1 1 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY LEGISLATURE 3 COUNTY OF ONONDAGA 4 ------------------------------------------- 5 In the Matter of 6 ONONDAGA COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 7 ------------------------------------------- 8 9 PUBLIC HEARING in the above matter, conducted at the Onondaga County Court House, Legislative 10 Chambers, 4th Floor, 401 Montgomery Street, Syracuse, New York before, JOHN F. DRURY, CSR, 11 Notary Public in and for the State of New York, on December 16, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. 12 13 LEGISLATORS PRESENT BY DISTRICT: 14 1st BRIAN F. MAY 15 2nd JOHN C. DOUGHERTY 3rd JIM CORL 16 4th (Judith A. Tassone - not present) 5th KATHLEEN A. RAPP 17 6th MICHAEL E. PLOCHOCKI 7th DANNY J. LIEDKA 18 8th CHRISTOPHER J. RYAN 9th PEGGY CHASE 19 10th KEVIN A. HOLMQUIST 11th PATRICK M. KILMARTIN, Floor Leader 20 12th DAVID H. KNAPP 13th DEREK T. SHEPARD, JR. 21 14th CASEY E. JORDAN 15th J. RYAN McMAHON, Chairman 22 16th MONICA WILLIAMS 17th LINDA R. ERVIN 23 Clerk Deborah Maturo 24 Reported By: 25 John F. Drury, CSR, RPR Court Reporter 471-7397 2 1 2 INDEX TO SPEAKERS 3 SPEAKERS PAGE 4 MATT MARKO 5 5 DEBORAH WARNER CenterState CEO 7 6 PHIL PREHN 12 7 THOMAS BOUVIA Southwood Fire Dept 15 8 MARK BURGER Soil/Water Conservation 17 9 BEATA KARPINSKA 19 10 JENNIFER PETERSON home/business owner 23 11 JOSEPH ESPOSITO Contractor for Covanta 26 12 PATRICK BROWN 29 13 LIZ MT. PLEASANT 35 14 PETER KING 40 15 JOHN HUGHES Sierra Club 47 16 IAN HUNTER Last Chance Recycling 54 17 PAM JENKINS Cortland Envl Admin Bd 61 18 DR. MICHAEL WOLFSON 66 19 KATE BROWN 12 years old 81 20 KATHLEEN CARROLL Covanta Business Mngr 83-90 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 Calling Roll 2 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Good evening. 3 The public hearing for the Onondaga 4 County Solid Waste Management Plan is 5 now called to order. Just for a couple 6 housekeeping items. The exits in the 7 building. At this time if you please 8 turn off your cell phones. Would the 9 clerk please call the roll. 10 CALLING ROLL BY CLERK MATURO: 11 Q. Legislator May? 12 A. Here. 13 Q. Dougherty? 14 A. Here. 15 Q. Corl? 16 A. Here. 17 Q. Tassone. (No response) Rapp? 18 A. Here. 19 Q. Plochocki? 20 A. Here. 21 Q. Liedka? 22 A. Here. 23 Q. Ryan? 24 A. Here. 25 Q. Chase? 4 1 Calling Roll 2 A. Here. 3 Q. Holmquist. 4 A. Here. 5 Q. Kilmartin? 6 A. Here. 7 Q. Knapp? 8 A. Here. 9 Q. Shepard? 10 A. Here. 11 Q. Jordan? 12 A. Here. 13 Q. Williams? 14 A. Here. 15 Q. Ervin? 16 A. Present. 17 Q. Mr. Chairman? 18 A. Present. 19 CLERK MATURO: 16 present, 1 absent. 20 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you. Would 21 the clerk please read the notice of 22 public hearing or should we waive 23 reading? 24 MR. KILMARTIN: So move. 25 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Any objection? 5 1 Marko 2 Hearing none, the reading of the notice 3 is hereby waived. Was the notice of 4 this hearing duly published? 5 CLERK MATURO: It was. 6 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you. We 7 have speakers who signed up already 8 tonight. If anyone else during the 9 process would like to sign up and speak 10 please come and see our staff in the 11 front of the room. I would ask each 12 speaker, because there is quite a few, 13 try to keep your remarks to three or 14 four minutes. 15 The first speaker is Matt Marko, 16 Syracuse, New York. 17 MATT MARKO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 18 Good evening, Legislators. My name is 19 Matt Marko, I live at 311 Deforest Road 20 in Syracuse, New York. My professional 21 credentials include professional 22 engineer, board certified environmental 23 engineer, fellow of the American Society 24 of Civil Engineers, I manage the office 25 of an environmental consulting firm here 6 1 Marko 2 in Syracuse, vice chair of the SUNY 3 College of Environmental Science and 4 Forestry Board of Trustees. But today 5 I'm speaking as a resident of Onondaga 6 County. And one that lives less than 7 three miles away from the OCRRA owned 8 and Covanta operated waste-to-energy 9 facility. 10 I would like to commend the County 11 Executive and the Legislature for their 12 leadership in putting the message to 13 reduce, reuse and recycle first. 14 However, until recycling eliminates the 15 very real need to manage hundreds of 16 thousands of tons of the municipal solid 17 waste from our community our management 18 plans need to think regionally if not 19 globally, and in the best interest of 20 the environment and future generations. 21 The proposed plan and specifically 22 the Regional Partnership with Cortland 23 County is not perfect, but it does 24 address head on the reality of our 25 consumption base economy and our 7 1 Warner 2 consumption driven society. The plan 3 responsibly balances the environment, 4 economics, and social impacts, 5 specifically eliminating the troubling 6 situation of emergent facility. 7 The plan did not create OCRRA, the 8 waste-to-energy facility or the contract 9 between Onondaga County and Covanta, but 10 it does appropriately suggest how we 11 should move forward, based on where we 12 are at this time. 13 I urge you too approve this update 14 and ensure we re-evaluate in 10 years 15 time. Thank you. 16 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you 17 Mr. Marko. The next speaker Deb Warner, 18 Syracuse, New York. 19 DEBORAH WARNER: Good evening, 20 Mr. Chairman, Legislators. My name is 21 Deborah Warner, I am the vice-president 22 for Public Policy in Government 23 Relations at CenterState CEO. We are a 24 regional business and economic 25 development organization representing 8 1 Warner 2 about 2,000 businesses in a 12 County 3 region. I'm a resident of Syracuse, I 4 live in the Valley and I'm pretty sure 5 that's less than five miles from the 6 Rock Cut plant. 7 Thank you for the opportunity to 8 comment on the Onondaga County Solid 9 Waste Plan. Specifically we want to 10 commend you for incorporating the "trash 11 for ash" swap that has been negotiated 12 with Cortland County into your plan. 13 Years ago Onondaga County took bold 14 steps to initiate a waste management 15 ecosystem that created OCRRA, built the 16 Rock Cut Road waste-to-energy facility 17 and launched a world class recycling 18 program. 19 Our community has distinguished 20 itself nationally for our outstanding 21 recycling programs and for progressive 22 modern waste management. It's important 23 for us to continue these efforts and the 24 reputation we have deservedly earned. 25 We commend OCRRA, Cortland County and 9 1 Warner 2 Covanta for their leadership in forging 3 a win-win-win approach to our ash and 4 Cortland's trash for several reasons: 5 This brings long term operational 6 sustainability to both OCRRA and 7 Cortland County operations. Onondaga 8 County will be able to continue our best 9 in class recycling and special waste 10 program and extend them into Cortland 11 County. Covanta, having demonstrated a 12 strong track record will continue to run 13 the waste-to-energy facility and will 14 make $21 million in plant upgrades 15 starting with $6 million in enhanced 16 pollution control and monitoring 17 equipment. 18 This is an environmentally 19 responsible step, will reduce greenhouse 20 gas emissions, equivalent to taking 21 15,000 cars off the road. This plan 22 will cut ash travel in half from 80 23 miles to 40 miles a trip. And trucks 24 will now travel full both ways. More 25 waste-to-energy electricity will be 10 1 Warner 2 generated at Rock Cut Road. Bringing in 3 additional, up to half a million dollars 4 a year into those operations and saving 5 over $50,000 in Thruway tolls. 6 My message to you is also to 7 emphasize where why this agreement makes 8 good economic development sense and has 9 advantages. Good government makes good 10 sense and does not go unnoticed by the 11 business community. Having modern waste 12 disposal facilities and future viability 13 for these operations makes us more 14 attractive to keep, grow and attract new 15 jobs and economic activity to our 16 community. 17 The financial stability of OCRRA is 18 important, because it provides 19 predictability and cost for residents 20 and businesses. Predictability for 21 budgeting and a cost of operations is 22 useful and attractive to businesses. 23 Another important aspect is this 24 intermunicipal agreement is government 25 modernization. Modern, well run 11 1 Warner 2 municipal services speak positively to 3 the community and to businesses when 4 they're looking at their decisions where 5 to start to expand or move. Savings and 6 avoided costs for municipalities, school 7 districts and government entities will 8 benefit taxpayers at all these levels. 9 The savings from this new agreement 10 with Cortland will be spread amongst 11 residential households, businesses, 12 institutions and municipalities in both 13 counties. Also, given how precious 14 infrastructure dollars are now, deficit 15 reduced wear and tear on the road miles 16 and the miles traveled, especially by 17 heavy trucks, is an important benefit 18 that also benefits taxpayers. 19 We respectfully urge acceptance of 20 the Plan with its inclusion of the new 21 opportunities between Onondaga and 22 Cortland County. Thank you. 23 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you, 24 Deborah. Our next speaker Phil Prehn 25 from Syracuse, New York. 12 1 Prehn 2 PHIL PREHN: Phil Prehn, Syracuse, 3 New York. Good evening, thank you 4 Mr. Chairperson and Legislators for 5 holding this public hearing. My name is 6 Phil Prehn, I am a resident of the city 7 of Syracuse. And I guess I win the 8 lottery, because I'm a mile away from 9 the trash-burning plant as we have it 10 now. And my mother-in-law lives on 11 Thurber, she can practically see it from 12 her house. 13 I am here because I have a personal 14 stake in this issue. Many times I've 15 had to call the hot line and tell 16 Covanta that I smell acrid smelling foul 17 chemical smells in my neighborhood. I 18 had a hard time finding the number to 19 call. I had a hard time getting them to 20 return my calls. I still don't know 21 what they did. They claim they did 22 something, and eventually the smell 23 after a few days evaporated. But it 24 gave me pause and didn't actually 25 instill me with the confidence in the 13 1 Prehn 2 management of the operation. 