Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Grinding Feasibility topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Staff: owning a grinder would cost over $1.2 million and carry high operational risks

Directors and Citizens Advisory Committee of the Recycling and Waste Reduction District of Porter County · July 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District staff told the board that buying and operating a grinder and support equipment would require roughly $1.2 million in capital and bring total first-year exposure near $1.4 million, with uncertain repair, contamination and hauling costs making in-house grinding unlikely at current budgets.

Staff member told the board that a phased, in-house grinding program would require four major pieces of equipment and substantial operating support. “So just those 4 pieces of equipment alone, you're looking at $1,200,000,” the staff member said, and added that “together, that cost is about 1,400,000.”

The staff member outlined operating expenses that would include a CDL-qualified operator, benefits, insurance and parts. They warned that routine repairs can be unpredictable: one contractor reported a recent $20,000 parts order and said grinder teeth can cost about $70 each and number in the hundreds on a single machine. “If somebody accidentally throws their rake into the grinder… bricks get thrown in,” the staff member said, noting contamination drives repair and replacement costs.

Staff also flagged hauling and tipping fees as a major ongoing cost. Using a local clean-fill option would require outfitting a semi with an open-top trailer or walking floor; staff included hauling equipment and trailer costs in the capital estimate. They projected a breakeven against current contracting at roughly 4½ years based on present volumes and prices, but stressed that unpredictable breakdowns and unclear incoming material quality make that projection uncertain.

The chair and board members acknowledged the potential operational benefits of on-demand grinding but raised concerns about durability and maintenance. Staff said they will pursue further vendor conversations and peer reviews — including follow-ups with a municipal grinder operator in Chicago who later contracted out grinding because repair costs exceeded their budget — and return with additional analysis rather than an immediate purchase request.

Next steps: staff will continue vetting phased options, vendor warranties and hauling arrangements and report back to the board with clearer repair-cost estimates and potential funding options.