Vernon County votes to keep moving with landfill expansion despite DNR snag, citizen concerns

VIROQUA, Wis. – Last week, on Tuesday, Jan. 15, the Vernon County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously (19 – 0 ) to continue the process is seeking approval for a landfill expansion despite despite a second “letter of incompleteness” from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding the counties feasibility study. The vote taken at the county Board of Supervisors meeting was not asking for any more money, or to do anything other than what has already been approved, but it did give permission to county board leadership and county staff to enlist the help of state legislative representatives to try to mediate a solution to what some have called an impasse.

What the county board approved was a resolution to get their state representatives, State Senator Brad Pfaff and State Representative Tara Johnson, to help mediate that impasse with the DNR.

The county landfill is running out of space and they should be nearing the end of what is normally a three to five year process to get state approval for an expansion, but the solid waste department has been met with roadblocks in several areas, despite starting the preliminary work back in 2018. The plan for the expansion calls for adding new five acre cell onto the existing nine acre footprint. The expansion would be a vertical as well as a horizontal expansion. In other words, the expansion would grow the footprint, but also allow more height on the existing cell.

So far the county has spent around $750,000 for engineering, investigation and DNR fees to get this far. The county does face the possibility of having to do a full environmental impact study at a cost of $300,000 – $400,000 if they are not able to satisfy the DNRs request for information through the standard siting process.

Vernon County Solid Waste Administrator Stacie Sanborn has been working with the engineering firm Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH) to complete a required feasibility study for the DNR. The county and SEH submitted that study to the DNR shortly after getting approval from the County Board for the expansion in October of 2023. Throughout the process of completing the feasibility study and getting county board approval, Sanborn and SEH engineer Brian Kent communicated to the board that it was not uncommon to get a “letter of incompleteness” from the DNR. Such letters are the DNRs way of asking for clarification or additional investigation on technical aspects of a feasibility study. The county did get such a letter in Dec. of 2023.

Sanborn and SEH then set about answering the DNR request for clarification or additional data/investigation in 30 areas contained in that letter.

Following that letter some county residents raised concerns about the geology under the site and held public meetings to express those concerns. One of the main areas of concern was whether or not the expansion was sitting on top of karst geology. Karst geology is know for fissures and sinkholes and not considered stable enough to place a landfill on. Many of those county residents also brought those concerns to the county board.

In March of last year the board heard from many of those citizens, and they heard a report from Sanborn on the department financials. They also heard a report from SEH hydro-geologist Melanie Niday on the geology and safety of the site. Niday said it was her conclusion that the site was not sitting on karst geology and gave evidence why she came to that conclusion.

You can read about that meeting including a summary of citizen concerns and those reports in our previous story here.

Niday said Karst typically has sinkholes, sinking streams, caves and springs. Niday said she could not find any of those features on the site and concluded the site is not a karst site but psuedo-karst geology. She went on to say that is likely due to the fact that bedrock is very deep under ground and does not get enough air to combine with water needed to dissolve rock and form those karst features.

Niday said all of that adds up to a site that provides nine layers of protection and redundancy. Niday said she has been a part of siting landfills in many states over about 30 years and this site has the most protection of any site she has ever worked on.

“I worked on a lot of landfills in a lot of States,” said Niday. “And I say that this is the most protective one I’ve ever worked on. And that’s really, I you know when I think about it, it kind of surprises me…but remember our rules are built on protecting the groundwater”

Volume shortages and financial issues

The county landfill is the smallest in the state and has faced pressure from the private sector that has steadily taken volume that historically had gone to the county facility, out of the county. That has caused financial pressure because without the volume the landfill also does not have revenue to operate. Because one of the counties largest haulers, GFL (formerly SouthWest Sanitation), has a transfer station in Viroqua, the volume at the county landfill has fallen from about 17,000 tons per year to less than 10,000 tons per year. GFL ships all of its waste to the Eau Claire facility that it owns, except for waste from communities that specifically designated that their waste be hauled to the county facility, like the city of Viroqua.