3 I've been a life long resident of 4 the city of Syracuse, and in fact I was 5 a dues-paying member of Recycle First, 6 back in the '80s, when the trash burning 7 plant was first being proposed. And the 8 opposition at the time, including myself, 9 said that your building this way too 10 big. If you're really serious about 11 recycling you won't build such a large 12 trash burning plant, obviating the 13 ability of the recyclers to do their job. 14 And one of the things that was told 15 to us at the time was, well, don't 16 worry, we'll never import trash. So I'm 17 here some 30 years later to witness 18 you're going back on your promises. I 19 don't know, somebody earlier talked 20 about the benefits to municipalities. 21 Having an irresponsible Legislature that 22 you can't trust to honor the agreements 23 certainly isn't a benefit to other 24 municipalities, certainly not to 25 residents. 14 1 Prehn 2 Another statement was made about the 3 world class status of the OCRRA and 4 recycling. They have won awards and 5 they have done a good job as far as its 6 done, given the fact that they've had a 7 lot of potential recycling diverted from 8 their operation into the trash-burning 9 plant. But world class now, as we've 10 heard when an expert was brought to town 11 recently to talk about the promising new 12 ventures in recycling, world class now 13 means that real progressive communities 14 are shooting for zero waste. We're 15 nowhere near that. And I don't see how, 16 you know, having an extensive burning 17 program is going to make us world class 18 any longer. 19 And I urge the Legislature to not 20 approve ash-for-trash, to keep your 21 promises, not go back on the promises 22 you made 30 years ago. And to look into 23 establishing recycling as a true 24 economic engine for our community. It's 25 proven in other places that it creates 15 1 Bouvia 2 jobs. And it's much more beneficial for 3 people like myself and my in-laws and my 4 friends and family that have to put up 5 with what's coming out of the stacks 6 over on Rock Cut Road. Thank you, very 7 much. 8 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thanks, Phil. 9 Next speaker is Thomas Bouvia, 10 Jamesville, New York. 11 THOMAS BOUVIA: Good evening, my 12 name is Tom Bouvia, I'm the First Deputy 13 Chief of the Southwood Volunteer Fire 14 Department. The Covanta facility is 15 within our fire protection district, and 16 we get the pleasure of going there once 17 in a while, but more to train than for 18 any emergencies, so that's good. But 19 they do open their facility to us 20 several times throughout the year for 21 training exercises. And I'm honored to 22 be here in support of this proposal. 23 The Solid Waste Management Plan 24 proposes adding another 25,000 tons of 25 waste from Cortland to be processed at 16 1 Bouvia 2 the facility. Since the facility is 3 permitted by New York State DEC to 4 process over 361,000 tons of waste 5 annually, There is no issue with 6 bringing in this additional waste. Even 7 with this additional waste the facility 8 will not be exceeding the permitted tons 9 of the air and solid waste permits which 10 are tied to the over 361,000 tons. 11 Currently the facility is operating 12 well under capacity at 315,000 tons per 13 year, and has been for the last three to 14 four years. With Cortland's proposed 15 waste the facility will be at or about 16 340,000 tons per year, still well below 17 the permitted capacity. 18 Covanta and OCRRA have both been 19 great community citizens. Covanta is a 20 superior operator at the facility for 21 the last twenty years, and it has 22 operated a facility with an impeccable 23 safety record since it was constructed 24 in 1995. I'm confident the proposed 25 addition of bringing in Cortland County's 17 1 Burger 2 waste will have no negative impact on 3 the facility. Thank you. 4 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you, Thomas. 5 Next we have Mark Burger with Onondaga 6 County Soil and Water Conservation 7 District. 8 MARK BURGER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 9 and thank you Legislature for holding 10 this hearing. Mark Burger, the Director 11 of the Soil to Water Conservation 12 District of Onondaga County. And on 13 behalf of our Board of Directors I'm 14 here to provide support for Covanta 15 Energy and the community education and 16 outreach programs that they strengthen 17 through their support of the Onondaga 18 County Soil and Water Conservation 19 District. 20 Covanta Energy has been a primary 21 sponsor of our Regional Envirothon since 22 1997. Envirothon is a hands-on 23 competition for school students, high 24 school students that promotes awareness 25 to our natural environment. Teams 18 1 Burger 2 compete in such subject matters as 3 aquatics, forestry, wildlife, soils and 4 current environmental issues. To date 5 3,844 students have been through this 6 program in a five county region of 7 Central New York. 8 Covanta's sponsorship for this 9 program has exceeded $85,000 since 1997. 10 And that money has gone to providing the 11 annual newsletter, awards, scholarships 12 and T-shirts for participating students 13 and the volunteers. One of your former 14 Envirothon competitors has gone on to 15 become the Public Information Specialist 16 for Onondaga County Water Environment 17 Authority, and another is a conservation 18 officer in Sitka, Alaska. 19 In 2015 and 2016 Covanta has been 20 secured as a primary sponsor of the New 21 York State Association of Conservation 22 Districts Water Quality Symposium. It's 23 the first time that this Symposium has 24 ever been held in Syracuse, New York, 25 and with the financial support of 19 1 Karpinska 2 Covanta Energy along with hard work of 3 the Syracuse Convention Visitors Bureau 4 and your Soil and Water District, it's 5 going to bring hundreds of environmentally 6 minded conservationist from around New 7 York State and the northeast to Syracuse 8 in March of 2015 and 2016. 9 So on behalf of the Onondaga County 10 Board of Directors for the Soil and 11 Water Conservation District, we would 12 like to lend our support to the updated 13 Solid Waste Management Plan and to the 14 ash-for-trash opportunity with Cortland 15 County. We see it as a great way to 16 grow and expand community education and 17 outreach programs well into the future. 18 Thank you for your time. 19 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thanks, Mark. 20 Next we have Beata Karpinska, Syracuse. 21 BEATA KARPINSKA: Good evening 22 everybody. My name is Beata Karpinska, 23 I'm a resident of Cumberland Avenue in 24 the City of Syracuse. And I just wanted 25 to tell you today in this hearing that 20 1 Karpinska 2 burning trash is a terrible, terrible 3 outdated idea. We have much better 4 technological advances and means to do a 5 better job. And here is my concern: 6 We do not have any added value when 7 we burn trash. We just destroy and just 8 give more chemicals in the air and soil 9 in our land, polluting. We do not have 10 any new jobs that we create from burning 11 trash. We can create jobs from 12 recycling and new programs for recycling 13 and making sure that we have clear waste 14 programs. But we are not doing it with 15 burning trash, it has absolutely no 16 value. 17 There is a picture on the wall when 18 I was going by that says early 20th 19 century manufacturing giant. Over there 20 if I can direct you to it. It has smoke 21 stacks. This is early 20th century. We 22 have to move into the 21st century. And 23 we have to embrace the new technologies 24 that we have wonderful facilities for, 25 like ESF and S.U. and students. And 21 1 Karpinska 2 there is so much other already on the 3 market that we can use to make sure that 4 we take advantage of those technologies 5 to be able to recycle more, not to 6 expand our trash burning. 7 I think it's really important. We 8 cannot go out and import trash from 9 Cortland. This is just going to make 10 our already polluted environment from 81 11 and in that area much worse. Our air, 12 our soil and water will be more 13 polluted. And what I'm concerned about, 14 that this is going to cost us much more 15 money than we can save at all in any way 16 by burning trash. Because we're going 17 to have to clean it up, just like we had 18 to clean up the Onondaga Lake. 19 All this pollution of air, soil and 20 especially water, our reservoir in 21 Jamesville, and Clark Reservation, all 22 those other areas, and especially also 23 health costs of the residents like 24 myself. I also live within a mile from 25 this plant. And I'm very concerned with 22 1 Karpinska 2 the air pollution there. All of our 3 health care costs. This all has to be 4 taken into consideration by you, because 5 you are our public officials that we 6 elected for you to make that important 7 decision today. 8 So I think we have to look at much 9 more beyond just saving money. And this 10 Plan that you have that you have been 11 planning to go all the way to Cortland, 12 I think I'm very concerned that Cortland 13 is not going to be enough. Next place 14 will be another County that you're going 15 to be going to importing trash, which 16 will bring more pollution. So those are 17 the concerns as a resident I have. 18 I very much urge you today to start 19 thinking about expanding recycling and 20 do not approve this plan to go ahead 21 with importing trash from Cortland 22 County, because all we're going to 23 create is more illness, cancer in the 24 community among residents. Vote 25 against, please vote against this 23 1 Peterson 2 expansion. You're going to vote against 3 residents if you vote for expansion and 4 for trash burning. I truly believe 5 you're voting against us, the residents. 6 Thank you, very much. 7 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Beata, thanks. 8 Next we have Jennifer Peterson. 9 JENNIFER PETERSON: Good evening. 10 My name is Jennifer Peterson, and I own 11 a home in the Southwood area, which is 12 less than two miles from the Covanta 13 energy plant. I have lived at my home 14 for over 15 years and I represent an 15 average home household in Onondaga 16 County. It is myself, my husband, my 17 nine year old son, my seven year old 18 daughter and our two dogs. We produce a 19 typical amount of trash each week and we 20 recycle and have a compost pile, but we 21 do have trash that needs to be taken 22 care of weekly. 23 I had often wondered what the 24 building off 481 did as I passed it each 25 day on my way to work. I knew there was 24 1 Peterson 2 concern about it being there and I knew 3 it produced or processed trash. But 4 that was all I knew until I received a 5 call in 2004 from a company called 6 Covanta Energy, who was looking for 7 janitorial provider. 