ASHLAND – In many ways, it’s business as usual at the Ashland County Recycling Center.
Residential customers pull up to the garage, where employees help unload bags of plastics and metals, stacks of newspapers, tires and electronic waste.
On the other side of the center, trucks drop off large loads of recycling that have been picked up either directly from commercial customers or from collection bins throughout the county.
Recycling center workers– some of them full-time employees and others temporary helpers– open and dump out each bag of recyclables. They sort out by hand anything that cannot be recycled, including the collection bags themselves, and making sure everything is ready for the next step in the recycling chain.
“It’s kind of a thankless job, and it never stops,” said Ashland County Solid Waste District director Cindy Brady. “It just keeps coming all day long.”
Up in the Air
An already tough job recently has become tougher, as employees of both the Solid Waste District and the Recycling Center await the results of a study commissioned by the Ashland County Commissioners and conducted by GT Environmental Consulting. Depending on those results, the commissioners may make changes to the operations of both entities.
Changes could include outsourcing the work the recycling center does, and/or combining the county’s solid waste district with one or more other counties.
“We’re looking at all our options– what the investment would be to update our facility, what it would take to privatize some stuff we do but not everything, or privatize the whole recycling operation,” County Commissioners President Denny Bittle said. “We’re looking at everything.”
Ever since the commissioners’ plan to commission a study appeared in the Ashland Times-Gazette late last year, Brady said, employees have been concerned about the possibility of losing their jobs.
Cindy Brady’s husband, Alex Brady, resigned from his position as director of the recycling center effective Feb. 1.
Alex Brady said he felt disrespected by the lack of communication from commissioners about the study.
“As departments heads, we had to read they were doing a study in the newspaper,” he said. “I’m not saying they shouldn’t have done a study, but I am saying they should have told their department heads.”
Alex Brady also said he thought he could do more for the center’s remaining employees and for its customers from the outside than he could from his previous position.
“My goal is not to see the center fail, but people need to know it is a possibility that they privatize. I don’t want a battle. I just want people to be informed,” Alex Brady said.
Alex Brady does not expect the county will find another arrangement that provides the same level of service at a lower cost, and he worries things that could be recycled may end up in landfills.
“Landfills aren’t the answer,” he said. “Somebody eventually will be accountable for them, whether it’s us or our great-grandchildren.”
Upon Alex Brady’s resignation, commissioners appointed Cindy Brady as interim director of recycling, so she has been directing both sides of the operation. She worked on the recycling side 20 years before moving into her current solid waste role.
Cindy Brady said she feels frustrated by the uncertainty of her situation, but she takes things one day at a time.
“We are recycling on at this point because we just don’t know,” Cindy Brady said.
Recycling and Solid Waste
Cindy Brady explained the relationship between Ashland County Solid Waste District and Ashland County Recycling Center.
Though both are in the same building, the two entities are seperate.
The solid waste district is responsible for tracking and reporting all the trash and recycling produced by Ashland County businesses and residents. It gets its money from taxes businesses, governments or other entities pay when they take trash to landfills.
The solid waste district makes sure the county meets certain recycling requirements, and it promotes recycling and provides recycling education in schools.
The recycling center’s function is to gather and process recyclables, preparing them for the next step in the recycling chain. The center sells each commodity to a different broker. Plastics go to Akron Waste Management. Cardboard goes to Medina Paper while mixed paper is sent to Recycle It in Brook Park. Metals go to Muskingham Iron and Metal.
The recycling center is mostly funded through the sale of the commodities it collects. When its revenues fall short, the solid waste district provides funding to help cover recycling center costs.
The two entities are essentially self-sufficient and have not received any money from the county’s general fund since 2003. One exception to that, Brady said, is the commissioners did pay for replacement heaters for the building, which the county owns.
The Bradys were surprised the county commissioners had concerns about efficiency because the recycling center and solid waste district have not operated at a loss.
“Unfortunately, there’s not a lot of money in recycling, but we make it work and we don’t run in the red,” Cindy Brady said. “When we fall short, solid waste puts money into the recycling.”
Maintenance Costs
The commissioners say one main reason they commissioned the study is because of anticipated maintenance costs that will cost the county money.
“We wouldn’t be doing our job if we didn’t take a look at efficiency, especially in light of the maintenance costs it would take to upgrade it and make it modern,” Bittle said.
Bittle estimated it would take $500,000 to $1 million to fix up the recycling center to the point where it will be viable long into the future. One major cost, he said, will be to replace the bailer.
But Cindy Brady said of the bailer, “with proper maintenance, it could go another 10 to 15 years.” She added the center just had a cylinder replaced on the bailer at a cost of $7,500.
Cindy Brady agreed it is time to begin thinking about replacing the bailer, but she said there is potential for grant funding or other financing programs through brokers that the recycling center could pursue.
Commissioners have also cited the age of the center’s trucks, but Brady argued when the center tried to purchase a new box truck with its own funds in 2017, commissioners told them to instead buy a used truck.
“They say they’re looking at efficiencies. I don’t know that that’s the case,” Cindy Brady said. “To me it seems like a lame excuse because they don’t give us any money. If they’re just making sure we’re doing as much as we can do, wouldn’t they contact their department heads that have been here 23 and 17 years?”
Alex Brady expressed a similar sentiment.
“Why not let your department heads know what you’re thinking a little bit before you spend the amount of money they spent on a study,” he said. “If they’re out for efficiency, there’s nothing wrong with that. In my mind, if you’re trying to find out the efficiency of something, you’re going to talk to the people who have been doing it 15 or 20 years.”
The study will cost the county approximately $15,000.
Seeking Public Input
Bittle said the commissioners will make no permanent decisions until they receive the results of their study. Commissioners are also putting out a request for proposals to determine what various options that might be recommended in the study would cost the county.
Additionally, Bittle said, county leaders would not make the decision without discussing the plans with various stakeholders like the City of Ashland and Ashland University. The county handles cardboard for the city and also brokers the glass the city collects.
Bittle said he also hopes to have public meetings to solicit input from county residents and business owners.
Bittle said he does not believe privatization of recycling operations would necessarily lead to less recycling. He said recycling bins would still be available throughout the county, and the county may consider keeping the drop-off lane open even if the rest of the center closes.
But Cindy Brady said she believes any change that makes it harder for people to recycle could reduce the amount of recycling businesses and individuals do, and she questions whether the same level of service would be offered by a private company.
“There are a lot of businesses that use our center, and it’s not costing them anything. If this place is gone, they’re going to have to pay for that,” she said. “Commercial companies are not going to lose money to pick up recycling, It’s just the way the world runs.”
At the end of the day, Bittle said, the commissioners plan to do what is best for the community rather than to make a decision solely based on money.
Bittle said he hopes the commissioners will reach a decision by the end of the year.