The dispute over volume is governed by what is known as “flow control” and whether or not the county is allowed legally to direct municipalities to send their waste to the county facility. The county attorney previous has given her opinion that county is not allowed to engage in flow control using a county ordinance. Sanborn previously attempted to get communities to voluntarily send their waste to the facility with the use of Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs). Sanborn got signed MOUs from many of the county municipalities and then the county decided they were not valid, and rescinded them. GFL has sent letters to the county threatening legal action against anything that is viewed as an attempt to implement flow control. You can read about those MOUs in our previous story here.

Since that time the Infrastructure Committee (that oversees the Solid Waste department) granted Sanborn permission to hire an outside attorney and has worked with them to draft new agreements with municipalities and haulers that will likely ensure a stable level of volume moving forward. Those agreements and contracts were approved earlier this month by the Infrastructure Committee.

You can read more about that battle for volume and revenue in our previous story here.

Second letter of incompleteness from the DNR

Although the first letter of incompleteness was somewhat expected, but what was less expected was a second letter of incompleteness, given the dialogue that has been taking place with the DNR about the information being requested in the first letter. Sanborn said the county and SEH have had numerous meetings with DNR staff and the most recent letter was a bit of surprise because they felt they had been in agreement.

“I would revert back to all the meetings that they’ve (DNR) cooperatively had with myself and the consultants from SEH,” said Sanborn. “There’s been several, like at least a half a dozen different meetings, of going through information, back and forth, conversation with with the DNR. “Our last meeting, we thought we had a solution, and then the notice of incompletion came out.”

Sanborn said the county and SEH have satisfied 21 of the 30 areas that the DNR asked for clarification or additional information on in that first letter. The one area of the most concern is a specific area where the DNR has sounded “mounding” is occurring that could be an indication of karst. The county agreed to drill more test wells in that area, at a cost of about $130,000 to satisfy the DNR concerns about the underlying geology. That drilling is scheduled to begin this week.

Public comment prior to the county board vote

A number of people spoke during public comment periods at the Board of Supervisors meeting prior to the board discussion and vote. Of the 18 speakers 10 spoke against the expansion and seven spoke in favor. And one person was neutral but encouraged the county to provide more opportunities for public dialogue.

Gail Frie is the former landfill manager and was part of the siting of the original landfill. Frie would later go on to manage the landfill in Monroe County. Frie said he is in favor of expansion because the design is safe, pays its way and provides a valuable service that municipalities would not be able to afford.

“I live in the town of Viroqua and I have concerns about the landfill and how big the resolution 21 appears on your agenda,” said Frie. “I’m concerned about Vernon County’s reputation being lost as a leader in protecting the environment by having the safest landfill design in the state, having local control and comprehensive disposal programs that are paid with landfill revenue. And as a county board member, you should have first hand knowledge of these services. And if not, please go out to the landfill and visit with your hired staff. We might even look foolish for throwing away $760,000 already spent on the feasibility study, with no regard to the multi-million dollar investment in the landfill site and equipment, because it’s not county tax money, it’s just landfill money. The landfill provides an essential service to all citizens, a solid waste operation never missed a beat here in COVID. While some of your other service providers work from home, the expense of contracting for disposal services from a for profit waste company will fall on all municipalities that are not in a good position to cover the increased costs. This is why they requested the county to get into the landfill business in the first place. Having the expense of a forever landfill monitoring and site maintenance with no revenue coming in to pay these expenses, having the liability of two landfills, the current site, which is not going to magically disappear, and a private landfill that can change their name and go away if they have a landfill failure. Our municipalities are responsible for their waste forever, no matter where they send it. I’m concerned about history repeating itself, going back to burn barrels and back 40 ditch dumping because they can’t afford the increased cost, municipalities will have no other option but to pass these costs on to users.”

Frie went on to say two previous feasibility studies and numerous hydro-geologists have declared the site safe and that outside influences are holding up the DNR decision. Frie also seemed to reference disciplinary actions taken against Sanborn regarding the landfill issue.