8 See I'm a business owner who 9 provides commercial janitorial services 10 for Onondaga County businesses. Since 11 2004 we have been working closely with 12 Covanta not only to ensure they have a 13 clean facility, but we have also helped 14 them implement green cleaning within the 15 facility, as well as installing green 16 paper products and dispensers. I have 17 learned from my many years with Covanta 18 that this County produces a lot of 19 trash. I was overwhelmed when I saw how 20 much is disposed of daily. 21 As a parent and a homeowner I 22 wondered where can we possibly put all 23 this trash? In the ground? And then 24 what issues would we have? I highly 25 suggest to anyone here to have the 25 1 Peterson 2 opportunity to visit the facility to do 3 so. It is astonishing what is put to 4 the curb weekly. 5 I'm consistently working with 6 Covanta to make certain we have our 7 following and necessary guidelines that 8 they strictly adhere to for the 9 cleanliness and safety of their 10 environment as well as ours. I am 11 confident and comfortable living where I 12 do, because I know what happens behind 13 the scenes. I know what Covanta 14 employees do to ensure a cleaner 15 environment, while addressing our 16 excessive trash demands and providing 17 energy to support this area. 18 I do want to recognize those that do 19 have concerns with the facility. So I 20 want to leave you with one thought. In 21 the part of Jamesville where I live 22 there are many large open fields and 23 farm areas. It's very common for my 24 neighbors to burn barrels or fire-pits 25 of wood, trash and leaves. It is a 26 1 Esposito 2 fairly common practice in the area. One 3 burned barrel can produce the same 4 amount of emissions or pollutants as 5 Covanta does in one year. 6 In closing, I care very much about 7 the environment as a parent, homeowner 8 and business owner. I have two small 9 children who rely on me to make 10 decisions that are in their best 11 interest. Based on my personal 12 experience with Covanta Energy I feel 13 confident they are always keeping the 14 community in mind while providing a much 15 needed resource. Thank you. 16 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you 17 Jennifer. We have Joseph Esposito from 18 Jamesville, New York. 19 JOSEPH ESPOSITO: Good evening. I 20 have the opportunity to be a contractor 21 at the garbage burning steam plant and I 22 live a mile and-a-half downwind along 23 with my children, my wife and my 24 grandchildren; my parents live in 25 Fayetteville. 27 1 Esposito 2 But I have the unique opportunity to 3 be there since the place was started. 4 The scrubber technology in that plant is 5 phenomenal. It's what we needed in the 6 Midwest, so we wouldn't pollute the 7 Adirondacks. Now I understand to all 8 our other residents the confused mind 9 says no. But that place runs like a 10 nuclear plant. The care and the concern 11 that they give to the environment and 12 what the previous speaker just said 13 about the air that comes out of that 14 stack is true. 15 We should all strive to help them. 16 We have to live with Onondaga Lake, 17 that's a big black eye for us. But not 18 only do we gain financially from this 19 plant, all us residents here, but it is 20 a state-of-the-art. We all come from a 21 day when our fathers put oil behind the 22 garage. We should encourage this and we 23 should work to educate the citizens of 24 this County how good that place is. 25 It's a state-of-the-art, you can't go 28 1 Esposito 2 anywhere in the world and find clean -- 3 what we should be more worried about is 4 China. Those people care about the 5 environment. My family works there. I 6 worked there almost since the day it was 7 opened. I have no problems with 8 anything that's emitted there. I spend 9 hours and hours plowing their snow. 10 As a matter of fact when Enron went 11 out of business they spun into a little 12 bit of a problem financially with their 13 bond rating. And they made sure I 14 didn't get hurt. They care about this 15 community. I was down 6,000 in their 16 bankruptcy, and they came and they made 17 sure that I got all that money out of 18 the bankruptcy proceedings. 19 So they do care. But more importantly 20 it's great for our community. It's 21 great for the air. What else do we 22 have? There is no recycling that can 23 take care of all our trash. It doesn't 24 exist. That's a needed facility and it 25 makes us all money. And we should be 29 1 Brown 2 thankful and help them expand if we can. 3 Not only that, but if the Plan that's in 4 place right now that they're proposing 5 makes good use of the fuel, we're going 6 to take the trash from Cortland and 7 bring it here and we're going to bring 8 the ash down there. As a contractor 9 that's a win-win situation. They're 10 great people and we should support them. 11 Thanks. 12 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you. Next 13 we have Patrick Brown, Jamesville, New 14 York. 15 PATRICK BROWN: Thank you, Chairman, 16 thank you Legislators for hearing us 17 tonight and allowing us to comment. I 18 am a resident of Jamesville, I've been a 19 life long resident of Jamesville. I'm 20 here as a resident this evening. And in 21 my career I've been a long term educator 22 and I'm a school administrator of an 23 award winning blue ribbon school 24 district in Central New York. 25 Tonight I would like to discuss the 30 1 P. Brown 2 education section of the actual Solid 3 Waste Management Plan that's proposed, 4 which is on page 81 Section 8.6.3, which 5 is Implementing Interactive and Engaging 6 School Curriculum. The educational 7 program proposed or that's on the 8 website now intends to reach over 12,000 9 3rd through 5th grade students, that's 10 what it states, with common core aligned 11 lessons, videos and games. 12 I've had a chance to review the 13 content of the curriculum materials on 14 the site. The videos, the games and the 15 lessons. And I find that there are 16 several positive messages to our 17 students that are around composting, 18 that are around recycling, reduction and 19 reuse. 20 However, the section on waste-to- 21 energy does not give our children the 22 full story, and the understanding on 23 waste-to-energy facilities. The 24 continued message to the students and 25 the videos, games and materials that are 31 1 P. Brown 2 produced on the website for the lessons 3 in grades 3 through 5 is that waste-to- 4 energy or incineration is the answer for 5 all unrecyclable or non-reusable items. 6 By burning, we're doing the best we can. 7 And that is simply not the reality. The 8 message has been sent to our youth and 9 their teachers for several years, and 10 for specific reasons. And that could 11 quite possibly be one of the reasons we 12 don't have a lot of young people in the 13 room tonight. I have a few I see, but I 14 brought them. 15 Nowhere in the materials does it 16 really discuss a plan for zero waste. 17 And to think about asking our kids based 18 on the inputs from the videos to think 19 about how we would get there. That's 20 true critical thinking. The lessons on 21 incineration and waste-to-energy are 22 very rote, repetitive on the topic of 23 glorification of incineration. How 24 clean and how healthy it is for the 25 environment. And it glorifies the 32 1 P. Brown 2 mounds of energy that's created. 3 It states in the video that there is 4 no harm to our environment from burning 5 trash. It also states that burning 6 trash has a positive impact to our 7 environment, several times in the videos 8 and in the materials. This is simply 9 not a true statement. And it's a 10 message that's being sent to the youth 11 of our County. 12 The videos also say that the 13 waste-to-energy facility has a high-tech 14 pollution control system that keeps our 15 environment clean and healthy. If we're 16 going to make a statement like that to 17 kids, what do we expect them to believe? 18 The expectation from those types of 19 statements is that everything is just 20 fine. What the presentation materials 21 that our kids are being exposed to 22 doesn't show are additional facts about 23 incineration, such as that 24 waste-to-energy industry's sales pitch 25 emphasizes the energy production of a 33 1 P. Brown 2 waste-to-energy facility, even attempting 3 to portray it as green or renewable 4 energy. The sales pitch for the 5 waste-to-energy industry does not 6 address any human health concerns at 7 all. 8 Waste incineration systems produce a 9 wide variety of pollutants which are 10 detrimental to human health. Far from 11 eliminating the need for a landfill, 12 waste incinerator systems produce toxic 13 ash and other residues. The 14 waste-to-energy program to maximize 15 energy recovery is technologically 16 incompatible with reducing dioxin 17 emissions. Dioxins are the most lethal 18 persistent organic pollutants, which 19 have irreparable environmental health 20 consequences. The affected populace 21 includes those living near the 22 incinerator as well as those living in 23 the broader region. So it's not just 24 the residents of Jamesville. 25 People are exposed to toxic compounds 34 1 P. Brown 2 in several ways: By breathing the air, 3 which affects both the workers in the 4 plant and people who live nearby; by 5 eating locally produced foods or water 6 that have been contaminated by air 7 pollutants from the incinerator; and by 8 eating fish or wildlife that have been 9 contaminated by the air emissions. 10 Dioxin is a highly toxic compound, 11 which may cause cancer and neurological 12 damage and disrupt reproductive systems, 13 thyroid systems, respiratory systems, 14 etc. 15 We are requesting three things. 16 1. That the educational materials 17 be re-evaluated to show the entire 18 picture of waste-to-energy incineration; 19 positive and pitfalls for the children 20 of Onondaga County. Let's tell them the 21 truth. 22 2. That the waste amount of 23 chemicals that are being released from 24 the stacks of the Rock Cut Road 25 waste-to-energy facility not be 35 1 Mt. Pleasant 2 increased by bringing trash in from 3 Cortland County or any other County to 4 feed it. 5 3. We are also requesting that the 6 importation law not be changed for the 7 sustainability of our environment and 8 for our future generations of children. 9 A true common core aligned lesson 10 regarding waste-to-energy would include 11 students researching several different 12 types of waste-to-energy strategies and 13 forming their own opinion supported by 14 research. Thank you. 15 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you very 16 much. Liz Mt. Pleasant, West Shore 17 Manor Road. 18 LIZ MT. PLEASANT: Good evening, 19 thank you for giving me this opportunity. 