Landfill host agreement creates challenges for Cumberland officials

Sometimes, as Cumberland residents raise questions about the proposed Green Ridge landfill, county supervisors can’t say anything. It’s not because they don’t want to. But rather, as members explained at their Tuesday, Aug. 13 meeting, they have to be careful due to the landfill host agreement previous boards signed.

“Everyone sitting here, I don’t think anyone really wants a landfill. (If there were) say a Top 10 of businesses coming in, it wouldn’t have a landfill. If it was a Top 20, it wouldn’t have a landfill. (But) these are, unfortunately, the deck of cards that was handed to us from several boards ago,” Board of Supervisors Chairman John Newman said. “This is what we have to deal with. We are looking into it. We are looking into various aspects of it. We take it seriously, we take comments seriously. We will do everything we can as a county to do the right thing for everyone.”

To explain what Newman is referring to, we have to go back a few years to 2018. In August 2018, the Cumberland board voted 3-2 to adopt a community host agreement with Green Ridge Recycling and Disposal. Of the members at that time, then-Chairman Kevin Ingle and District Two Supervisor Lloyd Banks voted in opposition to the motion and District One Supervisor William “Bill” Osl, District Four Supervisor David Meinhard and District Five Supervisor Parker Wheeler voted in favor. Now that history applies today because of the wording of the agreement.

What does the landfill host agreement say?

The biggest concern stems from Sect. 3.5(b) in the host agreement. Most of that section is your typical contract language. The county has to cooperate with Green Ridge’s efforts to obtain permits, provide data pertaining to the landfill as requested and send them through the regular process for approval or rejection.

Halfway down in that section, however, is the part that draws red flags. “The County will take no action intended to frustrate or prevent Green Ridge from receiving and maintaining a permit, and other local permits and approvals that are consistent with the applicable ordinances and zoning, including any conditional use permits.” As to what is considered ‘action to frustrate’, that can be open to interpretation. For example, back in 2020, then-Supervisor Ron Tavernier was given a cease and desist letter for simply the way he spoke about the project at meetings. Tavernier in those meetings opposed the landfill, calling for it to be derailed and the permit denied. Green Ridge’s legal counsel at Woods Rogers took offense to that, stating that “Tavernier’s statements and actions are outrageous and not consistent with paragraph 3.5(b) of the host agreement,” in that July 9, 2020 cease and desist letter.

The letter went on to say “we all should want to avoid the untold damages that would ensue if Green Ridge’s project failed because the County did not fulfill its obligations under paragraph 3.5(b) of the host agreement.”

The implication right there being pretty clear that legal action could follow if Green Ridge’s project failed due to the county not fulfilling the requirements of the host agreement.

That’s why, supervisors say, they’re very careful with what they say and how they act, in regards to the landfill discussion.

“Like John (Newman) said, we were dealt a hand of cards that was given to us by two boards ago,” District 1 Supervisor Bryan Hamlett said. “The way I interpreted that host agreement was we as a board cannot take an action that will frustrate that contract, that host agreement. But I can speak, I don’t lose my first amendment right by being on this board.”

Cumberland supervisors being cautious

Hamlett pointed out that he’s spoken to many of the residents, he’s listened and shares the same feelings in some cases.

“However, this county can’t afford a $15 million lawsuit,” Hamlett said. “And I’ve tried to be careful not to frustrate that host agreement. If any of you were here at July’s meeting, the comment was made that because of the change in location for the entrance to the landfill, (some residents felt) that was a breach of the host agreement. So I posed the question to our county attorney and he said he would get back to us. You’ve got to understand, first and foremost I ran to serve the people of District 1 and the people of Cumberland County as a whole. That being said, there are certain conversations when we seek legal advice that are considered privileged.”

And If board members speak in public or in open session about the conversations they’ve had with their attorney, then those are no longer privileged and protected discussions, Hamlett pointed out.

“We could destroy privilege and open ourselves up to discovery from Green Ridge if they decided to sue us,” he added.

That’s why supervisors are being careful about how and when they discuss the landfill, Hamlett explained. But at the same time, residents also need to understand the board can’t just take a vote and say let’s get rid of it, he pointed out. That’s a pretty good way to end up in a $15 million lawsuit.

“Then what will your taxes look like,” Hamlett asked.

Where does the issue stand?

Cumberland supervisors have asked County Attorney Kemper Beasley to send a letter to Green Ridge, pointing out they think there’s a breach in the landfill host agreement and asking for their response.

“The reason I asked for that is moreso to protect this county and protect the people of this county when it comes to contracts that we enter into,” Hamlett said. “If we’re gonna hold up our end of the deal, then that other contracting party needs to hold up theirs.”

The post Landfill host agreement creates challenges for Cumberland officials appeared first on Farmville .