“Another thing, two feasibility studies have already been approved on your landfill site,” said Frie. “With multiple DNR engineers and hydro-geologists agreeing that this is a very safe site. Now we have a few people feeding the DNR false claims. That is causing one person in DNR to hold off the approving of the third feasibility study, with no regard to the silent majority who support the Solid Waste Department. After the county board strongly voted to expand the landfill, I believed all levels of management would get behind the project, because they all work for you. Instead, your professional landfill manager gets written up multiple times for getting emotional and becoming too vocal supporting the landfill. I always valued my employees that took their job seriously. County government operates on the committee system. This resolution does not have a fiscal note attached, and probably doesn’t require a roll call vote. Whomever insisted that this decision go to the full county board knew this action would be self defeating. My dad would always say, and I quote, When you see the tail wagging the dog, just follow the money. Someone is getting paid or serious conflicts of interest are in play. End quote. We are living in very uncertain times, and the landfill business is no different. I don’t think it’s a good time to give up local control of environmental programs. Most of us here, unfortunately, are short timers, but the landfill operation was never intended to be a short-term operation.”

Monica Matos did not specifically take a position on the expansion but said many people get frustrated with the format of meetings that limit dialogue and offered to facilitate community discussions through a local organization she is a part of.

“My response to that comment was that people seem to find the format for interacting with civic leadership bodies to be discouraging,” said Matos. “Because the mandated one way comment process feels like speaking into a void. You express your heartfelt feelings about an issue, and the response is limited to thank you. Next. Of course, I understand that the format of the public comment period is legally mandated to not be an opportunity for two way communication, for good reasons. But that raises the question about whether some other kind of opportunity is occasionally needed around highly charged issues.”

KJ Jakobson has a background in accounting and said she has done a “line by line” analysis of the landfill financials. Jakobson said that an unaudited report was given to the Infrastructure Committee earlier this year showing the facility broke even with recycling losing $34,000 and the landfill making $34,000 was inaccurate. Jakobson said county auditors did not use correct procedures in adjusting numbers year to year and her analysis shows that the facility had a loss of $179,216 after depreciation.

Kelvin Rodolfo is a retired geoligist who lives in the Viroqua Township where the landfill is located He said he has studied the local geology since retiring here and his research as well as research by others indicated the site does have karst geology.

“When the county asked for a vertical expansion in 2002 the DNR required a new site evaluation that Central Wisconsin Engineers (CWE) and architects did in 2003 discovered that the original study for landfill used antiquated equipment to measure how fast garbage juice escaping through the landfill would flow through the underlying rocks,” said Rodolfo. “Using modern gear, CWE measured flow rates tens of hundreds of times faster than originally reported. Usually ground water flows only inches of foot per day, and one well, it was 87 feet per day. That alone is from strong evidence for karst. Our groundwater is already seriously threatened by this. Why the compulsion to make matters worse? …. I examined the Viroqua Landfill in person several years ago, when it was considered as a site for fly ash disposal, and I found definite evidence of karst landforms and karst processes in the immediate vicinity. The location of the landfill is already unfortunate, and expansion can only make the situation more hazardous, potentially resulting in serious economic and environment environmental consequences in the future.”

Rodolfo was also critical of the data collected but the SEH.

Vicki Ramsey is an environmental educator and says she has been taking students to the landfill for field trips for years. Ramsey said she has had interactions with the last three manager and they are all dedicated to running the facility in a conscientious way, but she also opposes the expansion.

“I really value the work that they do,” said Ramsey. “I feel like each one of those operators felt very strongly that they were environmentally conscious and doing the best that they could for the environment with the work that they had before them. But I also believe strongly that the work that KJ (Jakobson) has done and the research that she’s done, and that the learning that I’ve had from Kelvin (Rodolfo) as well, speaks to the sensitivity of karst geology, and that’s something that we have to consider. It’s very different than other kinds of geology, because your groundwater is exposed directly to pollutants.”

Supervisor Wayde Lawler read a written statement from former County Board Chair Dennis Brault since he was not able to attend in person. Brault is also a town of Viroqua resident and a member of the committee negotiating a new “town host agreement” for the town of Viroqua. Brault explained some the history of the landfill operation as he remembered it.

