Landfill-host money for village?

By DAVID HULSE

MONTICELLO — A landfill-host-benefit fee could be part of an alternative “purpose” of operations at the Sullivan County Landfill, and Monticello Village Mayor James Barnicle says alternatives are what he is looking for.

Barnicle confirmed Monday that he and county legislators have been meeting. “But those have been regular meetings, not solely devoted to the landfill,” he said.

County Legislative Chair Chris Cunningham issued a statement on Monday reiterating the county’s commitment to work with the village “as the county seeks mutually satisfactory solutions regarding waste management in Sullivan County…. I applaud the mayor and the village board’s leadership and common sense in looking to work with the county,” he said.

Cunningham would not comment directly about a host-benefit fee, saying that a range of issues have been under discussion.

“The county’s position,” Cunningham said, “is to continue operations at the landfill, which includes moving forward with phase II expansion. The mayor and manager recognize our resolve on this issue and are eager to have village residents’ input.”

Still, Barnicle said that he felt that legislators have been sincere about their mutual desire to find alternatives and while he remains opposed to an expansion of the landfill, he wants to keep the lines of communication open. Barnicle wants to get away from simply burying garbage in the ground. He believes that one alternative measure could be a greatly increased recycling effort, such as the program suggested recently by an Orange county recycling firm. “It has great potential,” he said.

But, “if we feel that we reach a point where we’re not making progress, the village will look at its alternatives.”

Barnicle referred to a local law banning landfill expansion, which the trustees tabled on May 9 in favor of a resolution opposing the expansion.

The other immediate player in the expansion issue is the Town of Thompson, which has reportedly funded counsel to oppose the expansion. Supervisor Tony Cellini did not respond to requests to comment on the issue, but in earlier published remarks, Cellini has been critical of the village’s willingness to negotiate further with the county.

Barnicle and Cellini have been close political allies and Barnicle says the relationship is ongoing.

“We’ve talked,” he said of Cellini. “We’re working two roads to the same end, the same result,” Barnicle said.