THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, July 13, 1995 TAG: 9507110101
SECTION: NORFOLK COMPASS PAGE: 07 EDITION: FINAL
LENGTH: Long : 147 lines
SOME FLOW-CONTROL FACTS
The recent article by Robert K. Dean, a member of the Virginia Beach City Council, related to SPSA and ``flow control authority,'' requires a response. Mr. Dean is certainly entitled to his opinion, but his article fails to disclose a number of essential facts.
In the mid 1970s through the early 1980s, southeastern Virginia was faced with a serious problem of how to dispose of solid waste. Environmental laws enacted by Congress were requiring the closure of many of our local landfills. The cities of Chesapeake, Franklin, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk and Virginia Beach, and the counties of Isle of Wight and Southampton joined together to solve this solid waste problem when no other option was available.
Each of these jurisdictions entered into a contract committing the jurisdiction to deliver or cause to be delivered to SPSA at least 95 percent of the solid waste generated within the jurisdiction. This was in 1984. Surely Mr. Dean is not suggesting that the localities renege on their contracts to deliver waste to SPSA. Based on these contracts, SPSA developed a state-of-the-art, comprehensive solid waste management system. This system was financed by bonds issued in reliance upon the contractual commitments of the local jurisdictions, and there are currently outstanding bonds in the amount of $270 million.
Flow control was an integral part of the Virginia state law at the time SPSA was created and remains so today. It is a tool to protect the investment made in an essential public service for the benefit of the citizens of the region.
Until the Supreme Court struck down flow control in 1994, SPSA's member jurisdictions were paying $34 a ton to dispose of their waste. This was a comprehensive charge, which included not only the management of solid waste but both the curbside and drop-off recycling programs, the collection of yard waste, special programs such as the disposal of oil and household hazardous waste, and the use of solid waste to produce steam and electricity for the Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth.
It should be noted that for the same period, the City of Richmond was paying $50 a ton for private disposal of waste only. Curbside recycling and other programs required an additional charge.
SPSA's fee for the disposal of municipal waste is being increased from $34 a ton to $48.20 a ton for only one reason. The large multinational private haulers are taking the commercial waste from the SPSA jurisdictions to their own landfills elsewhere in the state.
When this happens, this waste is not subjected to any recycling process. Until the early 1990s these landfills did not exist, and the haulers were happy to take advantage of the public investment for their disposal needs.
In the last three or four years, Virginia has become one of the major importers of garbage in the country. These large haulers now want to use their own landfills for their own profit and leave the burden of paying the debt for the public investment to the region's homeowners.
In seeking Congressional authority to require flow control, SPSA desires only to protect the public investment that was made when other choices were not available. Unless everyone shares the burden of repaying that investment, it will necessarily fall on the homeowners or general tax funds of local governments. The bonds must be paid or, without question, it will affect the financial integrity of all the member communities.
Flow control is the right way to ensure that the burden is shared equitably while maintaining the comprehensive waste management system that we have all grown to appreciate.
Malcolm T. Cofer
S. Chris Jones
A.M. Felts
Peter P. Duda Jr.
W. Norwood Boyd
Paul R. Riddick
C.W. McCoy
Southeastern Public Service Authority
Board of Directors
THE PAGE HOUSE TREASURE
For the first time in many years my brother came to visit and brought his family. They had never visited Norfolk or this region.
In the spirit of regionalism, we visited the Children's Museum in Portsmouth, the Marine Science Museum in Virginia Beach, the Virginia Living Museum in Newport News, the Hampton Carousel, Waterside and Ocean View Beach. While all of this was exciting, the visit that impressed him the most was the Page House Bed and Breakfast. My brother and his wife stayed there for a night as an anniversary gift.
I have always been appalled the City of Norfolk restricted the owners/proprietors/residents from renting all six rooms in one day, but I was sure such nonsense had ceased. My brother found the situation had not changed and was shocked to find such shortsightedness in a city as progressive as Norfolk.
He felt the Page House offered history, beauty, elegance and warmth. We were baffled any city would want to restrict such representation to two-thirds availability. He was also surprised the Chrysler Museum had not exerted influence in favor of the Page House, since the two were so complementary. If the citizenry of Norfolk saw the Page House, their civic pride would request a reassessment of such a silly restriction. Few cities have such a prize!
Charlie Thesz
East Ocean View Avenue
A MUCH-NEEDED ORDINANCE
As president of the Fraternal Order of Police, Commodore Lodge 3, I would like to bring to your attention a matter that I believe is of utmost importance to the business community and every citizen within the city of Norfolk.
In June of 1994, a proposal for a ``Zero Tolerance'' preventive Drug Ordinance was submitted to City Council for consideration and adoption by Mr. Jerry Hufton of the Hampton Roads Building and Construction Trades Council. The intent of this ordinance would be to require any contractor doing work for the city to have in place a ``zero tolerance'' drug policy for its employees.
The policy would include random drug testing. I understand that Mr. Hufton, in conjunction with Councilmen Herbert Collins and Paul Riddick, have been working together to draft and adopt this ordinance. However, after more than one year, the ordinance has yet to be adopted.
Based upon information provided by Mr. Hufton, it appears that there is a certain element either in the city bureaucracy, on the City Council, or both, that oppose adoption of a preventive ``Zero Tolerance'' Drug Ordinance. As a result of this opposition, the proposed ordinance was modified, without proper notification to Mr. Hufton, to exempt contractors working on city projects below a $100,000 threshold.
The insertion of this ``threshold'' modification provides the implication of condoning drug use for a price. Surely, this can not be the intent of our city government.
As a citizen deeply affected by those who illegally use and abuse drugs, and as president of the FOP, I am outraged that the city has resisted, for over a year, and continues to resist the adoption of this drug ordinance.
We all suffer from the ill effects of drug use and drug abuse, either through higher taxes, higher crime, increased medical costs, human degeneration, and/or community decay. Nationally, drug use and substance abuse costs the nation billions of dollars a year, which does not account for the untold and incalculable human suffering we see so often as a result of drug use.
For the City of Norfolk to expend over $4 million a year and to dedicate daily over 55 officers for the enforcement of drug laws is notable. For the city to resist, oppose and otherwise not support a preventive ordinance that could sway drug use, is, to say the least, absurd.
Many reasons are cited by city staff (and I suppose a majority of City Council) for opposing adoption of the ordinance.
Enhancing the quality of living for all of Norfolk's citizens is a philosophy that City Council professes to maintain. Common sense would dictate, therefore, that the passage of such an ordinance would be constructive to that end. City Council should send the proper message by enacting the ``Zero Tolerance'' Drug Policy Ordinance without further delay.
Benjamin Rogerson
President
Fraternal Order of Police
Commodore Lodge 3 by CNB