Good catch on
a trashy deal

Disposal of the county’s garbage is an expensive proposition – about $5.8 million annually – so any contract negotiations should be taken seriously and with much thought.

The county commissioners haven’t been known for their due diligence on tedious documents in the past, but they deserve credit for raising questions about the latest contract extension proposal from Waste Management.

The commissioners had planned to cancel their Dec. 17 meeting during the Christmas season, but have instead chosen to use the time to get more answers from Waste Management on their valuation of a three-sided metal building they’re offering the county at the “bargain” price of $325,000. As so often happens with monopolies, Waste Management has given the county the choice of paying $325,000 for this grossly overvalued building or accepting another long-term contract for waste transfer.

Whether the “deal” Waste Management is giving the county in the new contract is a good one needs study, but the commissioners are right to raise a red flag about the price of this shell of a building.

There are other issues that need to be thought out as well, such as aligning the transfer contract with the time frame of the collection contract because it’s not practical to have one contract commensurate with the other.

Second, the contract requires a minimum of 100 tons of garbage a day be moved through Waste Management. That kills any incentive to recycle or cut the waste stream, which would save taxpayer dollars in landfill fees.

Making sure taxpayers get the best deal in contract negotiations is what the commissioners are elected to do, even if it means working through Christmas. This is one trashy deal that wasn’t swept under the rug.