Carroll County explores landfill expansion to cut $7M annual transfer costs; officials weigh $25–30M upfront

Carroll County commissioners and staff discussed a plan to expand the county landfill and set aside county funds to develop new disposal cells, with the goal of reducing or eliminating expensive transfers of waste to other jurisdictions.

County staff framed the discussion as primarily financial. "Developing new space gives us the opportunity to reduce or even in theory eliminate how much we're transferring," a staff member said, noting the county currently has about $11,000,000 set aside from the land purchase but that full build-out could exceed $100,000,000.

The nut graf: expanding landfill capacity could make the county's solid waste enterprise fund self‑sustaining by removing recurring transfer costs, but would require large up‑front capital, state permits and several years of design and construction.

Most important facts – what commissioners were told

- Current costs and shortfall: Staff said the county now spends about $7.0–$7.5 million a year on transferring waste offsite. The solid waste enterprise fund runs an annual shortfall of roughly $3.5 million to $4 million under current operations.

- Cash on hand and estimates: The county has about $11,000,000 available that was set aside when land was purchased. Staff estimated initial steps to enable additional on‑site landfilling could be in the $25,000,000–$30,000,000 range, while a full build‑out would likely exceed $100,000,000.

- Per‑acre and cell costs: Staff presented a high‑level per‑acre estimate of roughly $600,000 to construct a landfill liner system (including perimeter roads). The first new disposal area ("cell") was estimated at about $7.8 million in construction cost.

- Acreage and life estimates: The proposed design would add about 70 acres of new landfill and approximately 20 acres of overlay on the existing facility (about 90 acres total). The existing landfill footprint is roughly 60 acres. Staff said if the county landfilled everything under the proposed expansion, the estimate was about a 38‑year life for the facility; under current operation (about 27,000 tons a year placed) the present life is roughly eight years. Staff also said a breakeven point—where the cost to transfer versus landfill roughly balances—appeared near 60,000–70,000 tons a year landfilled.

- Schedule and approvals: Staff said permitting from the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) would be the lengthiest step, with an expected state permitting time horizon of roughly 2–5 years. Cell construction itself typically takes about one construction season (roughly a year), depending on size and phasing.

- What is and is not included: Commissioners were told the $25–30 million initial estimate covers a new entrance, internal roads, the first new cell and stormwater/permitting requirements. That estimate does not include relocation or rebuilding of the transfer station; staff said the transfer station replacement would be additional and would need to happen separately.

Policy, legal and revenue considerations

- County code restriction: Staff said the Carroll County code currently prohibits the county from accepting waste generated outside Carroll County. Changing that restriction would require action by the commissioners. Staff noted the county could also pursue public‑private partnerships that might accept out‑of‑county material under different contractual terms.

- Potential revenue: Commissioners asked whether the county could generate revenue by taking material from other jurisdictions. Staff responded the prohibition in county code prevents that now; the board could choose to change the code. Staff added that if the county reached a break‑even or surplus position on operations, enterprise fund revenues would generally need to stay related to landfill operations and could be used for landfill‑related capital or debt service.

Operational notes and ancillary items

- Leachate/sewer connection: Commissioners raised a previously designed but never built sewer/leachate line that would connect toward Westminster. Staff said the route would be easier with recently acquired property but that Westminster has not committed to the project; the county would need right‑of‑way acquisitions and intergovernmental conversation before proceeding.

- Cover material and phasing: Staff said the county would excavate material from new cells to provide cover for existing fills and could accept clean fill soils to help operations; the design will be phased so cells "roll" as prior cells are closed.

Commissioners' responses and next steps

Commissioners generally expressed interest in pursuing the option but urged caution. Several commissioners said they were open to earmarking additional funds from unassigned fund balance to move the project forward, but at least one commissioner said any adjustment to the county's transfer/landfill mix should wait until permitting and initial cell work were underway as an "insurance policy" before reducing transfers. Another commissioner ran the rough payback math and observed that, if the county stopped transfers entirely and avoided the roughly $7 million a year transfer cost, it could recover an additional $20 million put aside in about five years (as a high‑level check on the costs staff presented).

No formal funding decision was made at the meeting. Staff was asked to continue design, permitting and follow‑up conversations with potential partners and with Westminster about the leachate/sewer option.

Votes and formal actions

The meeting concluded with a procedural motion to adjourn; the motion was moved and seconded and carried by voice vote (verbal "Aye" responses were recorded). No formal motion was made or voted on during this discussion to reallocate fund balance or to change county code.

Ending

County staff asked commissioners to consider whether to earmark a portion of unassigned fund balance in the upcoming budget process for landfill development; commissioners asked staff to return with further permitting and design details before the board makes a funding commitment.