“I was on the committee when Gail (Frie) left to become the landfill manager of Monroe County,” said Brault. “I was on the committee that hired his replacement, Gene Edwards. Soon after Gene became manager, conflicts developed between Gene and our haulers. Gene really had it out for Bill Meeks of Southwest Sanitation, our biggest customer was 70 plus percent of our tipping fees. It seemed like every committee meeting involved some type of conflict with Southwest Sanitation. To the best of my memory, none of the haulers ever attended a meeting when Gail was manager. But once Gene began feuding with Southwest Sanitation, Bill began showing up at every meeting. Gene hired Stacie (Sanborn), the current landfill manager, as his accountant. In 2016 I was elected county board chair, and as was my custom, continued to attend many solid waste meetings. When Gene left due to health reasons, the committee promoted Stacie to landfill manager. I was hopeful that the change in manager would end the feuding, but no, it continued and maybe even intensified. It got so bad that our biggest hauler, Southwest felt the need to explore the option to build a transfer station so they could avoid hauling waste to the county landfill. In an attempt to repair this obviously broken relationship, I replaced the solid waste committee chair only entry with Justin Running. I was hoping that perhaps Justin could find a way to repair the relationship, but it was too far gone. Ad that’s the history as I remember it. My recommendation is to begin making emergency plans for what to do if the landfill is forced to close, I would suggest a meeting with our cities, villages and towns, as to what strategies will best serve our citizens.”

Tom Lukens lives downstream of the landfill and said the board was skipping over the DNR letter that laid out environmental concerns.

“There is real evidence that the board chair is in absolute denial about the geologic and hydrologic science that is the substance of the DNR second letter of incompleteness determination,” said Lukens. “You’re stepping right over talking about that if you go to this resolution. Please, if you look at that whole video from that monster three hour committee meeting, you’ll hear Lorn (Board Chair Lorn Goede) say at the end of it, there is no karst. You’ll also hear a protracted discussion about tipping fees, and why the original budget had $65 per ton tipping fees, and then it went to $60, and how they came up with $60 in the additional 1000 tons. And you will hear that they both Stacie and Lauren say that that the landfill is precariously perched and a $5 ton (increase) would drive customers away, because within five miles $50 a ton tipping fees are being offered within five miles of landfill. These guys have not been straightforward with you about the precariousness of the financial situation.”

AnnJo Doerr is a neighbor to the landfill and is also the chair of the town of Viroqua committee that is negotiating the new town host agreement for the expansion. Doerr pointed out that the county and the township never had a written agreement in place, it was all based on a handshake.

“I just want to remind the board that this long history of operating a landfill has never had a record, never had on record a written agreement with the town of Viroqua as the town host,” said Doerr. “And this is just an important thing to realize that in the long story of negotiating this, the existence of the landfill and the ongoing presence of the landfill, if it goes forward, that the relationship with the town of Viroqua has not been one of complete transparency, or generosity, or good neighborliness. A lot of the opposition, a good, a fair amount of the opposition to the ongoing landfill is related to people who are in the town of Viroqua. Which is important, and it’s important to take note that that’s one of the factors. And so, with the town host agreement that is not yet on record, and now the town of Viroqua has legal counsel helping negotiate that, there are some requests that are being asked from the town of Viroqua which are still not in any plan. They’re in draft form. But there are further complications of expense regarding the running of a landfill, the responsible running of the landfill, which, if we’re going to run a landfill, it needs to be done in a responsible manner. And in the year that we’re in, 2025, I firmly believe that is a very different standard than the history of time behind us. So I’d like to just go on record for saying that I’m opposed to the expansion.”

Doerr also asked the county to set a firm closure date for the facility to there is awareness of when the facility will have to look for other options.

“One of the requests the town of Viroqua committee is asking for, among other things, it’s an absolute firm end date that this expansion would be if it goes through, would be the final expansion,” said Doerr. “And we would request that the town of Viroqua, or Vernon County, start planning for the future of their solid waste needs beyond the possible 15 year expansion.”

Daniel Arnold is a supervisor in the town of Webster and told the board he can recall how waste disposal was handled before the county opened the landfill and asked the county to continue providing the service for all county residents.

“We’ve probably been customers at the Vernon County landfill since it was built,” said Arnold. “And it’s not about heritage or personalities, although many people in this room who are opposed to the project are friends that, I’ve considered to be friends in the past, and I hope we can continue those friendships. I think there’s a lot of a lot of friction that’s happened around this whole project.”

