Sullivan County adopts 10-year solid waste plan as residents raise concerns over waste-to-energy options

SULLIVAN COUNTY, N.Y. — Sullivan County's Public Works committee voted by voice to approve a 10-year local solid waste management plan that will be submitted to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) for review, while residents urged the Legislature to reject waste-to-energy and gasification options cited in draft planning documents.

The plan, described by county staff as a 10-year blueprint with required biannual updates, was approved as part of a block of resolutions the committee passed by voice vote at the meeting; individual roll-call tallies were not recorded in the transcript. County staff said the DEC's sign-off is required before the plan takes effect.

County Public Works staff outlined the plan and related procurement work, including bids received for loading, hauling and disposal; staff said Seneca Meadows and several other out-of-county landfills were among the options under consideration. The committee also reviewed earlier vendor outreach for a separate waste-to-energy track: staff held a July 18 pre-proposal conference that drew seven companies, and said they expect to convert comments on the draft into an RFP by September.

"Basically, what you're authorizing is that we're gonna follow the plan and do two-year updates," said Paul (last name not specified), a Public Works staff member, describing the resolution the committee approved. He told the committee the county will submit the plan to the DEC and expects the agency's review in a matter of months.

Residents who spoke during public comment pressed the committee to exclude incineration or gasification from the county's preferred options. "Getting in a waste incinerator might be a quick fix for something, but it is an absolutely devastating environmental and economic problem for the county if this goes through," said Dor Hesse, a resident. Hesse cited potential risks to tourism and second-home owners if emissions spread beyond county borders.

Rebecca Kreshkoff, another public commenter, warned of health impacts in nearby communities should the county move forward with large-scale waste-to-energy facilities. "People living within two miles of that will suffer higher rates of certain types of cancer, asthma, childhood asthma, preterm birth," she said. Kreshkoff also described gasification as a form of "chemical recycling" that has failed to reach commercial scale in other counties.

County staff described ongoing procurement and grant work related to solid waste operations. Loading, hauling and disposal bids were reported as received from multiple vendors; staff said they will follow up with vendor Q&A before final selections. The report listed several potential landfill partners, including Seneca Meadows, and staff said fuel and transport costs are affecting projected disposal prices.

Staff also briefed the committee on parallel initiatives: a compost grant application requiring a county match (estimated between $1.6 million and $2 million) and a 50% local match requirement, and exploratory discussions with private firms marketing alternatives such as gasification. Staff said they and outside consultants are still clarifying what counts as an eligible county match for the compost grant.

"We had seven companies come out for the preproposal conference," the staff report said of the waste-to-energy outreach. "By September we should have an RFP put together for that." Staff cautioned that outreach at this stage reflects interest from vendors and technical consultants, not a procurement or final selection.

Votes at a glance - Resolution 1: Approval of the local solid waste management plan (10-year plan with biannual updates) — approved by voice vote as part of a block motion; recorded as passed. Details of the DEC submission and final conditions were described in committee discussion and will follow DEC review. - Resolution 3: Not-to-exceed contract with Titan Roofing for roof repairs at the county jail for items not covered by warranty — approved by voice vote as part of the same block motion. The contract was described as a not-to-exceed, as-needed arrangement with the warranty-holder.

Why it matters: The solid waste plan will guide county disposal, recycling and potential alternative technologies for the next decade and requires DEC review. Residents and public-health advocates urged the committee to avoid incineration or unproven technologies, citing environmental, health and economic risks for communities close to any proposed facility.

The meeting also left open follow-up steps: staff said they will finish vendor Q&A on hauling/disposal bids, complete the RFP process for the waste-to-energy draft if warranted, and return with contract details as procurement moves forward.

Ending: The approved solid waste management plan now proceeds to the DEC for review; staff said they expect to continue vendor outreach and to present further procurement details to the committee in coming months.