Ulster County Legislature Approves $60 Million Bonding Cap for Resource Recovery Agency Amid Debate

The Ulster County Legislature voted 16 to 6 to approve a service agreement that raises the Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency(UCRRA) bonding authority to $60,000,000, a change supporters said matches the agency's 10-year plan while opponents warned it weakens legislative oversight and exposes taxpayers to implicit risk.

Legislator Kevin Kovacs said the increase would replace a deliberate check that required the agency to seek legislative approval for large borrowing and called the proposal a "blank check." "If we approve this 60,000,000 cap tonight, we've replaced that healthy process with a rubber stamp," Kovacs said.

The change, presented as resolution 209 (authorizing the chair to execute a service agreement with the Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency), drew supporters who said the larger cap reflects modern costs and a multiyear capital plan. Legislator Nolan said the agency presented a 10-year project list that could use up the requested amount and noted the contract would run five years against a 10-year plan.

Legislator Matthew Hewitt argued the cap is intended to permit significant investments in resource-recovery infrastructure and that the total figure represents the aggregate debt ceiling, not a single project draw. "Maximum diversion will cost significant dollars," Hewitt said, and the county should be prepared to invest in projects with long-term payoffs.

Public commenter Chris Hurlburt, who addressed the legislature during public comment, urged a transparent feasibility and return-on-investment study before committing to local processing capacity. "We spend over $10,000,000 a year trucking garbage nearly 250 miles," Hurlburt said, and he recommended a public ROI study to assess costs, savings and job potential.

Opponents, including Minority Leader Roberts and Legislator Litz, sought stronger contractual limits and safeguards. Roberts said he could not support the process as presented and asked for a "firewall" to pause spending if the agency drew funds too quickly. Litz noted the UCRRA board had not yet voted to ratify the contract and questioned the sequence of approvals.

Supporters emphasized the county currently lacks a standing bond cap while the agency is out of contract, and said a new agreement would restore defined terms. Majority Leader Ushitao noted that without a new contract the agency would continue operating with no bond cap.

The motion passed 16 to 6. Clerk roll-call statements recorded two named yes votes in one count as Legislators Corcoran and Walls, and later the clerk announced the final tally as 16 yes, 6 no. The contract amendment will govern UCRRA borrowing and operations for the term specified in the agreement.

Background: The UCRRA has proposed capital projects including recycling and food-waste processing; supporters said grants and revenue streams could offset costs and that local processing could reduce trucking, generate jobs and produce revenue from compost, energy and tipping fees. Opponents warned of long-term debt-service costs and urged tighter oversight language in the agreement.

What happens next: The approved service agreement takes effect per its terms; the UCRRA and county will proceed under the new cap and the agency may pursue projects within that ceiling subject to the contract's provisions.