Arnold said he did a lot of cave exploration when he was younger and is familiar with karst geology. Arnold said he is confident that the Vernon County facility is safe.

“I have some confidence, though,” said Arnold. “I was so happy when we moved here with it. I was not happy that garbage was dealt with in our town… they had a ravine where we put our garbage in. By noon, it was lit on fire because they wanted to consolidate it. And that was the way the old timers did it. And I was so happy when the landfill movement got underway, and it was a search for a suitable site, and we actually found a place with enough clay on top of a reasonably stable area that we could have a landfill. To me, that was a huge step forward in protecting our environment.”

Arnold said the landfill is not just about the safety or cost, but also about local control of the waste stream.

“Personally, I see this whole situation, if we lose local control, we’re going to be sending our garbage in semi trucks to Eau Claire, or Boscobel, or some distant point I’m not in favor of,” said Arnold. “No one talks about the environmental cost of that, about trucking garbage hundreds of miles a day. So that’s, to me, a big factor in the whole in the whole process. There’s these other environmental costs we hear, I get that we need to protect our local resource, and I think that the studies that have been done so far show that we have a reasonably good chance of accomplishing that. And I think that we need to be responsible for our garbage. The town of Webster is one of the leading recycle customers with the county, and we continue to prompt our citizens to be responsible in that fashion. And I think the landfill could expand. We could be more creative with, with the things that we recycle and keep it out of our landfill. and make sure people aren’t putting illegal things in. More Clean Sweep program kind of things. Even if we had fund them ourselves. I see the federal funding is disappearing, so we need to be self-reliant here at this point, to not be dependent on multinational corporations to dispose of our garbage for us. I think that’s a trap that we should avoid.”

Westby is one of the only communities in the county that still collects waste from residents with city employees. Westby Mayor Danny Helgerson said he is in favor of keeping the facility open.

“I’m here to say that we’re definitely in favor of the expansion,” said Helgerson. I look at it, Westby is one of the few that still we we have trash collection and everything goes to the landfill. I think one of the biggest issues with this is we can make deals right now with these companies, truck our waste off. When the deals are done, the city of Westby, we no longer have the garbage truck. And we’ve lost an employee or two. I was offered a couple years ago, a sweetheart deal. We could have lower tipping rates for five years. When that runs out, nobody would have control anymore. The rates can be whatever they are, the higher the rates get.

Helgereson said he is confident the landfill is safe and it a big improvement or what took place historically.

“I tell you what will happen, if these rates get higher like this. we already see when some particular items cost more to get rid of, we’ve got an area here, there’s a lot of back roads and ditches and sinkholes,” said Helgerson. “Like was stated, they talk a lot about sinkholes, these farms that have a sinkholes. What do you think is going to happen? They’re going to go back to throwing them in there, because it disappears, it’s gone. That goes straight to the water. I think giving up control of what we have here is a big deal.”

Dwight Veglahn is a supervisor in the town of Genoa and runs the town dump site. Veglahn said the landfill is well run and the rural areas of the county depend on the service.

“I’m in charge of the site where we take in garbage every week,” said Veglahn. “And in our experiences with the past, we also had a dump. It wasn’t much of a place. It was just a hole in the ground. And what we have now is much better where it’s taken care of. I have many people that come in every week that are in support of the Vernon County landfill. They don’t want to see it go. And I think it’s a good idea that we keep this, and it may cost a little bit in the long run, but the city of Viroqua is not in this alone. It’s all all of us together in the county. And we, out in the villages and townships, appreciate having this service, and I think we should keep it …. Also I’d like to thank the employees at the Vernon County landfill for doing a good job with this. I I’ve been there a few times, I know how they operate, and I think it’s a good system. So I would just appreciate it if you would agree with keeping it open for the rural people.”

Kyle Kruizenga grew up next to the landfill and is still a neighbor. Kruizenga said he is concerned that the landfill is site in an area he knows there are sinkholes, and he not in favor of getting elected representatives involved.

