The original document and answers provided below were prepared by Suzanne Tresko, Recycling Coordinator for the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. Subsequent remarks and questions, highlighted in blue, were submitted by local citizens for further clarification...No response so far!

The following questions were submitted at the Solid Waste Plan public meetings held by the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System on January 14 & 15, 2007. The group submitting the questions identified themselves as belonging to Densa, consisting locally of J.K., M.N., V.N., and C.S. More information can be found about Densa at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Densa.

Questions from C.S.
1. Why are state-of-the-art landfills not the very highest priority for the regional system?
Washington State establishes waste reduction, reuse, and recycling as the highest priorities for solid waste management, followed by disposal, including both combustion and landfilling.

Obviously the question was intended to prioritize disposal options, which is extremely important, because the Waste to Energy Facility has reached full capacity, the Regional System is running $5 million dollar deficits, and we are hauling our excess garbage to a private landfill site that is over 200 miles away.

2. Why has the System not done a Financial Cost Analysis that incorporates the use of privately owned local landfill sites?
The City of Spokane does not conduct cost analyses or feasibility studies for privately owned landfill operations.

Nearly every Financial Model used by the System incorporates the use of the private sector (WTE operations, Ash disposal, Private Long Haul, Clean Green, Rabanco), so why wasn't a private sector Short Haul solution considered?

Statements from C. S.
1. A well designed landfill can achieve a 96% recovery rate for landfill gases.
According to standard landfill industry designs, a landfill site would not start generating enough methane gas for recovery until the landfill had a minimum of 1,000,000 tons of garbage in place, and probably not until it had about 3,000,000 to 5,000,000 tons in place would it be of any interest to an energy developer.

We produce over 600,000 tons of garbage and CDL a year, so in less than two years it could be up and running.

2. Methane electrical generation produces 1000 pounds of CO2 per MWH, while Spokane’s Waste to Energy Facility produces 3500 pounds of CO2 per MWH.
Please refer to the EPA’s report on Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Management of Selected Materials in Municipal Solid Waste at http://epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/SWMGHGreport.html for accurate information on greenhouse gas emissions by various disposal methods, including Waste to energy facilities and landfills. Combustion of waste allows energy recovery to displace fossil fuel-generated electricity from utilities, reducing greenhouse gas emissions both from the utility sector and landfill methane emissions. An integrated solid waste management operation such as the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System provides additional opportunities for greenhouse gas emission reductions: source reduction and recycling programs reduce emissions at the manufacturing stage, increasing forest carbon storage, and avoiding landfill methane emissions; diverting organic materials through the System’s Clean Green program also reduces methane emissions.

We read the EPA document listed above. The Spokane area uses very little fossil fuel for electricity generation (hydroelectric) and a modern landfill collects nearly all the methane it produces, so her response has nothing to do with the initial statement. The figures for the amount of CO2 per MWH listed in the original statement were correct.

3. Landfills are half the cost to operate as compared to a WTE plant.
The revenue produced from the electricity generated by Spokane’s WTE facility pays for the cost of its operation while producing enough electricity to light 20,000 homes.

In 2007, the System will pay $16 million to operate the WTE facility, and $4 million more to haul the ash away. Electricity sales produce $12.6 million, for a $7.4 million dollar loss to the System, and the losses are increasing every year. Landfills are far less than half the cost to operate, when the cost of financing a WTE facility is factored in .

4. Modern landfills are much safer for the environment than incineration.
All methods of solid waste management contain risks. Landfills produce risks through methane and CO2 greenhouse gas and other toxic gas emissions, groundwater and surface waste contamination, and onsite security concerns. Landfill risks become legacy issues for future generations. The Spokane Regional Solid Waste System was specifically formed through interlocal agreements with Spokane County, the City of Spokane, each of the other cities within the County, and Fairchild Air Force Base to remediate the contamination and risk issues from past landfill operations, and manage solid waste within our County in an environmentally responsible and sustainable manner.

