Hearing on Marion County waste control bill draws industry opposition and local advocacy for city control

Chair Karen Lively opened a public hearing on Senate Bill 1067, which would authorize a city within Marion County to control or direct the disposal, transfer, or material or energy recovery of solid waste generated within the city and to enter into related contracts.

Derek Nelotin, representing Resource, a materials recovery and transfer facility in Brooks, Oregon, said Resource opposes SB 1067 and submitted a list of what the facility called unintended consequences. Nelotin said Resource and local franchise haulers built the county's first construction-and-demolition processing facility and have scaled operations to receive large volumes of Marion County material. Kevin Hines, also representing Resource, testified the facility received 28,000 tons in its first year, processed a new state-of-the-art facility in 2021, received over 300,000 tons in 2024, and projected over 400,000 tons in the current year. Hines said Resource recovered and diverted 75,000 tons last year, contributing a 25% recovery rate to Oregon's 39% statewide recovery rate; he also noted Marion County's recovery rate at 46%.

Shane Kinsey, representing the Mid Valley Haulers Association, said franchise haulers originally took a neutral stance but moved to oppose the bill because no city has expressed full support and because the countywide franchise system is designed for cross-jurisdiction efficiency. Kinsey said many residential routes operate inside and outside city limits on the same truck and that if cities independently directed disposal, haulers might lose routing efficiency, face higher fuel costs, and need additional trucks to keep loads separated. He warned those changes would likely raise collection rates for Marion County ratepayers. "We're not opposing cities having autonomy," Kinsey said. "We just wanted to bring educational to the unintended consequences, which would be the loss of routing efficiency and likely higher rates for Marion County residents."

Representative Levy asked witnesses whether cities had requested the bill; the witnesses said they were unsure of the bill's origin and that they had not heard full city support. Representative Anderson questioned where the diverted material went; witnesses described commingled recycling going to Portland-area processors, food/compost to a compost facility (PRC), wood to a cogen facility, metal to a local recycler, and aggregate used for fill in riverbeds or ponds.

Jim Shepke of 350 Salem testified in support of SB 1067, saying the law that removed Salem's authority over its waste dated to the early 1980s and was passed to support the Marion County incinerator in Brooks. "Simply put, Senate Bill 1067 is about local control," Shepke said, arguing Salem should be able to direct disposal of waste generated within its boundaries. He said the bill would not prevent cooperative planning with Marion County but would restore negotiating leverage to cities.

Chair Lively closed the public hearing. The committee did not take a vote on SB 1067 during this meeting; no work session outcome was recorded. The committee carried over other work sessions and adjourned.