Vernon County Solid Waste Administrator Gail Frie said Dairyland Power Cooperative plans to have requests to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for two sites for its proposed ash landfill by the end of the January.

Frie said last week one site would be located in the area originally targeted by Dairyland in the town of Harmony (Northridge area), but the other site would be adjacent to the county landfill.

"They plan to have all the agreements signed (by landowners), so that they can test both sites by spring," said Frie. "When the testing is done they will decide which one is most advantageous. Some of the reasons… if we have it out on Northridge it is of no value to Vernon County and hopefully this is a short-term need for an ash storage facility. There is a lot of money and effort going into research right now for recycling the ash."

Frie said he has been working with private companies on recycling alternatives. Dairyland needs a landfill in the area to store ash from its Genoa coal-fired electrical power plant. Federal mandates had led Dairyland to plan to install new air cleaning, also known as "scrubbing" systems. These systems will leave behind more ash with more pollutants in it. Where ash in the past could be used in concrete, this ash will contain heavy metals, including mercury, and need to be landfilled. Dairyland announced last fall that it had narrowed its search for a suitable landfill site to two areas just east of Genoa in the town of Harmony, but public resistance to those sites, which are mostly farmland, led Dairyland to consider the option of placing the landfill next to the existing county landfill between Westby and Viroqua.

Frie said he asked for the meeting so everyone was aware of the necessary steps to get a site approved with the DNR.

"The county and the towns at both locations have a lot of power in the siting and negotiation and the design process," said Frie.

Frie said if the county and Dairyland can come to an agreement, the county would be "working in partnership, but on two separate landfills that would hopefully benefit both operations."

Frie was noting that an ash landfill added to the county's landfill would be run as a separate entity.

"The thought of it being sold after its use by Dairyland Power over to an outside operator is sort of chilling, downright scary." said committee member Judy Wilmes.

In terms of the physical location of where the Dairyland landfill would be adding to the existing county operation Frie said there is 40-acre parcel on the east side of the county site that would be of little value to the county operation and could be combined with a 40 acre parcel owned by private landowner. Frie said Dairyland is negotiating with landowners to do testing now.

"That is all part of the negotiation process," said Frie.

Frie said the process would include a site inspection (by DNR), soil testing and then feasibility studies before the "big negotiation process really starts."

"If we are only talking about 80 acres, why are we talking about such huge amounts acreage (at the other sites)?" asked Wilmes.

Dairyland had projected purchasing up to 600 acres at the Northridge sites.

"Dairyland has an internal policy of having a huge buffer area, so that they don't have potential problems down the road," said Frie.

"So, that is why you're looking at this idea of us (the existing county site) being part of the buffer?" asked Wilmes.

"It saves a lot of farmland…, yes," said Frie.

Frie said he invited county conservationist Kelly Jacobs to be a part of the process because the Seas Branch dam and lake are downstream of the facility.

"When we get to that design portion she is going to be involved to help us decide what we need for storm water protection," said Frie. "It is not what DNR has in the code, it is what Vernon County needs and sees as acceptable."

Primmer said he was not aware that Vernon County was involved in the process.

"I thought in November we passed a motion to back the people out on Hwy. 56 (Northridge) to keep Dairyland ash out of here," said Primmer. "Then last month I got a bunch of calls… that Vernon County was involved, that is the part that… I was just wondering why the neighbors around here (around the county landfill) weren't even informed."

"We are involved because we agreed to let them test some of our land," said Frie.

"So, there is no attempt to take land yet or anything like that," said Wilmes. "It is just an alternative idea which sounds… well I thought ingenious, but we do have to prove some these elements."

"Right, we have to answer all the questions and pose solutions to everyone in the neighborhood," said Frie.

When asked if the neighboring landowners had been contacted, Frie said he was informed by Dairyland's director of external relations, Brian Rude, that as soon as the site inspection requests are completed he will sit with Rude and draft a letter to go the residents in the area.

"Right now nothing is official and until then we are all just sitting around and talking about rumors, even thought they are factual rumors," said Frie. "There are things going on that are tying up land."

"When happens if they don't get permission to test?" asked committee chairman Brian Richardson.

"They can't test," said Frie. "But they are pretty confident they have enough landowners in agreement to do the testing on both sites."

"I was just wondering why the neighbors weren't informed before it came out in the paper?" asked Primmer. "That is an awful way to find out."

"It may be an awful way, but it is one of the only ways we have because none of this is formal yet," said Frie.

"I know, but wouldn't it be better if you would tell the people you are in the process?" asked Primmer.

Wilmes said it is common for utilities to go through a process like this when acquiring property.

"Just because they have done it for years and years doesn't make it right," said Primmer.

Some of Primmer's personal land near the county farm may be affected

Frie introduced Henry Koch, who is a landfill siting expert and former DNR employee, who has worked on landfill siting in Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois and Michigan. Frie said he invited Koch because he wanted to inform county supervisors about the siting process and because the information being distributed by Dairyland "purposely ignored the siting committee and the negotiation process with the design committee."

"The Wisconsin process is a good one," said Koch. "It is a very straight-forward technical process and a straight-forward negotiating process. It is very long and there are a lot of rules but it is clear to follow, other states don't have that."