20 I moved to Onondaga County when I was 10 21 years old from Tompkins County, and I've 22 lived in Syracuse most of that time. 23 Five years ago I moved out to Jamesville, 24 right on the reservoir. And when I saw 25 in the paper that this was in the works, 36 1 Mt. Pleasant 2 that we were trying to figure out a 3 better way to handle our waste 4 management I thought well, I better 5 study up on it. And that was daunting, 6 let me tell you. There are a lot of 7 documents, and so many of them say, well 8 this was already handled here, and this 9 was established 26 years ago and we 10 think it's still current. 11 I have received, I have reviewed 12 documents, listened to learned scientist 13 interviewed OCRRA staff, professional 14 environmentalists, city residents, 15 suburban residents, asthmatic cancer 16 survivors, geographers, journalists. I 17 rent apartments up in the University 18 area, we had a geographer who was doing 19 the geography of disease. And I think 20 our County health commissioner probably 21 could use that tool to help identify and 22 make recommendations for what is a 23 healthy situation here. I don't think 24 we've heard from that person yet, which 25 kind of disturbs me. But I'm told that 37 1 Mt. Pleasant 2 it's in the works. 3 The history, the law, the project 4 development. Tonight I've heard some 5 great things about Covanta's operation. 6 But the people that I talked to really 7 don't trust what they hear. They're 8 just not convinced, and maybe it's 9 because the data isn't there for them to 10 see or easily available. I haven't seen 11 it myself. Maybe transparency is 12 something I'm talking about there. 13 I think we really ought to take a 14 look at transporting garbage and ash, 15 you know. And I thought when I first 16 read about it, that really sounds like 17 that's a really smart idea. Bring the 18 trash in, take the ash away. And then I 19 drove by the place and I said, hey, 20 there is a railroad track here, not far 21 away at all. And that's the cheapest 22 way to transport stuff. Maybe we 23 wouldn't have to spend all the money on 24 building up this other area. Maybe we 25 could just put it on a rail and get it 38 1 Mt. Pleasant 2 out of here real easy. And cheaper. No 3 tolls. Just a lot easier sort of a 4 thing. 5 Of course I'm prejudiced. My 6 grandfather was a, he was a real 7 recycler. When he got off the boat at 8 Ellis Island he went through a barrel of 9 potatoes and threw away the rotten ones 10 and sold the good ones. And from there 11 on he was on his way up. And he found 12 jobs for a lot of people. And I think 13 he's my model. 14 And I think there is a better way 15 than what we're talking about here, 16 because I have to breathe that air, not 17 too far from the plant, and swim in the 18 water, and our boat livery sends people 19 out to catch fish for dinner. I'm 20 wondering, what are they having for 21 dinner? 22 So I'm really concerned about this 23 whole thing. And I haven't called 24 Warren Buffet yet to get an estimate on 25 how much it would cost, but I really am. 39 1 Mt. Pleasant 2 So you might laugh about it, why not? 3 Why do we put that plant there in that 4 valley? And I thought, you know, okay, 5 so there is a lot to think about. I 6 don't think we've come to the best 7 conclusion in the contract that I've 8 seen. 9 I saw that and I know we're talking 10 now about a ten year review, but when I 11 saw that the dump was going to last for 12 17 or 18 years and they had a 20 year 13 contract, I thought that doesn't quite 14 fit. And the idea that the foxes are 15 guarding the hen house is not convincing 16 to me. I think we need outside checks 17 more than once a year with a week's 18 notice on what's coming out of those 19 stacks. 20 And I'm real pleased that this 21 company is a good employer, I'm happy to 22 hear all the good stuff about them. But 23 I think we've got a responsibility to 24 hear the people here before we jump into 25 this. And I know it's a lot of time is 40 1 King 2 spent, but I think we need to broaden, 3 open up our eyes, like we are asking the 4 children, to study other plants and see 5 what works and then make a decision. 6 And maybe that's been done, but I just 7 saw too many questions in my reading. 8 The idea that recycling -- I really 9 hope that we will stick with that 10 proposal that the federal government 11 gave us in ELC, ETL 27 0. 106, the Act 12 of 1987, the hierarchy of solid waste 13 management. And respect that, and 14 really know that there has got to be a 15 better way than the way we're doing it. 16 Thank you. 17 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you, Liz. 18 Next we have Peter King, Thurber Street, 19 Syracuse, New York. 20 PETER KING: Good evening County 21 Legislature and people. My name is 22 Peter King, I'm a resident of the city 23 of Syracuse, actually live probably 24 under a mile from the incinerator itself 25 on Thurber Street in Syracuse. And I 41 1 King 2 must confess, I have not read the Solid 3 Waste Plan. I am aware of some of the 4 negotiations surrounding the Plan as 5 I've been involved with some decision 6 that were before, just to ask questions 7 about this a few years ago. 8 However, my first question really is 9 about lock-in. That I'm wondering does 10 the County want to be in a 20 year 11 position of lock-in with any agreement 12 or negotiation that cannot be gotten out 13 of? As a practical matter that doesn't 14 make good business sense. 15 And my second point being, there is 16 no way that incineration, as with any 17 garbage disposal, you really have to 18 consider full-life cycle analysis. 19 Incineration is frankly not clean from 20 the data I've seen. There is always 21 residual and it certainly is about air, 22 not only soil and water. 23 This is an environmental justice 24 issue, and I don't believe in forcing 25 toxic residues or waste on anybody, 42 1 King 2 whether it is someone from Cortland 3 County who is receiving ash or someone 4 living in the Valley of Syracuse who is 5 unknowingly breathing, you know, things 6 they don't want. I'll have to say as a 7 resident, I sometimes notice it in the 8 summer less some years than others. 9 But that what I have seen is that 10 the soil PCBs, this is data I requested 11 from the County on what is called South 12 Campus, which is immediately adjacent to 13 Rock Cut Road, which is inhabited by 14 students from Syracuse University. 15 There are PCBs and I think dioxins 16 measured routinely on that soil. 17 On the other side of that Valley at 18 Clark Reservation there's been scientific 19 papers written by University professors, 20 again, and very well known professors, 21 regarding the mercury in the fish there. 22 That it is rising in distinction to 23 mercury measured in other lakes in New 24 York State which is declining. And so 25 this also raises my question. 43 1 King 2 I have also seen an unpublished 3 paper by the US Forest Service at SUNY 4 ESF in Syracuse. And this has nothing 5 to do with the incineration, this is 6 just measuring the meteorology of the 7 Valley of Central Syracuse, which 8 stretches from the south side to 9 downtown. And that the main forcing 10 function there is downward winds every 11 night. And so it's called cold air 12 return. You see it often on farms, 13 where the air will drop down to the 14 lowest position. 15 And the point of this is that in 16 urban studies we find that there is 17 often what's called the urban 18 ventilation pattern. And some cities 19 make use of this to clean out their air. 20 In this case I think that Rock Cut Road 21 should be examined for being a 22 ventilation corridor. As I say, I live 23 near the incinerator and sometimes I go 24 up on the cemetery near there and I have 25 taken photographs of the incinerator 44 1 King 2 smoke blowing towards the city. And 3 this raises concerns. 4 And so as to health concerns, the 5 Valley of Syracuse is noted for having 6 17 times the asthma rate of the rest of 7 the County. And this could be for a 8 variety of reasons. We have a coal 9 plant up to the northwest. We have I-81 10 going through there, which is currently 11 being discussed. But that it is rising 12 as is predicted for asthma. And as 13 being observed for cities worldwide, and 14 there is a whole discussion around that. 15 We're actually getting possibly lower 16 wind speeds in New York state so that 17 the air becomes more stagnant. And 18 these, I'm just reporting these, this is 19 what's in the literature. 20 As far as the air quality in the 21 city, we have no measurements at all 22 because all the air monitors are outside 23 the city near 690. There was a monitor 24 by East Adams Street which was 25 decommissioned because it was in 45 1 King 2 compliance but it was carbon monoxide, 3 which is the one pollutant which EPA has 4 made the most progress on in getting out 5 of our cars. Meanwhile ozone and 6 particulate matter, which causes the 7 most disease are actually measured by 8 690 by Home Depot, you can drive over 9 there and take a look. 10 And so ozone is less easily solved, 11 as is asthma. There is an asthma 12 section in the greenhouse gas, an action 13 plan, which is an official state plan 14 available through NYSERDA, you can read 15 that. And frankly these things are 16 connected. We couldn't understand it, 17 because for a hundred years urban health 18 has been completely separated from urban 19 planning. And so it is more recently 20 that things like environmental justice 21 are coming into some kind of 22 understanding. And I think this is 23 something that in Syracuse we should be 24 taking note of. 25 And as far as solutions in 46 1 King 2 Binghamton. Binghamton is our closest 3 friend, they actually rejected an 4 incinerator a number of years ago. 5 There are people from Binghamton who are 6 very willing to come here and discuss 7 their vision and how they got there. 8 Our own recycling rate is, as somebody 9 has mentioned, not bad. It's in the 10 what, 60 percent or thereabouts. We can 11 go from recycling 101 to 102. We can 12 start recycling what's called the wet 13 stream waste. We can compost that. 14 That is maybe 60 or 70 percent of the 15 waste and it's not good to burn wet 16 stuff anyway, it doesn't give a good 17 burn. 18 And finally, I'm a member of the 19 Urban Jobs Task Force in Syracuse and 20 I'm not speaking for the Urban Jobs Task 21 Force here, but just to say that we need 22 jobs in Syracuse, and incineration will 23 not provide jobs. Recycling will. 24 There are recycling industries springing 25 up all over the country in cities which 47 1 Hughes 2 hire local residents, and they also 3 build greenhouses. And this can build a 4 whole eco systems of services that we 5 haven't seen yet. We haven't seen that 6 benefit. So until, I don't think we can 7 say we've seen the whole menu of options 8 there. Thank you. 9 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thanks Peter. 