Supreme Court Decision Likely to Send Ripples Across $52 Billion Waste Industry
In a much anticipated decision, the Supreme Court ruled this week that local
governments can compel private waste haulers to use municipal owned facilities.
In the case of United Haulers Association v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste
Management Authority (05-1345), the justices voted 6-3 to uphold so-called
"flow control" laws or ordinances that municipalities have
used to assure a steady waste and revenue stream into publicly financed waste
facilities. The court rejected hauler arguments that the rules unconstitutionally
discriminate against interstate commerce by barring shipments to sites that
charge lower fees.
The Court basically said that the Authority treats "in-state private business
interests exactly the same as out-of-state ones," avoiding any constitutional
problems. "It bears mentioning that the most palpable harm imposed by the
ordinances -- more expensive trash removal -- is likely to fall upon the very
people who voted for the law," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the
Court. "There is no reason to step in and hand local businesses a victory
they could not obtain through the political process," he wrote for the
majority.
The Oneida ruling blunts somewhat the Court's earlier finding in its Carbone
decision back in 1994. In that case, the Court held that waste was not very
different than any other item of commerce whose trade was subject to the Commerce
Clause of the Constitution. However, in that case, the facility was privately
owned.
Justice Roberts drew the distinction that "unlike private enterprise,
government is vested with the responsibility of protecting the health, safety
and welfare of its citizens." However Justice Alito wrote in his dissent
that "the public-private distinction drawn by the court is both illusory
and without precedent." And besides, he said the facility at issue in the
1994 case was only nominally private. The owner had agreed to sell the facility
to the town for $1 after five years.
The haulers had also argued that flow control almost always leads to higher
prices in the absence of real competition. Oneida-Herkimer charges $72.15 per
ton of solid waste, almost three times the $26 the haulers say an out-of-state
facility charged at one stage in the litigation. And, according to statistics
gathered by Waste Business Journal, that fee is much higher than the
average price charged by 19 other landfills operating within 100 miles of Oneida-Herkimer's
site. The weighted average price charged by those facilities is just $49.50
per ton.
The case is likely to encourage other municipalities to soon follow suit which
may also help bolster the viability of various municipal bond-backed facilities.
It is also likely to send ripples throughout the $52 billion waste management
industry. Although, as David Biderman of the NSWMA, which wrote an amicus
brief in the case, points out, "the impact of the decision will be limited
because local governments own only 17 percent of the solid waste disposal capacity
in the United States."
Moreover, few other communities will want to assume the political liability
and huge capital expenditures required to enter the business they have worked
to exit in recent years. The tremendous economies-of-scale in operating a landfill
for instance, requires among other things, control of ever larger streams of
waste in order to operate at the lowest costs possible. This excludes many municipalities
that aren't large enough to command a significant volume of waste. Agreements
among groups of municipalities are often uneasy alliances and fraught with political
peril.
Oneida-Herkimer has fought dearly for its right to flow control in no small
part because the authority is $26 million in debt. According to Standard &
Poor's, solid waste authorities in 2005 had more than $3 billion in outstanding
bonds secured by system revenue.
The effect of the ruling will be as the Haulers had argued, to push up pricing,
especially in the more populated areas of the country, like the Northeast, where
landfill capacity is scarce and local pricing is already high owing to transportation
costs to export waste to more rural areas. This will benefit recycling programs
whose incentive has always relied on the avoided cost of disposal in landfills.
In the end, the ruling is also likely to benefit aspects of the waste business
now on the margin, including some of the newer and more cutting edge projects
involving new compost techniques, and alternative waste-to-energy approaches.
Note:
For detailed statistics on private versus municipal control of waste disposal
including historical statistics, call the staff of Waste Business Journal
at (619) 793-5190 or email them at info@wastebusinessjournal.com. |