Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Biosolids Moratorium topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EIP committee debate over biosolids moratorium stalls amid legal, practical concerns
Summary
Steuben County's EIP committee debated a six-month moratorium on new biosolids spreading permits, heard legal advice that state permits likely preempt a local ban, and—after procedural back-and-forth—left the proposed local law on the legislature agenda rather than tabling it.
The Steuben County Legislature’s Environment, Infrastructure and Planning (EIP) committee spent its meeting debating a proposed six‑month moratorium on new biosolids spreading permits and whether local action could be effective given state regulation. The committee heard legal guidance that the state’s permitting authority and ongoing DEC rulemaking may limit what the county can do locally.
The county attorney told the committee that a local ban is likely preempted by state permits, saying, "You cannot you cannot grant any more permits in Steuben County," and noting that the DEC appears set to adopt testing rules rather than an outright ban. Staff also flagged procedural options short of a ban, including memorializations urging the state to follow models used in Michigan and Maine and submitting comments during DEC’s rulemaking. Committee members raised budget and disposal concerns if spreading were paused, including landfill tipping fees and capacity pressures.
The committee debated motions to table the local law and to move the item forward. After discussion about motions, seconds, and committee quorum, members confirmed they would not support tabling the item and the local law remained on the legislature’s agenda for the full body to decide. The meeting concluded with a voice vote to adjourn.
Why this matters: biosolids spreading involves long‑term environmental and public‑health concerns for residents and farms, while disposal approaches have significant cost and infrastructure implications for the county. The committee’s choice to leave the item on the agenda means the broader legislature will next weigh legal risks, local authority limits, and disposal tradeoffs.
