“Insurance policy” or unsafe risk?

Selectmen approve Host Community Agreement with WIN Waste Innovations on contentious 3-2 vote

  After some bitterly divisive debate, selectmen voted 3-2 on Tuesday night (April 4) in support of a Host Community Agreement (HCA) with WIN Waste Innovations that won’t take effect unless the state allows the company to expand its ash landfill.

  “Putting a Host Community Agreement in place is an insurance policy against the MassDEP, not the Town of Saugus, finding ways to add to the ash pile,” Selectman Corinne Riley told her colleagues, in explaining her reason to back the HCA.

  “Mass DEP has extended the ash pile many times over many years, and Saugus has nothing to show for it but more ash,” she said.

  Under the plan selectmen approved Tuesday night, WIN would be able to double the height of the 50-foot ash landfill near its trash-to-energy incinerator on Route 107 over a 20-year-period while the town would receive $23-$34-million over that period, based on one of two scenarios. (See related story.)

  Selectman Jeffrey Cicolini doesn’t support expansion of the ash landfill, but cast what many Town Hall observers consider the tie-breaking vote. “If they do their job, we don’t have a Host Community Agreement,” Cicolini said, referring to state environmental officials who have said expansion of the landfill isn’t possible under existing state law and regulations.

  “We’re voting on an insurance policy,” Cicolini said, agreeing with Riley’s evaluation.

  Board of Selectmen Chair Anthony Cogliano, Riley and Cicolini all voted for the HCA.

  But Board of Selectmen Vice Chair Debra Panetta criticized the board’s support of an HCA “not good for the town.” “The BOS has no authority to sign a host agreement with WIN Waste. That is not in our jurisdiction,” Panetta said.

  “However, WIN wants to go to the state with a piece of paper in hand that says that the Saugus Board of Selectmen wants a landfill expansion. Why else would they be here?” Panetta asked.

  “That is not the message that I want to send to the state: that we are advocating for more pollution & sickness for our residents,” she said.

  Cicolini took umbrage at Panetta’s suggestion that he was supporting more pollution for the town. “I don’t think a host agreement in any way is a vote for pollution,” Cicolini said.

  At the outset of the discussion, he stressed that a vote by selectmen on approving an HCA should in no way be considered an endorsement of expanding the ash landfill. “I absolutely feel this is in the best interests of our town,” Cicolini said.

WIN pleased with board vote

  James J. Connolly, WIN’s Vice President of Environmental Compliance, praised the selectmen for taking “a historic step toward sustained economic growth and enhanced environmental protection in Saugus by endorsing a Host Community Agreement (HCA) with WIN Waste Innovations.”

  “The HCA will direct between $23 and $34 million to the Town over 20 years, continue the support and management of Bear Creek Wildlife Sanctuary, avoid additional truck traffic traversing local roads, and voluntarily lower emissions limits,” Connolly said in a statement to The Saugus Advocate.

  “In exchange for the investments made by WIN Waste through the HCA and contingent upon regulatory approval by the Saugus Board of Health and Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), the company will keep operating its on-site monofill on the same footprint and using the same stringent environmental controls as exist today,” Connolly said.

  “We applaud the Board of Selectmen, under the leadership of Chairman Cogliano, in achieving this public-private collaboration and we look forward to working with the Board of Health and MassDEP to demonstrate how we can continue to enhance the environment and deliver on the promise of the HCA,” he said.

  Cogliano hailed the board’s vote as crucial in protecting the town’s interests in the event that WIN does get state permission to expand the ash landfill. “My plan – the plan we’re going to vote on tonight – puts Saugus in the driver’s seat,” he said.

  He also recalled that the company has enjoyed a lopsided advantage against the town over the years. “We don’t win against WIN. They win,” Cogliano said, referring to past lawsuits and challenges.

  Precinct 6 Town Meeting Member William Brown suggested the town has gained little through its adversarial relations with WIN. “Over the past 20 to 30 years, the town has shown nothing but hot tongue and cold shoulder to the WIN operations,” Brown said.

  “If we had a host agreement 10 to 20 years ago, we’d have millions of dollars,” Brown said.

  State Rep. Donald Wong (R-Saugus) said he supported the adoption of a HCA because he thought it would establish “guidelines and accountability” for WIN.

Giannino letter read into record

  Precinct 10 Town Meeting Member Peter Manoogian, a longtime critic of WIN operations in Saugus, read a letter that state Rep. Jessica Giannino (D-Revere) coauthored with state Rep. Jeffrey Turco (D-Revere). The letter was addressed to Secretary Rebecca Tepper of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs and expressed concerns about WIN’s efforts to weaken state environmental regulations as they relate to current laws barring landfill expansion in places with a designation as an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC).

  “Currently landfills are forbidden from any expansion in an ACEC. We expect that this could be a potential pathway for WW (WIN Waste) to approach the state regarding expansion and we want to alert you to this possibility,” the letter noted.

  “We humbly ask your support regarding the moratorium on landfill expansion in an ACEC and it is our hope that your office would not allow any change to the Rumney Marsh ACEC boundaries,” the letter continued.

  Manoogian had suggested that language be added to the selectmen’s vote on the HSA stipulating that the vote is not to have the ACEC designation relaxed. “The real issue is, how will the Secretary of Environmental Affairs interpret your vote this evening,” Manoogian told the board.

  Cicolini said he wasn’t concerned, because it wasn’t the selectmen’s role or responsibility to vote on expansion of an ash landfill.

  Cogliano noted that WIN’s willingness to provide more stringent limits on emission of NOx, Cadmium, Lead, Particulate and Dioxin is a huge benefit for residents of Saugus and surrounding communities. “All wins,” Cogliano declared. “For anyone to sit here and say we’re causing more damage to the town is ludicrous,” he said.

Why not a solar farm?

  Selectmen Michael Serino said the board should be working with WIN to develop the ash landfill so that it’s an economic benefit to both WIN and the town. Serino noted that back in 2017, the company submitted plans to the Saugus Planning Board to subdivide its 248-acre landfill into 10 commercial lots. The potential uses cited were an industrial park and a solar farm.

  “A few years ago, Saugus installed a four-acre solar farm on top of the old DPW landfill site. Saugus receives $20,000 a year for the four-acre site,” Serino said.

  “A solar farm at WIN’s 248-acre landfill would potentially generate $1.2 million per year for Saugus. Over 20 years alone, Saugus’s potential economic benefit would be $24.8 million; 25 years equals $31 million, without increasing pollution,” he said.

  “Looking at the big picture, I believe that the conversation with WIN should be in exploring potential development opportunities which will provide a greater long-term economic benefit for Saugus,” Serino said.

  Selectman Panetta noted that MassDEP’s position on expansion of the ash landfill is a clear “no.” “If the MassDEP’s letter said that it was OK to expand if there was a liner, perhaps we’d

have something to discuss,” Panetta said.

  “But they said ‘NO’ to any expansion because of its location – and we received two separate letters from two different administrations [both Baker’s and Healy’s administration] that clearly said ‘no’ to expansion. The MassDEP also stated, when they came to our Saugus forum last September, that no expansion was allowed,” she said.

  “They also said that the Selectmen voting on a host agreement is moot since current law and legislation would not allow an expansion.

  “So the bottom line is that the MassDEP is not going to issue a site suitability determination that allows expansion.”