Council hears push to raise landfill tipping fees as solid waste fund shows shortfall

County Finance Director Pamela Lynn and solid‑waste staff told the Wicomico County Council on April 30 that the solid‑waste fund faces a revenue shortfall and that the proposed FY26 budget includes stepped tipping‑fee increases that would move the county closer to a business‑style rate structure.

Staff said the solid‑waste division recorded about $4,000,000 in forgone revenue through April 30 compared with the amounts that would have been collected under the higher rates; Lynn said the missing revenue would otherwise reduce borrowing needs and save interest costs over the life of facility bonds. "By the current the tonnage that we had collect that we took in during those periods of time, the solid waste division through April 30 lost $4,000,000," Lynn said.

Budget detail and rationale: the administration proposed a two‑step increase — to $88 a ton on July 1 and to $100 a ton in January 2026 — to improve reserves for cell construction and closure costs. Staff said the landfill is aging, requires equipment replacement and has had recent operational challenges including a leachate‑liner failure that required 24/7 holding of roughly 1,000,000 gallons of leachate. Staff told the council the facility filled about 231,000 cubic yards in a recent 9‑month period and estimated annual throughput at roughly 165,000–170,000 tons.

Why it matters: Solid‑waste staff argued that setting rates close to the true cost of operations protects taxpayers because strong reserves avoid long‑term borrowing for cell construction. Council members and some speakers warned that large, rapid rate increases could prompt commercial haulers or municipalities to seek other disposal options, which could shift tonnage and revenue dynamics. One councilor asked whether off‑hauling to neighboring counties had been costed; staff said that analysis was possible but not ready for the April 30 meeting.

Other options discussed: staff noted steps to boost non‑tipping revenue, including gas‑to‑energy revenue that might yield up to $1 million annually; the council also discussed options such as charging for brush, privatizing recycling, and staged mid‑year analyses of tonnage trends to adjust fees. Staff said they have met repeatedly with commercial haulers and held public workshops; they emphasized legal reserve requirements that obligate the county to set aside cash for closure and post‑closure care.

No final vote was taken on the fee schedule during the meeting; the council directed staff to provide additional analyses and said it would consider the proposed rates during subsequent budget actions.