
health department building with not much
description. Yeah. No description. And
then Sharp's point, I mean, these are
these are numbers uh that add up so
quickly. It's mindblowing. and and uh uh
I I I appreciate look, the county
council is not going to make the right
decision all the time. Neither is the
county executive, but you would really
love to be able to make your decision
based off the most amount of
information, all cards on the table at
one time. So, yeah. Um John, in the
proposed legislation, emergency
legislation from the council, it
provides for a 20% sir charge for um
trash that's brought in from out of
county. Do you feel that this is a
sufficient disincentive for the
commercial trash haulers to bring in out
of county trash? Yeah, it's it's a great
question, Michael. And no, I don't you
know, I really personally I don't I
can't say, you know, how it may play out
where we could at least start and in the
process between now and when this bill
is is passed. I I'm hoping that we come
to a more exact number of what may be
considered a deterrent. I don't think
20% is really a deterrent. If you look
at 20 20% of what we have right now,
it's about a $16.80 increase, right? It
really only brings it up to par with
surrounding counties what they would
charge for their incount trash.
I would disagree. I think the other
counties, yeah, Wester County was at 80,
Somerset County was at 75. So, I think
ju just when we go to our next increase
to 88 or or 90, whichever they pick for
January 1, we're going to be above
Sussex, uh, Somerset, and Wester County,
but but, you know, to answer your
question, we're not really sure of what
that whether that does create a
deterrent or not. Uh, I don't really
think cost increases really does create
a deterrent. I think they just pass
those costs on to their uh to their
clientele. This is more about logistics
likely, right? just for them it's all
about logistics. Yeah. You're you're
you're having a trash truck and you're
wanting to make as many stops in a
straight line as possible and end full
at a dumping place. Right. One question
I would ask is if we go down to Snow
Hill to Worcester Countyy's landfill,
will we find some WCOM County trash
there? Mhm. And do we expect a trash
company to leave Salsbury, ride down St.
Luke's Road, hit a property line, turn
around and come back, maybe hit some of
Fruitland, come back to the landfill,
and then drive all the way to Ocean City
and maybe pick up some stuff and end up
in Snow Hill just to have to drive all
the way back to Salsbury for the end of
the night. Yeah, it doesn't work. They
get 3 miles to the gallon. Yeah, it
doesn't really work. But I think the
reason for that, Michael, for that 20%
as you're asking about was pretty much
in the last conversation that we had
when they wanted to increase the rates
immediately in July and then again in uh
January, we sort of had the the
impression that possibly it was being
treated as a deterrent. So this is sort
of like a kind of like an branch and
saying, "Okay, you know, we'll we'll try
to maintain some type of of measure of
increases for out of county services uh
if you think that's what should be
done." So whether or not that plays out
as a reality, we'll have to see over the
next the next uh over the next month. Do
you uh believe that what the executive
proposed at her press conference uh on
Monday uh for um uh disallowing all
outofcount trash, do you think that's
practiceable or do you see some issues
with that? Um it's what we're
implementing is that primarily for uh
for commercial businesses and industrial
businesses that are going to be bringing
uh construction and demolition materials
in. Absolutely. Absolutely. When you
think about somebody uh you know some
some agency that has to tear down an
entire house and then they bring that to
the landfill. That's a lot. I would only
like that to be in my con.
It's a lot. It can really it can really
hamper your your your business. Thank
you for coming in and speaking about the
landfill. Uh we really appreciate your
time and uh we'd like to follow back up
with you maybe as the rest of this
process goes on. Of course, we'll be at
the county council meetings for the
public hearings and that sort of thing
as well. Yeah. Anytime. Thanks. Well,
stay with us. We'll be right back.
Welcome back to Open Agenda. So, we've
had a chance to speak with County
Council President John Cannon. And just
to wrap up, brought in uh Dr. Joinosa.
Thanks for sticking around. Mr. Mike
Goldberg. Thanks for staying. Yes, sir.
So, gentlemen, Mike, I know you had some
questions coming out of the the press
conference from yesterday. Uh you and I
had a chance to sit with uh President uh
John Cannon. What do you think still
needs to be answered? Uh whether folks
want to go to the county council meeting
or reach out to the county executive
directly. Well, I think one of the
biggest question is, if not the biggest
question, is why was the situation uh at
the landfill being withheld from the
county council? The current council,
they are not being made privy to the
details of the problem. They don't know
that there's a problem, a crisis as the
county executive described it. And until
the press conference yesterday, nothing
has been communicated to them. to me
that that's simply unconscionable
because this is an effort that will
require a cooperative effort between the
council and the executive and if the
executive has the primary responsibility
and is not communicating to the council
how do you resolve the problem and and
this is the essence of it you know we
could critique and obviously I don't
want to spend time we we you know safari
the quarry is one thing right that
that's the kind of lack of transparency
that is bad but but this is paralytic to
sort of the county because you're
dealing with a in regards to the
landfill, you're dealing with
simultaneously an environmental crisis,
a fiscal crisis, and a logistical
crisis. And for the county executive to
be on the job for 2 and 1/2 years, and
to have never really brought it up until
recently, and then to sandbag the
public, forget the council, the public
about this triple threat with a six week
notice. with the 6 weeks not notice that
as we now talk about with President
Kennedy, it really can't be addressed in
the short term with that emergency
legislation until September. I think
it's I think it's easy to see why
someone who lives in the Shadow Hills
neighborhood would be upset about Safari
at the Quarry. Totally. But let's take
them out of the equation for just a
minute. Yeah. Why was it that someone
like you and I who don't live near
Shadow Hills Yeah. Why were we
concerned? Well, it's because if you
take the example of how that was handled
and you put it on something much more
important like the landfill, these are
the results you get. This is the thing.