10 Next, Don Hughes. Like to remind people 11 to try to be respectful to the three or 12 four minute time frame. We've been 13 going drastically over that. 14 DON HUGHES: Well, I'll try. So my 15 name is Don Hughes, and I've been a 16 resident of Onondaga County, Syracuse, 17 for a while now, since 1985. My 18 credentials include professional 19 engineering license in New York state, 20 and I hold a Ph.D. from SUNY College of 21 Environmental Science and Forestry; and 22 that's in environmental chemistry. I 23 also served on the OCRRA Board for about 24 six years, 2003 to 2009. So I know a 25 bit about the subject. 48 1 Hughes 2 My first point that I want to raise 3 here is that this document, we're 4 commenting on something which is a Solid 5 Waste Management Plan update. This is 6 not really a Plan. This is simply an 7 update. And the original Plan came out 8 in 1991. Supposed to be updated every 9 five years. That never happened. So 10 this is the first update. That was 23 11 years ago, if I did the math right. A 12 lot happens in 23 years. 13 In 1991 OCRRA was just a planning 14 agency. The trash burning plant had not 15 yet been built, that was to come three 16 years later. Recycling programs were in 17 their infancy. And today obviously 18 things are dramatically different. We 19 have mature recycling markets, we have a 20 lot more plastics in the waste stream. 21 We have newspapers that have gone away 22 or shrunk, literally. Electronic waste 23 has become a major factor. Every time I 24 walk the dog I see more broken TV sets 25 by the curbside. And of course the 49 1 Hughes 2 state and federal regulations on solid 3 waste and the vision for solid waste has 4 changed dramatically. 5 The new New York state solid waste 6 strategy has adopted a completely 7 different paradigm from what it used to 8 be. It's about sustainability and not 9 so much about an end of pipe solution. 10 And I would like to quote to you from 11 Beyond Waste. This was issued December 12 of 2010. This is New York DEC's update 13 of the state Solid Waste Management 14 Plan. They say, New York State's Beyond 15 Waste Plan sets forth a new approach for 16 New York State. A shift from focussing 17 on end of the pipe waste management 18 techniques to looking upstream, and more 19 comprehensively at how materials that 20 would otherwise become waste can be more 21 sustainably managed through the state's 22 economy. This shift is central to the 23 state's ability to adapt to an age of 24 growing pressure to reduce demand for 25 energy, reduce dependence on disposal, 50 1 Hughes 2 minimize emission of greenhouse gases 3 and create green jobs. 4 Fundamentals of Beyond Waste is a 20 5 year goal of reducing the average amount 6 of MSW, municipal solid waste that New 7 Yorkers dispose. And the ultimate goal 8 being .6 pounds per person per day, in 9 20 years. In the year 2030. We're 10 above that right now. 11 And if we succeed in achieving a 12 great reduction, and I certainly hope we 13 do, because that's clearly the most 14 environmentally sustainable thing to do, 15 with this Plan we're going to be looking 16 to fill a gap. Bringing in 25,000 tons 17 from Cortland is not going to be enough. 18 We're going to be hunting for more 19 trash, because that is what incinerators 20 are all about. You must feed them. If 21 we do not come up with the required 22 trash we, the County residents, have to 23 pay a penalty, about $6 a pound. So 24 that's point Number 1. 25 Point Number 2 is that this document, 51 1 Hughes 2 which makes lots of good points, I don't 3 want to disparage it, but it doesn't 4 talk about a essential, which is money. 5 How much will it cost? No mention 6 whatsoever of cost. We need an honest 7 evaluation of cost. How can we have a 8 Plan that ignores that? Economic 9 considerations have to be taken into 10 account. Not only includes the cost of 11 residents of the County and the 12 institutions and businesses in our 13 County for waste disposal, but it should 14 also include the economic costs 15 associated with increased health 16 exposures -- expenses rather, associated 17 with the operation of the incinerator. 18 For the transport of solid waste and ash 19 and all that. 20 And furthermore, economics should 21 look into job creation associated with 22 the various forms of waste disposal. 23 Recycling and waste reuse generates far 24 more jobs compared to land-filling 25 incineration. 52 1 Hughes 2 Recycling and waste reduce creates 3 added value as well as creating new 4 products from old materials. And 5 recycling is, well reduction and 6 recycling is by far the cheapest 7 alternatives. You get paid for materials 8 that you recycle. Other average costs, 9 $44 a ton for composting, $61 a ton for 10 land-filling. Incineration $92 a ton. 11 If we commit to incineration we're going 12 to see the highest possible cost. 13 And finally, environmental 14 considerations have been partially 15 addressed but not fully addressed. The 16 inflated claims made about the greenhouse 17 gas impacts on incineration compared to 18 land-filling. For one thing the power 19 generated by the plant does not replace 20 a lot of power generated by fossil 21 fuels. That's the claim that's being 22 made. But most of our electricity comes 23 from nukes. Nuclear power, 80 percent. 24 That figure is from Mr. Carrick over at 25 the Regional Planning and Development 53 1 Hughes 2 Board. And the other 20 percent, a lot 3 of it is hydroelectric. So we're not 4 getting a benefit. 5 And finally, I would like to refer 6 to a comparison of CO2 emissions, so 7 we're concerned about greenhouse gases, 8 which we should be. The amount of 9 emissions from a municipal solid waste 10 fired incinerator is about 3,000 pounds 11 compared to 2,200 pounds for coal. Coal 12 is the next worst. Oil is at 1,500. 13 Natural gas is at 1,200. This is not an 14 improvement, folks. So what I would 15 urge you to do is take this Plan, send 16 it back and tell them we need a 17 Comprehensive Plan, not just an update. 18 And we should not commit ourselves to 19 this relationship between Covanta and 20 OCRRA. It's not good policy for this 21 County, it's not good for this -- for 22 the residents, not good for the 23 environment. Thank you. 24 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Next speaker Ian 25 Hunter, Last Chance Recycling. We 54 1 Hunter 2 actually got worse with that last 3 speaker with our time requirement, so 4 I'm going to start enforcing it. 5 IAN HUNTER: I'm glad to follow that 6 last man because he's the first one that 7 talked about the economics of that, and 8 I'm going to go into it a little 9 further. 10 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: If you want to 11 press the button right there, the light 12 should pop up. 13 IAN HUNTER: All right, that's 14 better. My name is Ian Hunter and I 15 operate a company called Last Chance 16 Recycling, and I ran it for about 17 17 years now. And I'll give you a little 18 background. When we had the storm back 19 in 1998, I processed and disposed of 20 37.5 percent of the entire storm. So we 21 know what we're doing about recycling 22 yard waste. 23 When I first came here tonight I 24 talked with about I think a half dozen, 25 at least a half dozen Legislators, and I 55 1 Hunter 2 asked them a simple question. The 3 simple question was: How much is 4 Cortland County going to pay us to take 5 their garbage? And I worked out the 6 numbers. If we save $16 a ton it costs 7 to take the ash down to Seneca Meadows, 8 and now High Acres and add to it $8 a 9 ton to transport it, that's a $24.00 10 saving by taking it down to Cortland. 11 Right now the price to get rid of 12 garbage, this next year is $89 a ton. A 13 lot of you people don't know it but they 14 raised it $10 in anticipation of giving 15 more goodies to Covanta. So if you take 16 $24 that we saved from the $89 that the 17 taxpayers, the citizens of this County 18 are paying to get rid of their garbage 19 or will be next year, that means the 20 number, the dollar amount that Cortland 21 County should be paying would be $65 a 22 ton just to break even. Any less than 23 that would be a direct subsidy from the 24 families of this County to the families 25 of Cortland County. But nobody seems to 56 1 Hunter 2 know what the price is. So you know, 3 I'd like a little transparency here. 4 I have attended many meetings at 5 OCRRA, and they go through all the 6 committee reports and fixing the trucks 7 and all that baloney and at the end they 8 always go into executive session that we 9 can't go to. And we never hear what 10 they talk about in executive session. 11 They always tell us it's about the 12 Covanta contract coming down to 13 Cortland. But it's never published. I 14 don't think there are any numbers, I 15 would like to know what they are. 16 Now I worked out the numbers on the 17 difference between taking the garbage 18 next year, making the deal with Covanta, 19 and versus what it would cost to get rid 20 of it down to Seneca Meadows or High 21 Acres. The number I come up with, and 22 I've given this number up, nobody 23 challenged it yet. It's been 20 years, 24 the taxpayers in this County will save 25 $288 million just by getting rid of the 57 1 Hunter 2 flow control we have in effect now. 3 The haulers, most of them have their 4 own trailers, and most of them already 5 paid for it out of the residue taken 6 down to Seneca Meadows. Items that 7 aren't, material that isn't covered by 8 the flow control law. So if you get rid 9 of the flow control law there would be 10 no problem. 11 Now scare tactics are used in this 12 County. The scare tactic is this. If 13 we let Covanta buy the plant they could 14 buy it for a dollar, and they can import 15 all the garbage from anywhere they want 16 in the country, because the Supreme 17 Court says they can do that. That 18 happens to be true. But what's not true 19 it's just not a dollar, they would have 20 to pay $42 million to pay off the 21 existing bonds on the plant. 22 By the way, I'm getting all this 23 information off their own report, 2012. 