Garbage is roughly 30% carbon, and incineration removes 98% of that carbon during combustion, and places it into the atmosphere as CO2  (630 million pounds of greenhouse gas annually from Spokane's Waste to Energy Facility). Incineration also emits substantial amounts mercury, lead, sulfur, and nitrous oxides into the air. Incineration byproducts become a legacy issue to the entire planet for future generations. On the other hand, modern landfills are a contained system, and leave a large part of the carbon buried, while converting a portion of the carbon to methane through anaerobic decomposition, which is easily collected. Methane produces three times the energy per carbon molecule as compared to garbage. Modern landfills also collect and dispose of any harmful leachate, and are a much safer and cleaner option than incineration.

Questions from M.N.
1. As a facilitator to the plan update process, will you be ensuring objectivity and transparency to this public process? To whom do you report under your current contract?
The facilitator was specifically hired by the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System to assure objectivity and transparency in compiling comments, questions, and input from the public during the meetings, but does not participate in the input process per se.

The facilitator has submitted questions from the meetings, which have not been posted nor answered by the System.

2. The methodology the SRSWS is employing to interpret and subsequently prioritize system goals was found to be easily manipulated when presented to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) approximately a year ago. What internal steps are now being taken to ensure the Solid Waste Plan Update is not subverted to serve the narrow interests or beliefs of a few, and will meet the collective and improving good of the entire region?
The methodology used to facilitate stakeholder input follows industry standards for public processes. The Solid Waste Plan planning process involves input from the Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC), the Stakeholder Input committee (SIC), County and regional city electeds and staff, other public agencies, private businesses, and the general public. All alternatives developed through the planning process were included. Ultimately, the elected officials of Spokane County and each of the cities within Spokane County decide what they will adopt in the Plan. Washington State Department of Ecology has final approval of the Plan.

3. Why is the cost of consultants for the Solid Waste Plan Update $500,000.00? The average cost for Eastern Washington Counties is believed to be approximately $50,000.00 and Walla Walla is updating their plan with no consultant cost.
Each County must prepare a Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. Depending on the circumstances in each County and the planning needs at the time they are doing their Plan update, each planning contract will vary. The scope of work describing the tasks within the Spokane County’s SWMP reflects the planning needs for Spokane County as articulated by Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Liaison Board, and SWAC. Along with extensive updates to each section, the scope of work includes a waste flow analysis and a draft financial model calculating levelized tipping fee and lifecycle costs to different combinations of disposal methods, recycling programs, and jurisdictional partnerships. Submitted proposals were evaluated and consultants interviewed by a committee consisting of representatives from Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the Regional Cities, and SWAC. The consultant was chosen on the basis of the qualifications in their written and oral evaluations.

The County and the SWAC chose a less expensive consultant, but the City insisted that CH2M Hill be part of the process, forcing the cost to go up. This is one of the main reasons that the updated plan is 3 years behind schedule.

4. Is there an executive summary of what the Solid Waste Plan intends to accomplish for our community in the next 5 years, 20 years and 50 years? The current plan is hundreds of pages that few will ever read. It is unlikely any of those few will be elected officials that will eventually vote to adopt or reject this plan.
All County Comprehensive Solid Waste management Plans are required to consider a 20-year planning horizon, and are reviewed every 5 years. The 2007 Plan will contain a summary of recommendations.

5. Why is there no meaningful measure of system performance available relative to meeting the goals of the original Solid Waste Plan as well as ongoing year to year performance?
There are several meaningful measures of system performance. A stable tipping fee (only a $1.00 increase in 11 years); a high recycling rate (43%); a proactive SWAC; involved and knowledgeable elected officials and staff, and award-wining programs (2006 North American Hazardous Materials Management Association for Program Excellence for Best Moderate Risk Waste program in the nation, 2003 Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation Recycler of the Year, 2006 Washington State Recycling Association Recycler of the Year to Jim Haynes of Pacific Material Exchange, the contractor that operates the System’s Waste Reduction Assessment program (WRAP), 2000 Solid Waste Association of North America for Best Integrated Solid Waste system in the North America).

Useless awards issued by fellow bureaucrats is not a meaningful measure of System performance, and a recycling rate of 43% is low when compared with our high tipping fees (San Francisco's tipping fees are similar to ours, but they have a 67% recycling rate. Washington's statewide recycling rate is 44%, with an average tipping fee much less than Spokane's)

6. Why was the consultant team hired to assist with the plan update not allowed to answer questions about financial performance past and present?
The consultant’s scope of work did not include conducting a financial analysis.

