After three years, county takes tentative step on waste crisis

Three years after an accidental fire burned out Miami-Dade’s only incinerator, the best path to a replacement may also be accidental.

The way forward now is up to 15 parties: 13 commissioners, the mayor, and a consortium that the county engineered of two firms that want to run a new waste-to-energy plant. If the firms don’t fit well together, that will make 16.

After 36 months of debate, the commission last week made its first decision. It told the mayor’s team to work with the consortium on a preliminary agreement to go forward that the commission can vote on in April. That decision, called a formality, came after a 72-minute discussion.

That’s fine. After three years, all that remains to decide is whether to finally cut a deal with the consortium, what kind of plant the consortium would build, the terms of payment and costs, the site and its size, the size of the plant, what the plant will do, what other solid waste work will take place on that campus, how the county will pay the bills, what the costs will be to taxpayers, when the plant can actually open, and what the county will do with our solid waste at what cost until a plant finally exists.

But, at least, after three years we’re at the talking stage. That’s government moving at the speed of business – at least, as the county envisions business. I can hear Groucho Marx and Chico Marx haggling a deal now.

Obviously, none of the decisions on how to handle 5 million tons of solid waste a year is simple. But we’re still at the starting line.

“Today is more than anything a formality to just give the directive to the administration to engage with this new consortium … on starting negotiations so that in April … they can come back to us with a well-rounded, wholesome proposal on what this is going to essentially cost the county so that we can make an educated decision,” commission Chairman Anthony Rodriguez said last week, leading to 72 minutes of discussion.

The commission then waffled on whether it would be willing to pay to dump garbage – everyone is against it, but some questioned whether they can make a deal without it. “I don’t know what the market demands,” said Oliver Gilbert III.

They also discussed a joint proposal that FPL and FCC Environmental Services had delivered at 4:30 p.m. the day before, a proposal that some commissioners hadn’t seen before voting on moving forward with the consortium. Whatever that proposal said, it wasn’t public. Still, no sense in long study – just vote now and consider afterwards.

Mr. Rodriguez and others said they want the mayor to recommend on each possible solid waste service – what the county needs to burn as garbage plus all the add-ons as a la carte selections.
But what if there’s no money for all the add-ons, asked Vicki Lopez. Could the county just OK an incinerator and skip the extras? “There’s a lot of moving parts here.”
In fact, after three years there is no consensus on what the county wants to do, much less how it will do it all or at what cost.

If this was a restaurant, the waiter would fidget as guests dithered. Are we ordering lunch or just drinks? Will we have dessert? Are we splitting the check? But what if you order a bottle of fine wine and I don’t – are we still splitting 50-50?

“I just want to have a realistic understanding about what fee this board is going to ask the residents to pay,” said Mr. Gilbert.

“There is a profit-sharing associated with diversion” if some waste is handled other than by burning, said Raquel Regalado. “We don’t want them to build us a Bentley incinerator. We are doing the diversion. We could continue to do the diversion ourselves.”

Then came a waiter’s nightmare request: “I for one want to see every possible option,” said Commissioner Roberto Gonzalez. “I want to see hard numbers and options…. A concept without numbers means nothing.”

“I don’t think that what we are looking at today includes what we received last night in the e-mail at 4:30.,” said Chief Roy Coley, whose purview includes solid waste. “We think we’re going to come back with the interim agreement…. Today commits you to nothing other than tell us to go to work.”

One thing is sure: the politically perilous decision the county has ducked for three years must be made before Mr. Coley and his team can go to work. Commissioners must decide where to put an incinerator, he said. “Our position is we pick a site and keep moving forward.”

“Are you in a position, come April, to make us a comprehensive proposal with numbers and menu items of what this board needs to see to make a decision despite the fact that we have not selected a site yet?” Ms. Regalado asked, the equivalent of a customer asking for a dinner price based on side dishes before choosing the main course.

A consortium representative said no, and commissioners didn’t discuss a site. They didn’t even decide how much land they want.

How about 35 acres, asked Danielle Cohen Higgins. “Why are we looking at 65- and 70-acre parcels that we don’t own and we have to acquire and then pass those [costs] on to the ratepayer? [That’s us, folks.] So, have we looked at parcels of that size and scale?”

No, Mr. Coley said.

“Is that something that we maybe should do,” she asked.

Let the consortium pick the minimum, Mr. Coley responded.

A consortium representative said talks for smaller sites are already ongoing.

“It’s substantially less expensive,” Ms. Cohen Higgins said, asking administrators to answer her in April.
With that, Mr. Rodriguez got a unanimous vote to start talking with the developers, and that’s where it stands.

After three years, talks on solving the solid waste problem have now officially begun. No need to rush these things.