“When they expanded in 2002 or 2003, we as residents, when went to our township and talked about were given an end date, and that end dates keeps getting moved,” said Kruizenga. ….. “do we just say that there’s 10 out of 20 failed and that this is going to cost a lot more, and possibly $400,000 do we can keep going, with the $130,000 loan and drill the wells, because you’ve already got them scheduled. … Or do we appeal to our political elected officials as a county and ask them to intervene with the DNR and approve this? And that really upset me as a constituent. The elected officials are there for the constituents, and I feel for the county board to vote, to lack of a better word, put pressure on our elected officials. To pressure the DNR was a step too far, and that’s why I took off work to be here.”

Mark Davison is the chair of the town of Forest and chose to make his point as a resident by reciting the entire children’s tale about Chicken Little.

“I’m going to speak to you as a resident of Vernon County, town of forks, I’ve got something to offer, and I hope you take it in that spirit,” said Davison. “One day as Chicken Little walked past the big oak tree And a shady lake a big gust of wind, an acorn fell and hit Chicken Little on the head. Chicken Little said, the sky is falling. The sky is falling. I have to go tell the king. So he took off down the lane, and he ran into Henny Penny, and she said, What are you up to? He says, the sky is falling. The sky is falling. We have to tell the king. So, Henny Penny goes with him, and they go down the morning, and they come in the Juicy Lucy. And Lucy says, what’s going on? And Henny Penny says, the sky is falling. The sky is falling. Chicken Little had been hit in the head and she heard it coming. So moving a little further on then come into Foxy Loxy. He says, what are you doing? The sky is falling. The sky is falling. They heard it fall, and we’re off to see the King. Well, Foxy Loxy said, come into my cave and I’ll protect you. And they looked in and thought, Oh, we can in the cave. He’s going to kill us. So off they go to the king, and the king says, What is going on? And they say, the sky is falling. The sky is falling. The King reaches out and pulls the acorn off Chicken Little head. So you guys can interpret this however you want to. Now I’m going to speak to you as the town chairman of Forest. I’ve been coming out here for a small eternity to the infrastructure meetings in the board meetings concerning the landfill, there is so much misinformation, it is hard to tell the truth from the fact. I know the people of our township are fully behind the expansion. What are we gonna do? Haul it to Eau Claire? That’s a bad idea. Someone talked about throwing it in the ditches. That is what will happen. So I just encourage the board to really think this over and consider what you’re really doing. We haven’t heard a good alternative. The landfill has been operation for 20 to 30 years. There’s no known solution.”

Solid waste administrator report

Following public comment Solid Waste Administrator Stacie Sanborn gave her report to the board on the DNR approval process. Sanborn told the board that the DNR had informed the county of a likely second letter of incompletion back in February, but subsequent meetings with them and SEH engineers seemed to identify the area of concern and the county has since approved more test wells in that area. Sanborn also reiterated that 21 of the original 30 items in the first letter had been addressed so there has been progress since the firs letter.

“However, the DNR is still speaking concerns of karst, of bedrock, coring and geophysics,” said Sanborn.

Sanborn referred the board to a letter from SEH hydro-geologist Melanie Niday that spoke to the concerns raised in the DNR letter.

“She (Niday) is a long standing participant in the Minnesota Groundwater Association, and she actively serves on solid waste regulatory advisory groups,” said Sanborn. “She is registered as a professional geologist in both the states of Minnesota and Wisconsin. I wanted to give you guys that information so you guys understand we are hiring professional people to complete these studies, to do this investigation for us. All of this information is then turned over to the Wisconsin DNR for their review. And right now, we’re at a bit of an impasse between the team at SDH and Wisconsin DNR.”

Sanborn said in her conversations with Niday she pointed a long history of testing and site approvals.

“There’s been over 100 borings out there,” said Sanborn. “This facility has been operating 35 years. And she also made the statement that there’s 28 monitoring wells there. This facility has been through two different expansions. Both consultants and DNR have approved the site to be there. So there’s just history and facts for you.”

Sanborn also addressed groundwater issues and the information that has been presented by the public at county meetings. Sanborn said when she asked the DNR to address those concerns that have been raised by members of the public, she received an email stating that the DNR has seen no signs of concern with the data have now.