The question clearly asks why financial analysis was not part of the consultant's scope.

7. Why was the consultant team precluded from including any financial modeling projections that included new landfill and gas extraction technologies?
The draft financial model includes methane gas extraction as required for landfills under Subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

So RCRA requires landfill gas extraction under Subtitle D. The question pertains to financial impact of these technologies, which were not mentioned in any financial models.

8. Why did the consultant team insist on using blended rates in all financial modeling summaries? This technique was widely believed by SWAC members to be misleading and to improperly show the current regional system to be the best economic model for the region.
The financial model does not use blended rates. The financial model includes a summary which shows two industry standard units for comparing solid waste strategy costs: levelized tipping fees and life-cycle costs. The use of these units was discussed at length at several SWAC meetings and with the City of Spokane and Spokane County. Levelized tipping fees illustrate the overall impact to all generators in the county to show whether or not there were net cost increases or decreases associated with those strategies that would break apart the regional system. Since estimating costs for individual jurisdictions would be much more difficult and would depend on a host of assumptions about how each individual system would be operated, County-wide solid waste plans do not include such estimates. For the most part, it was agreed that life cycle costs are the more useful units in the draft financial model to use at this phase of planning, but levelized tipping fees will still be shown as art of the summary information.

9. Why do City of Spokane employees refuse to release the Excel program that created the financial modeling the new Solid Waste Plan is to be based? City employee statements that the program is too sophisticated for anyone but city employees to understand have not been convincing.
The Draft Financial Model was released to SWAC in October 2006. Further discussions with the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and SWAC led to refinements in the model, which will be re-released as soon as those modifications have been completed.

The questioner obviously wanted to know why the digital copy of the spreadsheet was not released, not when the new paper copy will be re-released.

10. If the City of Spokane did not control the revenue of the SRSWS and was unable to charge the system for a myriad of services, what would be the monetary impact to the city’s annual budget?
The City of Spokane owns and operates the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System for the benefit of all residents within Spokane County. The responsibilities of the City of Spokane in paying for the costs of administering and operating the System are defined in the interlocal agreements signed by the County, the City of Spokane, and each of the other cities within Spokane County, as well as Fairchild Air Force Base. Certain major decision must be approved by both the City of Spokane and Spokane County, as defined in their interlocal agreement. Costs of the System are paid through user fees only and do not impose any taxes on residents or businesses. Interfund charges only apply to those operations related to the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System, such as City of Spokane staffing at the transfer stations. System revenue has no impact on the City of Spokane’s general revenue.

The City of Spokane receives nearly a million dollars from the System as "Interfund Charges", and another 1.6 million dollars for a "Rebate of Closure Component".

11. How can the director of the SRSWS act in the interest of the entire region if that person is an employee of the city and reports to city officials facing severe financial shortfalls?
System revenue does not impact the City of Spokane’s general revenue. The City of Spokane operates the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System for the benefit of all residents and businesses within the County. The responsibilities of the City of Spokane in paying for the costs of administering and operating the System are defined in the interlocal agreements signed by the County, the City of Spokane and each of the other cities within Spokane County, as well as Fairchild Air Force Base. Certain major decision must be approved by both the City of Spokane and Spokane County, as defined in their interlocal agreement. The Spokane Regional Liaison Board, consisting of 6 elected officials representing the Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, and the other regional cities, act as a forum for the interlocal agreement partners to discuss System operations and policies. The Liaison Board reviews the System’s budget annually.

System revenue usually does not go into the City's general fund (see question above), but the System pays for City owned property, such as the Waste to Energy Facility, the Transfer Stations, Northside Landfill, Malloy Prairie, Colbert Compost Facility, and all the equipment to operate them - at a cost of hundred of millions of dollars.

Any System Director (a city employee) that placed the priorities of the entire County above, or even equal to, that of the City, would lose their job immediately.