24 For your information the only audit ever 25 done on it in the last years. One audit 58 1 Hunter 2 in 20 years. We haven't got the 2013 3 audit, and they're not even preparing 4 the 2014. Until that's done you folks 5 shouldn't do anything. You've got to 6 get those numbers. Let the people see 7 them, let your constituents see them and 8 then you can make a decision. 9 The other scare tactic they use is 10 that if Covanta buys it, which they 11 won't. But let's say they do. They can 12 take garbage from anywhere in the 13 country. The only problem is this, when 14 those trucks come down the Thruway from 15 Peekskill and those counties down along 16 the Hudson River, they pass on the 17 Thruway right through Onondaga County. 18 So when they get that far, they would 19 have a choice, if Covanta was in the 20 business. And that would be to turn 21 off, take their trash and deliver it for 22 $89 a ton or continue down the Thruway 23 an additional $7.00 a ton cost and 24 dumping it for $22. 25 And what I've done is I've taken the 59 1 Hunter 2 cost of letting the contractors, the 3 haulers take it down there, and what it 4 would cost. That's where I come up with 5 the $288 million, which is $75 a 6 household per year for the next 20 7 years. If anybody wants to challenge 8 that, please tell me. Because if I'm 9 making a mistake I don't want to 10 continue to make a fool of myself by 11 saying these things. But I'm not making 12 a big mistake, I'm using their numbers 13 and those are what the numbers are. 14 The other issue is recycling. They 15 say, well, we all want to reduce the 16 garbage by recycling. But OCRRA stifles 17 that. Because what will happen, if we 18 renew the contract with Covanta there is 19 going to be a reason to extend as much 20 of that burning plant as they can. 21 Because if we don't reach a certain 22 threshold we're going to pay extra 23 money. And nobody is going to invest in 24 money to come up with a technology and 25 the equipment to recycle more of a waste 60 1 Hunter 2 stream with Covanta -- or with OCRRA in 3 the room, because you never know what 4 OCRRA is going to do next. 5 In my business, I compost. I'm a 6 composter. I've got $2 million worth of 7 equipment. My private competitors are 8 in Onondaga County, and there is five 9 others, have over a million dollars 10 worth of equipment. And it costs me, 11 and I assume the rest of them the same, 12 it costs me $6 to grind the material, 13 put it in a pile, let it heat up, turn 14 it over, introduce water in it, turn it 15 over again. And when it cools off, 16 screen it out, and you end up with the 17 finished compost. It costs me $6 a 18 cubic yard. 19 Antonacci, Bob Antonacci, I 20 pressured him to do a report. And he 21 did a report for 2012. And it turns out 22 that the cost for producing compost is 23 subsidized by OCRRA. And it cost them 24 $55.60 to make the same yard of compost 25 that I make for $6. And if somebody in 61 1 Hunter 2 this County wants to go into, as an 3 example, C&D sort, they've got no worry, 4 I buy the equipment, set up the process, 5 get all of the permits I need. What 6 happens if OCRRA does it? Puts you out 7 of business. That's the problem we have 8 here. So my contention is, as long as 9 OCRRA is out there with that waste-to- 10 energy plant and they can charge this 11 $89 a ton charges so they can subsidize 12 their recycling, real recycling won't 13 happen. 14 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Wrap it up please. 15 IAN HUNTER: So if anybody has any 16 problems with my numbers, please tell 17 me. Okay, thank you, very much. 18 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Thank you. Pam 19 Jenkins, Cortland County Environmental 20 Advisory Board. 21 PAM JENKINS: Good evening 22 Legislators, my name is Pam Jenkins, I 23 live in Cortland County. Many of us in 24 Cortland are working very hard to ensure 25 that you will not have the option of 62 1 Jenkins 2 using the Cortland landfill for your 3 incinerator ash; and our momentum is 4 growing. 5 Cortland Town and County officials 6 are joining us to prevent an incinerator 7 ash dump from being built in the 8 recharge zone of our sole source aquifer. 9 In shameful violation of Open 10 Meetings laws and SEQR laws the siting 11 process has been a sham. With numerous 12 closed door meetings. Requested 13 documents are continually concealed. 14 And we were given an incomplete final 15 scope and an incomplete DEIS. Documents 16 were not read or reviewed but were 17 approved. And the project has been 18 pushed forward by officials who do not 19 have much of a clue about what the 20 project entails or about how much it 21 will cost or what the likelihood is of 22 catastrophic consequences to Cortland's 23 sole source aquifer. 24 In fact our landfill couldn't even 25 be permitted by the DEC for, I think it 63 1 Jenkins 2 was several decades, because of the 3 DEC's concerns of groundwater being so 4 close to the surface over most of the 5 landfill. 6 Incineration of some plastics causes 7 dioxins and furans to be created. You 8 must know that these are the most 9 hazardous and persistent organic 10 pollutants known to man. Dioxins and 11 furans either go out the stack with 12 emission or they are temporarily trapped 13 in the ash or they are trapped in the 14 pollution control devices. The 15 pollution control residue then requires 16 disposal. We don't want that stuff in 17 our landfill, and we don't want the ash 18 in the Cortland landfill either. 19 Onondaga could save greenhouse gas 20 and transportation costs by using the 21 landfill in Onondaga County for its 22 waste disposal needs. Incinerators 23 cause greenhouse gas emissions and emit 24 lead, mercury, cadmium, ammonia, 25 formaldehyde, sulfuric acid and fine 64 1 Jenkins 2 particulates. 3 The OCRRA incinerator does not even 4 monitor or control for 2.5 PM, the 5 smallest and most hazardous of the fine 6 particulate. It is completely untrue 7 that OCRRA uses state-of-the-art 8 equipment. This is a blatantly empty 9 statement. I learned that OCRRA burns 10 recyclables and I think it burns C&D 11 waste also. There are much more modern 12 ways to deal with waste. 13 Why have you allowed this situation 14 to persist? There are 46 schools, 16 15 recreation areas and 20 water sources 16 within a four mile radius of OCRRA. The 17 incidences of breast cancer, lung cancer 18 and prostate cancer are higher in 19 Onondaga County as compared to New York 20 State and the US. Why is this? Is 21 OCRRA partially to blame? Please put an 22 end to the use of dark age technology of 23 waste incineration. 24 Additionally, if Cortland begins to 25 recycle above the 8 percent that 65 1 Jenkins 2 currently occurs in Cortland County 3 there will not be much trash to send to 4 the OCRRA incinerator and you will have 5 to look further for trash. 6 There is a particularly heinous 7 provision in the contract that is being 8 negotiated behind closed doors between 9 OCRRA and Onondaga County. The 10 requirement is for Cortland to guarantee 11 a certain number of tons of trash to 12 OCRRA or pay a penalty per ton. This is 13 called put or pay. And this provision 14 has caused many localities to go into a 15 huge amount of debt to pay penalty to 16 incinerators when their waste streams 17 shrink due to recycling and composting. 18 Burning trash is a disincentive to 19 recycling and composting. 20 Onondaga and Cortland can do much 21 better in managing their waste. Much 22 better than tying our future to an aging 23 technology and toxic ash. Thank you. 24 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Next we have 25 Michael Wolfson, Bradford Parkway, 66 1 Wolfson 2 Syracuse. 3 MICHAEL WOLFSON: My name is 4 Dr. Michael Wolfson, I'm a physician, I 5 live in Dewitt. My background is that 6 I've been licensed as a physician in 7 Massachusetts since 1982, in New York 8 State since 1993. My training is in 9 primary care first, family medicine, I'm 10 board certified. I'm also board 11 certified in occupational and 12 environmental medicine with a master's 13 in public health from Harvard and 14 clinical training in the Harvard program 15 in occupational environmental health, 16 environmental medicine. 17 In addition, I have training and a 18 fellowship in addiction medicine from 19 Brown, where I was invited to come back 20 after I completed my program at Harvard. 21 I've been practicing occupation and 22 environmental medicine for the past 25 23 years or actually longer than that. 24 I have not heard anyone with my 25 credentials or my clinical experience or 67 1 Wolfson 2 my experience in the field in evaluating 3 toxic waste sites and other toxic 4 polluters and toxic emitters, give any 5 testimony at all the hearings that I've 6 been to in the last 16 years. However, 7 I'm very glad to hear that those 8 individuals who are opposed to this 9 incinerator on the basis of health 10 concerns are speaking today. 11 And I would suggest to those 12 proponents of the incinerator who 13 continue to insist that there is no harm 14 to the health, public health or the 15 environment, that I'm available for a 16 public debate with anyone that you can 17 bring forward with my credentials who 18 wants to have an open public debate 19 about the health risks to the community 20 from this incinerator. I'll be happy to 21 make arrangement to have that debate in 22 public. 23 Now, what I would like to address is 24 two things fairly quickly. One is the 25 health risks and the other is the, what 68 1 Wolfson 2 I believe now having reviewed the 3 federal, Code of Federal Regulations 4 regarding the disposal of solid waste as 5 well as the Clean Air Act, and the 6 hazardous waste disposal is governed in 7 large part by RCRA, the Research 8 Conservation Recovery Act. I've opposed 9 this incinerator, since I moved back 10 here in 1992, I'm originally from 11 Syracuse. And every time that I submit 12 testimony or testify before this 13 Legislature or Legislative Committees, 14 every time I've given that testimony 15 I've not received any response that 16 gives me any kind of logical or 17 reasonable opposition to what I've said 18 in terms of my concerns about health. 19 Now, I looked at, the Office of the 20 Environment from Onondaga County has put 21 out a 2014 proposed Comprehensive Solid 22 Waste Management Plan update. And I 23 think it's telling what it has to say in 24 the first sentence of the second 25 paragraph. 69 1 Wolfson 2 "It's been nearly 25 years since the 3 development and approval of Onondaga 4 County's Comprehensive Solid Waste 5 Management Plan. And although the 1991 6 Plan is still quite relevant today," 7 which is absolutely false, "to remain 8 current with state requirements the 9 County has proposed updates to the Solid 10 Waste Management Plan that reflect 11 revisions to evolving state 12 requirements." 