Koch said there are two parts to the Wisconsin process and the first one involves technical data and the second part is the negotiation process.

"This is the part left off of Dairyland's sheet and is the part a lot of the public is not familiar with," said Koch. "In Wisconsin, there are state laws that say an applicant must negotiate the siting of a landfill with the affected municipality, and Vernon County will be an affected municipality. The township will also be an affected municipality."

Koch said the county could say they don't want to be involved.

"But frankly the county would be foolish to do that because this is a major environmental project," said Koch. "You need to be involved to protect your citizens and to benefit your citizens during this process."

Koch reassured the committee that the county will have "plenty of time" to go through the process even though Dairyland may "fast track" the project.

DNR representative Dave Lundberg agreed said the DNR tries to represent all parties involved and therefore takes more of a neutral stance.

"Our job is to make sure where it is located it doesn't impact groundwater, surface water, habitat and things like that," said Lundberg "So, we focus on the environmental and human aspects, but the negotiation process allows you to get into some socio-economic issues."

Lundberg said whatever agreement is worked out is enforced by the local courts and not the DNR.

Koch said the county will not get involved officially until Dairyland does its feasibility study in about a year-and-a-half , but can be involved with Dairyland on an informal basis before that. Koch advised the committee that informing the public can be handled two ways.

"I have tried it where I told people everything and I worried them to death," said Koch. "I have tried it where I said we aren't going to tell people anything until we get our borings and they said I was hiding it. The best I can say is give your public information at a pace that is right for them."

"The sooner we can get our concerns and the neighbors concerns to Dairyland the sooner they can get them into the feasibility study," said Frie. "I really think there is an advantage to working together to come up with the safest solution."

Koch handed out model agreements that have been approved in other areas and urged the committee to "develop a road map" that is unique to the process they will have to go through.

Frie said he has been looking a the possibility of hiring a consultant like Koch and found out that Wisconsin law states the county has the right to hire a consultant of equal caliber as the applicant for a permit at their expense. Koch said when the process gets to the negotiation portion the county will need to represent its side to the DNR and the other party and negotiate items like road use, hours of operation, and ask that the applicant exceed DNR requirements in certain areas. Koch said sometimes requirements can be put in to an agreement regarding wells and property values,so neighbors have recourse in the event they are harmed.

"When you enter the negotiations you are on your own," said Koch. "There are things you can ask for. You can ask that Dairyland meet a 100-year storm instead of a 25-year storm. I have seen where the agreement said, 'We want a clean sweep program and you as the applicant are going to fund it.' I have seen where there is a monitoring committee setup and the applicant funds that. Or protections against property value where there is a fair market value set and if it can be shown the property falls below that they have to buy it. They asked to have a firehouse built and fund it. They asked to have a bike path and recreational corridor built. They asked that they pay for the addition on the school. It is that open ended."

Koch said the agreement has to be something both parties can live with. Frie said the arrangement could work to the benefit of both parties by combining resources. Frie said one way to combine those resources may be to use an onsite water treatment plant that will treat the Vernon County runoff water saving the county money. Currently the county has to haul by truck its runoff water (leachate) from the landfill to Viroqua's waste water treatment plant.

"Knowing full well that when they are helping us save money we are helping them save money," said Frie. "It is two separate landfills and ownerships but a working partnership between the two."

Koch suggested the county ask to have a provision in the agreement that states the Dairyland site can never accept waste from outside the region in case they no longer need it for ash. Koch said if the site is approved for ash only the only way it can be used for other waste is to do another feasibility study and renegotiate the agreement.

Frie said he feels the solid waste department needs to take a leadership role to inform the public of the process in conjunction with Dairyland.

"I don't want to answer questions for Dairyland Power, they should answer them, but I want to have Dairyland there so they hear the concerns of the public," said Frie.

County Conservationist Kelly Jacobs clarified that the county can ask for things in the agreement, whether the site is next to the county landfill or at the Northridge site.

"But it is a lot harder for Vernon County to make them agree to higher standards when it is out on Northridge," said Frie. "Here it just makes good sense. There is no way we are going to allow a landfill next to ours of a lower quality design because if the groundwater gets affected we are both to blame. From Dairyland's point of view the cost of higher standards is minimal compared to a contested case that goes to court and condemning land and all of that."

Koch said the cooperative discussion between the applicant and county is "unusually proactive" since in most situations the two sides are opposed to each other.

"What I am hearing that is refreshing is you are not approaching this from the standpoint of what can we get out of Dairyland, because they are jamming this down our throat," Koch said. "You are saying 'How can we benefit Vernon County with this process? What is in the interest of Dairyland and ourselves and how can we work to develop a win win situation?' This is exceptionally good."

"To boil it all down the reason it is important is because the original (landfill) committee and myself gave this neighborhood our word that we would be a good neighbor," said Frie. "We have done our best to fulfill that obligation."

Frie said the landfill has set aside cash for handling future construction and closing of cells.

"Right now a couple of them (neighboring landowners) are upset and I understand why they are upset," said Frie. "And that is why we need to get the word out that we want to work with them."

The committee will discuss the issue again at a later meeting, which has not yet been scheduled, and Frie said he will continue to work with Dairyland on the informational letter to adjacent landowners.