12. How is it reasonable that a director subservient to the narrow interests of the city escape clear conflict-of-interest charges when administering a budget with a projected 1.5 billion dollar, twenty year revenue stream. The director will be purchasing services from the city, with essentially no oversight, unless the heavily conflicted mayor and city council constituents oversight. These entities can not possibly be viewed as independent as the case should be when overseeing such large public cash-flows. This problem is made worse when roughly 55 percent of the population resides outside the city limits and may not benefit from the many programs subsidized by the Regional System into which they have been paying for years.
Revenue from the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System does not impact the City of Spokane’s general revenue. There are many layers of oversight over the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System. The roles and responsibilities of the City of Spokane in paying for the costs of administering and operating the System are defined in the interlocal agreements signed by Spokane County, the City of Spokane, and each of the other cities within Spokane County, as well as Fairchild Air Force Base. Certain major decision must be approved by both the City of Spokane and Spokane County, as defined in their interlocal agreement. The Spokane Regional Liaison Board, consisting of 6 elected officials representing the Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, and the other regional cities, act as a forum for the interlocal agreement partners to discuss System operations and policies. Spokane County and the Liaison Board review the System’s budget annually. The City of Spokane is audited annually by the State.

See answers to questions 10 and 11 above. Also, Spokane County and the Liaison Board can only review the budget, not change it.

13. Are there any initiatives planned that will reduce the current $50 million a year cost to operate the regional system or increase value to the communities and rate payers that have been contributing to this system for years?
The Spokane Regional Solid Waste System operates an integrated solid waste disposal system that includes waste reduction and recycling, moderate risk waste management for households and businesses, Freon-appliance management, and education and outreach programs as well as operating a modern environmentally sound disposal facility. The System has also maintained a rate stabilization fund to absorb increases in costs without having to raise tipping fees. The tipping fee also includes a revenue bond repayment costs. Those revenue bonds will be retired in 2011, which will undoubtedly stimulate discussions on changes in tipping fees.

Questions hand-written on the back of M.N’s letter:
1. Can you provide complete and timely financial accounting information pertaining to the performance of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System?
The System annually presents its budget to Spokane County and the Spokane Regional Liaison Board. Spokane County conducted a detailed review of the closure component portion of the System’s budget and found no irregularities. The SWAC chair annually receives a copy of the System’s financial statement. The City of Spokane is audited annually by the State. Specific financial accounting information requests can be made through the public disclosure process with the City of Spokane Clerk’s office at 509-625-6350.

A request has been submitted to the City Clerk for the years 2007-2012. Only year 2007 was provided.

2. Will SRSWS be addressing the high cost of Clean Green Disposal
The System’s Clean Green contract handles over 40,000 tons of yard waste annually. The contract was competitively bid and awarded to the most highly qualified respondent. With proper permitting, any private operator may build and operate a compost facility within Spokane County and charge a competitive fee.

What high qualifications are required to be the middleman for a simple hauling contract?

The System has and will only consider Waste Management as qualified, so actually, there is no competitive bid process. Also, the private sector cannot compete with a heavily subsidized System that takes Clean Green at a huge loss.

3. Is it true that that total cost of Clean Green Disposal is $60 a ton?
The cost of the Clean Green program has been subsidized by the disposal tipping fee since the System opened the regional compost facility in 1993. However, as with all recycling programs, there are ancillary benefits and cost savings by diverting material from disposal and allowing more efficient use of existing disposal capacity for non-divertible material. Over time, the Clean Green tipping fee has been adjusted to make the program more solvent on its own while maintaining the monetary incentive for residents and businesses to continue to divert Clean Green from disposal.

Was that a yes?

4. Do you plan to renegotiate the inter-local agreements before 2011?
There have been no requests on the part of any of the interlocal agreement partners to renegotiate the interlocal agreements before the end of their terms.

5. Since this is a regional system shouldn’t the director be independent?
The City of Spokane owns and operates the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System for the benefit of all residents and businesses within the County.

The City of Spokane and Waste Management are the only major beneficiaries of the System, receiving $48 million from the System's $56 million dollar budget. County residents will have nothing to show for all the money they've dumped into the System, except for a few closed landfills.