13 Now when I have evidence, I'm not 14 going to discuss it today, it's in 15 plenty of places so that nobody is going 16 to be able to tamper with it, we've got 17 evidence in writing that the Onondaga 18 County Health Department, the DEC, the 19 State Health Department and EPA, have 20 all ignored all of the health concerns 21 that have been raised about this plant 22 since it opened. So let's talk about 23 what those are. 24 First of all, OCRRA has ads running 25 on TV that say that they've taken 70 1 Wolfson 2 325,000 tons of waste out of the waste 3 stream by burning it in the incinerator. 4 Just not true. Now, I had a discussion 5 with the director of OCRRA after the 6 OCRRA Board meeting, which was in my 7 view somewhat laughable, since we were 8 allowed three minutes to speak and since 9 it was pretty obvious to me, in my 10 opinion, that the decision of the Board 11 and what they were voting on had already 12 been predetermined. And they allowed 13 half a dozen or more of us to speak for 14 three minutes then they just voted. 15 Now, at that meeting I stated that 16 in fact dioxins were a cancer risk. And 17 I would now label this facility, as I 18 have in the past, although I couldn't 19 really determine a proper name for it, 20 this is a cancer factory. The fact is 21 that medical and scientific agreement of 22 the vast majority of physicians and 23 scientists is, that carcinogens, cancer 24 causing materials are unsafe at any 25 level. Certainly unsafe at any measured 71 1 Wolfson 2 level. 3 And I have the documents here that 4 show the measurements of dioxins in the 5 soil, at a whole variety of off-site 6 monitoring locations. We also have the 7 indication that the ash that's being 8 dumped from this incinerator is loaded 9 with dioxins, dibenzofurans, which are 10 relatives, PCBs and then the other 11 carcinogens, I won't name all of them: 12 arsenic, nickel, chromium, cadmium, lead 13 is now considered a carcinogen. 14 Actually lead was not considered a 15 carcinogen when the original health 16 assessment for this incinerator was 17 done, over 20 years ago. 18 Over 20 years ago when the Health 19 Risk assessment, which we demanded to be 20 repeated was done, dioxins were not 21 known to be a thousand or more times as 22 toxic as they are now. So if that 23 Health Risk Assessment were repeated, 24 which we are again demanding, I'm 25 demanding this and other individuals in 72 1 Wolfson 2 this room and other people who have 3 spoken at these hearings have demanded a 4 new Health Risk Assessment. If that 5 Health Risk Assessment were done the 6 incinerator would have to be shut down. 7 On DEC regulations it could not operate. 8 And that's the reason that the Health 9 Risk Assessment has not been repeated, 10 because the operator and apparently the 11 County, want the incinerator to continue 12 operating. 13 Now the director of OCRRA stated to 14 me, and it would be laughable if it 15 weren't pathetic, that all of us who are 16 opposed to the incinerator are self- 17 interested. Well, I spent several 18 thousand hours researching this 19 incinerator and speaking at hearings 20 like this for the last 20 years. I 21 don't get paid for this. There is 22 nothing in it for me. If this 23 incinerator gets shut down, the only 24 thing that's in it for me is the 25 protection of the public health and the 73 1 Wolfson 2 environment. 3 The people who are self-interested 4 in keeping this incinerator open are the 5 executives and staff at OCRRA who are 6 getting paid. Because a lot of their 7 income comes from running the 8 incinerator. The incinerator operator 9 itself, which is making money on this. 10 And interestingly, Connecticut has just 11 legislated a plan to get rid of all of 12 their so called waste-to-energy 13 incinerators in the next 10 years. And 14 three of those nine incinerators are 15 operated by Covanta. And what does 16 Covanta have to say about that? Well, 17 it's pretty interesting. 18 Covanta says, we support the state's 19 goals to increase recycling and we hope 20 to help. Covanta spokesman, James 21 Reagan said, "we will be an extremely 22 important part of waste disposal in the 23 state." In other words, they know, they 24 can see the writing on the wall and 25 they're not opposing the closing of 74 1 Wolfson 2 their incinerators. 3 Now when we're talking about again, 4 dioxins, let's just go back quickly to 5 the health risks. There are no levels 6 of cancer-causing chemicals or other 7 materials that are safe for humans. If 8 you can measure it, then there is a 9 cancer risk. The cancer risk from 10 dioxins, I did a brief calculation while 11 I was sitting in the back. When you 12 measure dioxins at City Lights, in the 13 soil of the homes of people who live in 14 City Lights, it's a pretty expensive 15 development. And you measure those 16 dioxins and then you calculate the way 17 the EPA does, how much of that toxin, or 18 toxic I should say, from the soil gets 19 into people's homes? And then how much 20 those individuals will ingest or inhale 21 every day? 22 Because all of you in your homes if 23 you're adults the numbers vary, but it's 24 about a hundred milligrams of dust or 25 dirt that you're going to eat or inhale 75 1 Wolfson 2 every day in your homes. Children, 200 3 milligrams. If you calculate how much 4 dioxin is in that soil, and you use 5 conservative estimates from the EPA, 6 that at least a quarter of that will end 7 up in your home or in your workplace, 8 for example in the South Campus of 9 Syracuse University, which has elevated 10 dioxin and arsenic levels among other 11 things. Then you recognize that in fact 12 the cancer risk for those people is 13 something like one in a thousand -- or 14 one in a thousand to one in 10,000. The 15 acceptable risk from EPA is one in a 16 million. Now one in 10,000 risk means a 17 hundred extra cancers per year per 18 million population. That is clearly 19 from a public health standpoint 20 unacceptable. 21 Now, the last thing that I wanted to 22 get to, all of these toxins that I 23 mentioned are all cancer-causing. 24 Arsenic causes cancer in almost every 25 organ in the body. It is also 76 1 Wolfson 2 responsible along with dioxins. You can 3 go online and read the Vietnam Veterans 4 and Agent Orange publication that comes 5 out every two years from the National 6 Academy of Sciences, and take a look at 7 that. Dioxins are responsible for 8 causation of Type 2 diabetes, multiple 9 cancers, including prostate, brain, 10 lymphomas, leukemias, soft tissue 11 sarcomas. All right, that's just the 12 beginning of the list. 13 Arsenic, I won't even tick off the 14 number of different organ systems in 15 which arsenic causes cancer. All of 16 these substances have been found in soil 17 in levels that are considered to be 18 elevated by EPA standards, which are 19 still too conservative. That's if 20 you're willing to accept the EPA numbers 21 that say that at these levels one extra 22 cancer per million population above what 23 would be expected is going to occur. 24 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Dr. Wolfson, 25 please wrap up. 77 1 Wolfson 2 MICHAEL WOLFSON: Just about done. 3 The one other thing I would mention, 4 having read now, I didn't read all 337 5 pages because some of it was 6 bibliography, but having read now the 7 TCLP regulations, which is the test, a 8 discredited test that's being used by 9 OCRRA to prove that its ash is safe to 10 bury in an unregulated landfill. 11 I found that there are three 12 instances in which you're not allowed to 13 dispose of that waste except as 14 hazardous waste. One: If it contains 15 any cancer causing materials. Doesn't 16 matter whether you do a so called TCLP 17 test. If there are carcinogens in the 18 waste it's hazardous waste. If it 19 contains dioxins it's hazardous waste. 20 And last, I looked at the report and 21 in OCRRA's recent publication, and I got 22 to believe in the mail in or the 23 newspaper. And it said, "we tested by 24 TCLP, and we found that cadmium and 25 lead, both of which are cancer causing 78 1 Wolfson 2 agents, meet the EPA's TCLP standard, 3 and it's not hazardous waste. Well, 4 lead and cadmium are both carcinogens, 5 so therefore it is hazardous waste. 6 Besides that, the TCLP regulations state 7 you have to test for 39 different toxic 8 components. And if one of them exceeds 9 the EPA standards it's hazardous waste. 10 That means that this incinerator and 11 the County have been violating federal 12 law for as long as these regulations 13 have been in force. And it's been many 14 many years. 15 So I'll tell you now, we have 16 increased rates of breast cancer in the 17 13078 zip code, which I mentioned the 18 last meeting I attended. More than 50 19 percent higher than what's expected. 20 That's approximately 30 plus thousand 21 women downwind of the incinerator in 22 Jamesville and in surrounding areas. 23 Now the wind changes, so that's the 24 biggest area of exposure. But there is 25 exposure all over, within easily 5 to 10 79 1 Wolfson 2 miles of the incinerator you're going 3 for exposure to those carcinogens. 4 The fact that we have a 15 percent 5 increase in the incidence, in other 6 words new cancers, compared with when 7 the year the incinerator opened in 1994 8 is, to my mind and my opinion, evidence 9 that it's highly likely that it's the 10 incinerator that's responsible. 11 We've lost other industries, the 12 only emitters of those carcinogens that 13 are causing these excess cancers is the 14 incinerator. It should be shut down. 15 If it's shut down, if a Health Risk 16 Assessment is done and it's shut down 17 there is no cost supposedly, according 18 to what the Legislature promised this 19 community 20 years ago, there is no cost 20 to the taxpayers. The people who will 21 take the hit are the bondholders, who 22 have been making money off the suffering 23 of the people who have been getting sick 24 for the last 20 years, in my opinion. 25 And possibly the people who work for 80 1 Wolfson 2 OCRRA who are going to have to scramble 3 to make sure that they find enough work 4 to do to keep their jobs. 5 The bottom line is that we're not 6 making money from this. And I'm very 7 glad to hear the opinions of the other 8 folks who spoke earlier. We are putting 9 the public health and the environment at 10 risk. And it's quite clear to me the 11 increase of cancer, which has been noted 12 by the American Cancer Society, the 13 Susan G. Komen Foundation, the County 14 Health Department in its report that I 15 just cited a few minutes ago. Every 16 authority you look at says, we've 17 increased our rate of cancer by over 15 18 percent since the year the incinerator 19 opened. 