Moraine City Council on March 27, 2025, voted to ratify the Montgomery County Solid Waste Management District's revised solid waste management plan after a presentation by John Minor, assistant director of the Montgomery County Solid Waste Management District and Operations, Montgomery County Environmental Services. Councilmembers recorded voting to approve the plan; Mayor Murphy cast the sole recorded no vote.

The plan updates the county's five-year solid waste strategy and includes a financial projection covering 20 years. John Minor told council the district needs a $0.65 increase in the per-household fee to avoid running a deficit, and that the increase would go into effect only after the city ratifies the plan and the director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency approves it. "What they came up with was basically the district's going to need a 65¢ increase which, if the plan is ratified, would go into effect in 2026," Minor said.

Why it matters: the district's plan implements requirements from Ohio's 1988 solid-waste statute (House Bill 592) that counties demonstrate 20 years of disposal capacity and set programs to reduce waste. Minor said Montgomery County meets the plan's key performance goals on disposal capacity and residential/commercial recycling rates, and that recent audit work adjusted the county's residential/commercial recycling number to about 25.6% (meeting the state target after reclassification of some materials reported by industrial haulers).

During and after the presentation, a Moraine resident raised repeated complaints about odors and other impacts from a nearby landfill and expressed frustration with perceived lack of benefit to the city. The resident said, "All you have done for the city of Moraine is not a whole lot. We spent a whole summer with smells that nobody could go outside of their house," and objected to the continuing presence and perceived impacts of the landfill. Minor and district staff responded that the district does not operate or control the landfill permitting process and that enforcement and liner-monitoring authority rests with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other permitting agencies. Minor said the district will advocate to the landfill operator when complaints are received and that the district maintains a fund to help municipalities identified as potentially responsible parties avoid direct liability for remediation costs.

Minor outlined additional context discussed in the presentation:
- The 1988 Ohio law (House Bill 592) required counties to prepare solid waste plans and guarantee 20 years of disposal capacity.
- Montgomery County historically relied on transfer-station contracts (Minor cited the county's contract with Rumpke) to meet disposal requirements and operates a transfer and recycling facility serving Moraine residents.
- The district's financial advisory committee examined options after forecasting a reserve shortfall in 2026 and recommended the $0.65 per-household increase; the district last raised the fee in 2010 (from $2 to $3).
- Two county programs'the electronics recycling program and the household hazardous waste program'have seen significant cost increases in recent bids (Minor cited roughly 92% and 200% increases, respectively, for those services).

Council action: Resolution 8142-25, described in the agenda as "a resolution approving the solid waste management plan of the Montgomery County Solid Waste Management District," was placed before council and a motion to approve carried. Roll-call voting recorded councilmembers Doherty, Marcus, Allen and Miller as voting to ratify the plan; Mayor Murphy cast the lone recorded no vote. The resolution will be submitted to the director of the Ohio EPA for final approval; the proposed fee increase cannot take effect until that state approval is granted.

What remains: the district must obtain Ohio EPA approval of the revised plan before the fee increase can be implemented. Minor told council he would continue to answer questions from city staff and citizens and provided a district office phone number for follow-up. The resident who spoke said she planned to pursue complaints with the EPA but was told that filing technical complaints with the EPA is distinct from the district's advocacy role.

Notes: The presentation and subsequent council action included technical details about the county recycling-rate calculations and long-term budgeting; council members asked clarifying questions during the Committee of the Whole presentation earlier in March, according to the packet materials presented to council at the March 27 meeting.