It's the pattern, right? Yes. And and
and again, no disrespect to the people
at Shadow Hills or anywhere else, but we
are dealing with probably the biggest
crisis in recent county. Don't forget
the county executive just recently was
bragging about how she did a bait and
switch over busting the revenue cap to
the county to the county council. Right.
So, is this is this a bait and switch?
Yeah. Like we don't really know what's
going on up at the landfill because
again, you don't have the information.
Her credibility is gone because she
explained that she did a bait and
switch. There's a consistent pattern of
behavior here and that pattern of
behavior is shrouding the truth from the
public and from the council. Of course,
Shadow Hills kind of opened
that
eyes to what's going on. Actually, I
think the Matt Litel thing opened
and then Shadow Hills walked right on
in. One of many, you know, taking away
the u the recycling centers, the
convenience centers. This is also the
same department who just came to the
county council to ask for $10 million to
pull soil out in an emergency at a
sharps point for the dredging and then
said they couldn't even wait till
November for the the money to be bonded.
So I mean bait and switch one crisis
after the other admitting that we don't
go public until there's a crisis. This
is no way to manage a government. It it
seems like the lies are piling up higher
than the trash at the landfill at this
point. And and two, it's submitting
budget slate where it puts the council
in position where they have to make snap
decisions in order to be in compliance
with the with the terms and conditions
of the county charter. There is again a
consistent pattern of behavior and that
pattern of behavior is grossly
irresponsible. But but this one really
has the potential. I mean this is this
could be a big deal. This could be the
big one. Again, pattern of pattern of
behavior. And look, and let's not let
the county council completely off the
hook here, they have shown, if we go
back to the kennel legislation over the
winter, they're not great at doing
things when they have to do them last
minute. Uh we bought the health
department building in a rush and then
we're kind of in a rush to renovate it
at like half the cost of the whole
building itself. Yeah. That's not the
position to put them in to get the best
out of them. True. And then on top of
that, this is about our seventh crisis
in six months. And I'm not talking
shadow hills here. I'm not talking about
that kind of stuff. I'm just talking
about uh sharps, which which related
which raises the other question is, you
know, god forbid, what's next? We don't
know. And and but it's coming. We joked
I mean today is the first day of the
fiscal year uh 26, right? That is true.
and and we we have a little joke inside
bet on which department's going to come
to the county council first within the
first 60 days and go we had no idea this
was going to happen and we lots of money
what's the old expression never let a
crisis go to waste well when you've got
multiple crisises that's so so what do
you think Dr. Dr.
What from a political science
standpoint, which I'm not, but well,
history, you're the closest one. All
right. All right. Political science
standpoint, what do what if folks, the
regular citizens are out there, what do
they need to know and what questions
should they be asking? Well, again,
simply put, uh you need to know that we
have some serious problems in our county
right now, particularly with regard to
the landfill where it is this trifecta
of problems, environmental, logistical,
and financial that affects everybody,
every business, every homeowner, every
renter, every kid who makes a dirty
diaper, whatever. It all is wrapped up
into this issue. And when you have no
real communication from the
administration that is supposed to take
care of us, supposed to protect us, uh,
and then you just have excuses at the
last minute coupled with a rush to
basically put other companies and
businesses perhaps out of business, um,
we're in real trouble. And so regular
citizens need to understand something
that while we don't think of local
government as the most interesting or
sexy thing, um, it really does matter
where our trash goes or doesn't go.
Yeah. And it's literally piling up now
in ways that I think a lot of people
just were not told about. Unfortunately,
I I just don't feel that the county
executive is focused on the big issues
that really matter to the citizens of
Wcomo County. You know, she was more
interested in the first two and a half
years of her term in fulfilling campaign
promises to her uh allies, her friends,
and her donors. So this wasn't really on
her radar perhaps until you know more
recently and now surprise there's a
crisis. Well just a couple months ago
she's already stated that her her
attention to some degree has been turned
to running for reelection. So is that
the litmus test here? Is this is if it's
if it's a if it's an issue that could go
to reelecting her, she's interested. If
not, I think that's why the press
conference happened the way that it did.
I mean that like every every press
conference by a politician to some
extent is about electoral politics,
right? To to some extent. But but but
this really was an it was an attempt by
the executive's office, I think, to go
from being on the defensive to then try
to switch it around, switch the
narrative to then put blame elsewhere.
Yeah. And that she's part of the
solution when in actuality is not.
Right. And and that's that's a classic
sort of maneuver of any person or entity
that's trying to take advantage of a
crisis situation is, you know, you
become the agent of the solution even if
you're the cause of it. Well, we we are
one year ago from her last press
conference out in front of the
government office building touting the
the dissolution of the monopoly for for
liquor bills, right? And uh the key the
key quote there was, we open the door,
we might as well walk through it. I
think uh we've definitely opened a new
door. And to the point I was making
earlier, who were the beneficiaries of
that? Her campaign donors and political
allies, not the people of the county. I
sense a pattern. Well, we're going to
continue to follow this story and we
hope that you will as well. So, thank
you for joining us for this edition of
Open Agenda. We'll be back next week
with another new episode.
This is not a Julie Gerardano Mike
Goldberg
If you like fireworks, you'll get 'em on this week's OPEN AGENDA (S2 E24). This is a “must watch” episode devoted to the landfill debacle that will impact every resident of Wicomico County. You'll witness the Executive Branch of the county government provably and repeatedly lying about the terms of the Landfill Permit, the Executive's absurd plan to phase-in closure of the landfill starting August 1, and the impending “crisis” that was somehow excluded from the Comprehensive Landfill Plan she submitted just 6 months ago. You'll learn about how the Executive withheld vital information from county residents and the Council alike, and in her own words you'll hear her say, “Until there's a crisis, there's really not a need to communicate.” Tune in and be informed.