6. Do you have operating budgets in place right now? And if so, for how long? 5 year? 20 year?
The City of Spokane works off of 6-year annual operating plans.

7. What is the expected useful life of the 2 WTE boilers?
With proper maintenance and upgrades, the boiler life is unlimited.

8. Why is your system so complicated?
During the early 1900’s, Spokane used to dispose of its garbage in the Spokane River. We advanced to putting raw garbage in unlined pits at garbage dumps, which lead to the contamination of our sole-source groundwater supply. Thankfully, those days of uncomplicated garbage disposal are over. The Spokane Regional Solid Waste System manages a safe and effective integrated solid waste system that complies with local, State, and Federal solid waste management regulations and protects our environment for the benefit of all residents of Spokane County, including waste reduction, reuse, recycling, moderate risk waste, education and outreach, planning, and disposal.

The Waste to Energy Facility is the largest single producer of greenhouse gases in the County (630 million pounds annually), and some people believe that global warming would be harmful to the environment.

9. What are you doing to lower the cost of disposal?
The System’s disposal contracts are competitively bid and compare favorably with other disposal contracts in the State. The System tipping fee includes costs for other components for repayment of revenue bonds that many other jurisdiction pay for out of property or other taxes rather than a user-based tipping fee. Those revenue bonds will be retired in 2011. A major point of the current planning process is to gather input on how to reassess the tipping fee once we do not have to include the costs of revenue bond payments.

The operation of the Waste to Energy Facility has never been put out to bid, and over the 16 years of their 20 year contract, the cost of operating the plant has outpaced inflation twofold. The current cost of operations is $55 per ton, while the 1991 costs were approximately $27 per ton, for an inflation rate of 100%, as compared to the CPI, which rose only 48%.

10. Can we separate the inert materials out at the transfer stations? (This will be a money saver).
Inert materials are separated out as much as operationally possible at the System facilities. Ferrous (iron-based) metals are retrieved from the ash after combustion. The public has access to a recycling area where they can drop off recyclable material at no charge before disposing of their non-recyclable material. There are numerous construction, demolition, landclearing, (CDL), inert, and scrap metal facilities that accept these materials for recovery. The Recycling Hotline at 625-6800 can provide information on CDL, inert, and scrap recovery facilities.

There is only one CDL dumpsite in the entire County (Airway Heights), an inconvenient location for over half the population of the County. If the Transfer Stations allowed a lower rate for CDL materials, the System would be more equitable to County residents.

11. What percent of the systems budget is sub-contracted? And what percentage and dollar amount goes to the city?
For 2007, the System’s budgeted major contracted expenditures: $14.4 million - Wheelabrator; $6.4 million - Regional Disposal Company; $2.5 million – Waste Management, Inc. (yard waste), for a total of $23.3 million. Approximately 47% of the System’s total annual budget is allocated to contractual services (Wheelabrator, Regional Disposal Company, and Waste Management, Inc.). Debt service requires approximately 30%. The remaining 23% is used for other System expenditures such as recycling programs, transfer stations, capital items, taxes, etc.

12. Why did we build the plant on leased property?
The land leased by the System for the WTE facility is owned by the City of Spokane and Spokane County.

The question was why was it built on leased property, not who they are leasing it from (we were told it was the Spokane Airport).

13. How much money goes to R&D and how much to W.M.?
Respondent is unclear of the meaning of the abbreviations.

Everybody knows R&D stands for research & development, and she definitely knows W.M. is Waste Management.

14. Do you believe that free-market competition would make the system more efficient?
All System contracts operate under a free market system.

It's not a free market if it's a government controlled monopoly. The System makes competition illegal.

15. How much money or percentage goes “in-city” versus outside city limits for litter control?
County-wide litter control is paid entirely out of System funds
.
16. How many different materials are being tested for emissions?
Section 8, Energy Recovery and Incineration (www.solidwaste.org) provides a complete description of WTE Facility operations, including emissions testing.

17. Is it true that Spokane pays more than any other city in the lower 48 states that operate waste to energy systems?
No, it is not true.

Where exactly is this WTE facility that charges more than $55 per ton just to operate the plant?