Sanborn read the response from DNR hydro-geologist Mark Peters which states:

I can tell you that the concern raised by some residents that landfill liners are likely to fail within 30 years does not appear to be supported by available data. Wisconsin solid waste code for landfills is based on the federal resource recovery or Conservation and Recovery Act, also known as RCRA, and subtitle D, which was developed in part to standardize and minimize risk from municipal solid waste landfills such as the Vernon County landfill. There’s no data from existing subtitle D landfills in Wisconsin, many of which have been operating for about 30 years, that these liners are starting to fail. Subtitle D landfills have a leachate collection system that actively removes liquid from the base of the landfill. The concerns raised in the department’s incompleteness letter deals with one specific layer of protection, but not the whole landfill design. Groundwater samples are collected twice a year from the landfill, and evidence of a release from the landfill has not been identified. Concerns raised in the department’s incompleteness letter regarding the proposed expansion should not be interpreted to mean that a release has or will occur.“

Sanborn went through the various layers of proetection the landfill uses to protect groundwater.

“I just wanted to remind you folks that the Vernon County landfill, the current design of the facility does exceed state requirements,” said Sanborn.

• The state requires a four foot clay compacted liner beneath the geo-membrane – Vernon County Facility has five feet
• The state requires a 12 inch barrier layer over that 60 mill geo-membrane, Vernon County opted to put an additional six inches of protective barrier
• Vernon County also has additional leachate collection trenches beneath the landfill to ensure that the water is getting to that collection system and then is getting removed
• Most landfills install the plumbing to remove leachate directly through and penetrate the liner system. Vernon County opted to bring it up and over that liner system.
• Aside from some of the natural occurring protections for the groundwater, the bottom of the landfill is over 75 feet from the bottom of the landfill to the perched aquifer and is over 100 feet to the regional ground water system.
• several monitoring devices the perched aquifer that would detect a leak if one should occur

Sanborn also pointed out that the leachate is constantly collected and hauled out for treatment to there is little in the landfill to leak out.

“So over the last 10 years, Vernon County has removed 2.6 million gallons of leachate a year,” said Sanborn. “It is my third highest expense of operation out there, next to staffing and DNR fees. So the main focus, aside from putting garbage in the landfill, is to keep it empty monthly. Head well monitoring is done out there. We have an environmental monitoring program that is tested twice a year, some points quarterly. All this stuff is mandated by the DNR. We jet the leachate system every year to ensure that it’s clean. There’s no obstructions, there’s no pipe separations, and then every five years It’s televised to ensure this stuff as well. All of this is then reported to the Wisconsin DNR, who governs our day to day operations. …. I just wanted to put that out there that you guys understand what we’re doing to prevent the leaking and the concerns that are being stated.”

When asked if the landfill has used any tax levy up to this point Sanborn pointed out that the department has paid for almost of the engineering an DNR costs for the expansion so far out of operational revenue. if the expansion would go forward the $3 million – $4 million cost of construction would need to be borrowed. When asked how that would be paid for Sanborn gave a projection that the expansion will provide “airspace” that is estimated to be worth around $23 million at a $70 per ton tipping fee.

Supervisor Wayde Lawler encouraged the board to vote on the issue based on the current situation and not unknow hypotheticals.

“I recognize people are concerned about the potential for an environmental impact study being ordered by DNR at significant cost” said Lawler. “But that is yet to be determined. It’s a potential outcome. If a third notice, which is another potential outcome of incompleteness, were issued, I think Charlie (Jacobson) has a good point in that with a lot of uncertainty around those potential outcomes, it would be potentially foolhardy of us to invest further significant resources with no not guarantee, because that’s impossible. But with no even indication that that further expenditure would produce the results that we want. That being said, there’s risk associated with stopping as well, as has been noted, if we lose local airspace, eliminate local airspace and are subject to the whims of one company who then will control the entire local market. We may enjoy a short period of decreased tipping fees as a sweetener, but then we have absolutely no guarantee that subsequent rates or environmental controls, to be frank, will be sufficient or even remotely close to what we currently enjoy. So I think we do need to be aware of that unspoken risk that that’s not a part of our project here. If we lose this, we’re incurring that risk for our entire county. And I think that the responsible thing to do is to explore all of our avenues without further expenditures. And if we were to be presented with a third letter of incompletion and potentially a environmental impact study, then that is another crossroads, and we will have to vote on that at that time. That’s not before us today”

Some on the board questioned the approach of enlisting elected officials and worried that would amount to pressuring an agency. Sanborn again addressed the need to help mediate a process so that they thought had been meeting the requests for information.