20 Industry has been leaving the 21 County. There is no other good reason 22 for this increase in cancers. And 23 certainly the breast cancers in those 24 areas downwind, including the 13078 25 area, are, in my mind, no question in my 81 1 K. Brown 2 mind, in my opinion, that at least some 3 if not most of those are related to 4 exposures from the incinerator. 5 So I would ask this Legislature to 6 postpone any decision about further 7 contracts and to protect the public 8 health and the environment. We're not 9 going away. I've been doing this, I 10 might be stupid for doing it, I've been 11 doing this for over 15 years. I'm going 12 to keep on talking about it. As far as 13 I'm concerned, as I said, this is a 14 cancer factory. You vote to keep this 15 incinerator going you're voting for 16 cancer. That's my opinion. Thank you. 17 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Kate Brown. 18 KATE BROWN: Hi, my name is Kate 19 Brown, I'm 12 years old, and I'm in 7th 20 grade, and I live in Jamesville, New 21 York. I kind of want to get with the 22 education topic of this because when I 23 was in 3rd grade my class, the entire 24 grade, we took a field trip to the 25 incinerator. And prior to the trip we 82 1 K. Brown 2 were told all the good things that the 3 incinerator was going to be doing for 4 our County, and the smoke was going to 5 be filtered through the stack and it was 6 actually improving our air quality. 7 But I was in 3rd grade and we had no 8 other idea than to believe what they 9 were telling us. Yet, later we learned 10 that not everything they told us on that 11 field trip is true. Because the 12 emission coming from the smokestack may 13 be lightly filtered, but it does not 14 remove all the harmful chemicals, 15 mercury, arsenic, lead and dioxin. 16 Now we plan on bringing in another 17 County's trash. The pollution coming 18 from the trash being burned already is 19 enough. But bringing another County's 20 trash is actually going to increase that 21 amount by the amount of trucks that have 22 to bring in the trash as well. They're 23 letting off pollution. 24 And as I grow up here in Onondaga 25 County, I won't have to be worried that 83 1 Carroll 2 I might get cancer from this. And I'm 3 really urging you guys to think about 4 what's going to happen if we bring in 5 another County's trash and we increase 6 the amount of pollution in the area. 7 Tons of other counties and different 8 states around the country have 9 eliminated these incinerators and have 10 brought in more recycling. And that's 11 something that I think we should do 12 here. Thank you. 13 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Kate, I can tell 14 you're a great student because you're 15 the only one tonight that fell within 16 the time limit. Some others out there, 17 if they can take lessons from you that 18 would be great. Next we have Kathleen 19 Carroll from Marcellus, New York. 20 KATHLEEN CARROLL: I'll try to beat 21 the 12 year old, but she's a hard act to 22 follow. My name is Kathleen Carroll, I 23 live in Marcellus, New York, I've been a 24 resident of the County for 20 years. 25 I'm a Red Sox fan, so I apologize. I 84 1 Carroll 2 actually moved to this area for a job 3 opportunity. And I'm glad to promote 4 that statistic because obviously we've 5 had some downsizing in the area, which 6 as a business manager I hate to see. 7 But I speak here tonight first as a 8 resident of the community that I live 9 in, Marcellus; a mother of two children; 10 and an employee of Covanta, where I've 11 worked at the facility in very good 12 health for 20 years. 13 The studies, there have been several 14 studies that have shown communities such 15 as the OCRRA-Covanta partnership that 16 recycle and process and waste-to-energy 17 facilities, they run in parallel. 18 Meaning that waste-to-energy and 19 recycling grow at the same effects. 20 There have been statistics that 21 OCRRA does a great job. If you want to 22 look at our environmental record, every 23 year we test, every day, every hour, the 24 facility is regulated 24 hours a day 25 seven days a week, 365 days year. And 85 1 Carroll 2 someone earlier mentioned, we welcome 3 anyone to come in and tour the facility 4 and see what's it is, we're very 5 transparent as is OCRRA. We have a 6 great relationship. 7 Since 2008 we fell, as everyone 8 knows, into one of the most severe 9 recessions since like the '30s. This 10 community has struggled until recently 11 for the loss of jobs; New Venture Gear, 12 Carrier, Bristol Myers, lots of big jobs 13 have left this area. We have maintained 14 in this area and we have grown. 15 At the same time recycling has been 16 reduced due to things like thin wall 17 packaging. You know, you go out and 18 everyone is buying their Christmas 19 presents now and packaging is a lot less 20 than five years ago, which is great. 21 Because I come from a community in 22 Massachusetts, where they have a green 23 bin and it's all they recycle is 24 newspapers. So when I came here, I was 25 very happy to see a person at my door 86 1 Carroll 2 with a blue bin and a list of the items 3 that I could put in it before it went 4 into my trash can. Which I didn't have 5 to buy three trash cans like I did in 6 Massachusetts, instead of one. 7 So at the same time, like I said, 8 recycling has really worked. One of the 9 largest recycling volumes also has been 10 reduced from seven to three days, that 11 being our newspaper. My children have 12 toured the facility several times 13 through the years. I think my daughter 14 and son were in when we first started 15 up, they were four years old and one 16 year old. They feel that energy-to- 17 waste is the best technology as opposed 18 to land filling. Because right now even 19 though OCRRA does one of the best jobs 20 in the country for recycling, there has 21 to be somewhere to put the stuff that 22 can't be recycled. 23 You have a landfill, where you put 24 garbage in the ground. And garbage in 25 the ground can leach and cause very 87 1 Carroll 2 severe impact to your health. That's 3 also been cited. 4 At the facility OCRRA is able to, we 5 recycle it into energy. And those 6 energy revenues support all of the OCRRA 7 programs that we have all come to love 8 in the community, such as household 9 hazardous waste days, such as the 10 additional shredding events, 11 shred-o-ramas, all of those programs you 12 hear and see through OCRRA are all 13 financed through the revenues from the 14 plants. 15 We recycle over 9,000 tons a year of 16 metal and what's called non-ferrous 17 metal, you know, bicycle parts and all 18 sorts of things that don't burn we pull 19 out and recycle on the back end. 9,000 20 tons, which is about 3 percent of what 21 comes in is recycled and resold. 22 None of OCRRA's revenue are coming 23 from the Onondaga County Legislature, as 24 you all know. OCRRA is entirely funded 25 by the revenues associated with the 88 1 Carroll 2 plant. If that waste can't be recycled 3 it is an alternative. The only 4 alternative for that waste is to bring 5 it to a landfill. That would mean a 6 reduction in OCRRA's revenues of 7 approximately 8 to 10 million dollars a 8 year. And if you look at that 9 statistics and compare it. For every 10 $250,000 that's a dollar reduction in 11 your tip fee or a dollar increase. So 12 if you do the math, which I heard some 13 tonight doing the math, you'll see that 14 would add many, many dollars to us as 15 taxpayers that would dribble down to our 16 bill to pay. And like I said, the 17 alternative is land-filling. 18 I moved up to this area to start up 19 a plant with the OCRRA team in 1995. At 20 the time, before I came here I lived 21 less than two miles away from a landfill. 22 And I can tell you, every day when I 23 left for work or I came back from work I 24 had the droppings of pigeon covering my 25 car. When you leave raw garbage out in 89 1 Carroll 2 a landfill, no matter if you have dirt 3 or you have beneficial use ash on it, it 4 still smells and it emits odors and you 5 get your car covered with pigeon 6 droppings. Those are the realities. I 7 lived six years within two miles of a 8 landfill. 9 And I would also state just like I 10 would like everyone to come tour the 11 facility to also tour a landfill. It's 12 not pretty, it smells really bad. And 13 that's the only other alternative we 14 face here or anywhere for everything 15 else that we can't recycle. 16 OCRRA and Covanta work together to 17 encourage residents from disposing of 18 waste at the curb that comes to the 19 facility. We recently hosted a mercury 20 removal residential collection in 21 October. We had over 300 residents 22 bring to us mercury thermometers, 23 thermostats and other mercury containing 24 products which were collected and sent 25 to mercury recovery facilities. 90 1 Carroll 2 Next on our plan is to host a 3 e-waste collection event to gather, as I 4 see when I come to work every day, the 5 TVs that are left at the curbs that have 6 nowhere to go at this point. So we're 7 looking forward to doing that, it's 8 another collaborative partnership 9 between the two of us and the community 10 we have here tonight. 11 We support the OCRRA trash-for-ash 12 into the municipalities initiative. And 13 as a resident and taxpayer I'm very 14 pleased that my taxes do not include any 15 additional fees to support all of the 16 programs that OCRRA provides me as a 17 resident of the community. I am very 18 proud to live in an environmentally 19 responsive community, and I urge you to 20 vote for the trash-for-ash 21 instrumentality agreement between 22 Onondaga County, Cortland County and 23 OCRRA. Thank you. 24 CHAIRMAN McMAHON: Any other 25 speakers? Ask one more time, anyone 91 1 2 else like to address us in the public 3 hearing? Seeing none, the hearing is 4 now closed. 5 * * * * 6 C E R T I F I C A T E 7 This is to certify that I am a 8 Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary 9 Public in and for the State of New York, 10 that I attended and reported the above 11 entitled proceedings, that I have 12 compared the foregoing with my original 13 minutes taken therein and that it is a 14 true and correct transcript thereof and 15 all of the proceedings had therein. 16 17 _______________________ 18 John F. Drury, CSR, RPR 19 20 Dated: December 22, 2014 21 22 23 24 25