“So the notice of incompletion came as a surprise to SEH and the reason it was such a surprise is because we had had that meeting on February 4,” said Sanborn. “It was a three hour meeting, and the majority of that three hours was allocated to a concern of mounding on the southeast corner of the landfill expansion project. The DNR again, drew the circle on the map suggesting a location of these wells that I’ve already gotten approval on to help solidify knowledge on that southeast corner, and ensure monitorability of the expansion site. Three hour meeting, karst was barely discussed as well as the geophysics was barely discussed in that meeting, if at all. So then when we got the notice of incompletion, that’s why it was such a surprise to SEH and myself.”

The board approved an amendment to the resolution to remove the language that asked the state representatives to “support” the expansion to language that asked them to facilitate a discussion with the DNR.

County Supervisor Mary Henry gave the last comment before the vote and encouraged the county to think long-term about waste and do more to not fill the landfill if it is expanded.

“We’re moving forward, I feel, but I also have the opinion that I think we can do a better job of what goes in that bladder,” said Henry. “So that we do not fill it so quickly and back to Dennis’s (Brault) comments. The reason there was such a point of contention at that time because there were things going in that bladder to fill it that we were not okay with. So there was a reason they did not get along, (landfill manager and haulers) and it was filling up our bladder too quickly. Where we are at now, the point is you don’t want to fill that bladder. That’s what’s so expensive. You want to keep out as much as possible. One is doing food (waste). And greens and composting, we haven’t even done that. Why we haven’t done that is beyond me, and that’s a good percentage of airspace. Why we don’t recycle more than what we do is beyond me. Because there was a time when you had to pay for your garbage bags, and it forced the hand. Instead of doing a general strength, you were recycling by number, and that kept it out of our landfill. The city of Westby does a much better job at recycling than the city of Viroqua. The city of Viroqua, at their city council meeting, they didn’t want to go back to separation. They thought people in Viroqua would be upset they didn’t give us an option. We needed an option, because at one time, that is what paid for the landfill were those garbage bags and recycling.”

Henry said she serves on state committees so she looks at the issue from wider perspective and said it is in the counties best interest to keep control of its own waste stream.

“I don’t only represent our county,” said Henry. “I represent the board for our region, and I’m also on the state land and water. So I look at all of these things with a broad stroke of not just our area, but how does this affect our state? Because we are talking our state, and I am very concerned about that landfill in Eau Claire. If you go to GFL and you go to their site, they have many lawsuits against them. They are a public stock. We are owned, and we decide there’s a big difference. They are meant for profit. We are not. We are here to provide a service for our constituents. Do I want us taking garbage from other areas? I do not. I don’t want that bladder filled. Sweden, they only put 1% into their bladders of their garbage. They’re taking out as much as possible. We can do that too. GFL is owned by Canada. One of their violations is overcharging for fuel. That’s not even the top one of sex discrimination, and racial, go on their site and look. They’re an $8 billion profit. Ten percent. They’re there for money. We are here for our people. We are here to protect our aquifer and our water. Don’t get me wrong, by saying we don’t care. I care greatly of our natural resources, deeply. I also care about people just throwing stuff because it’s happened on our property. You have a ravine, people just think a box spring belongs there. Vacuum Cleaner belongs there. Garbage bags belong there. Deer carcasses belong there. You know who calls it off? Me. And then the township pays for it. People will dump if it gets too expensive and they have nowhere to go, they will put stuff into sinkholes. Don’t fool yourself that they won’t, because there will be toxins going directly to that aquifer. We have a way to control our environment with a very efficiently run, and I think a better way, of running it yet into the future. We just have not explored everything that is possible in recycling and keeping it out of that landfill. We can do better, much better.