With waste issues piling up, Maine Legislature weighs more oversight of Juniper Ridge
Just over half of Maine's landfill waste ends up in Juniper Ridge, which has an operating contract with a subsidiary of Casella. The landfill is expected to reach capacity in 2028. (Photo by Claire Sullivan/New Hampshire Bulletin)
As the state's largest landfill nears capacity amid concerns about the environmental impact of possible expansion, two legislators that represent its neighboring communities are seeking greater legislative oversight for the state-owned Juniper Ridge Landfill.
The Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources Committee held a public hearing Monday for a series of bills related to waste management, including two that seek to address and increase oversight of future use of the landfill, which straddles Old Town and Alton. The facility is owned by the state through the Bureau of General Services, which has an operating contract with NEWSME Landfill Operations, a subsidiary of the waste management company Casella.
When Rep. Jim Dill (D-Old Town) knocked on doors before last November's election, one of the biggest complaints he heard from residents was the poor quality of the garbage bags they must purchase to dispose of their trash. That's why LD 1782 would require the operator of a state-owned landfill to provide free disposal of household waste for the local residents.
However, Dill explained that his bill also seeks to address what he described as the 'crisis' of the landfill soon reaching capacity by imposing new fees on the operator and requiring state agencies to develop a solid waste management plan that addresses the issues associated with Juniper Ridge.
The committee also heard bills seeking to increase recycling of construction materials, reduce the volume of solid waste and better manage waste from wastewater treatment plants.
The Departments of Environmental Protection and Administrative and Financial Services opposed Dill's proposal. Since the DEP is already required to submit a waste generation and disposal capacity report in January, the department argued the additional reporting requirements in the bill would be burdensome.
Just over half of Maine's landfill waste ends up in Juniper Ridge, which is expected to reach capacity in 2028. The state has signaled its support for expanding the facility despite objections from environmental advocates, the local community and the Penobscot Nation, whose reservation sits just five miles from the landfill.
The Bureau of General Services has not submitted an application to expand the landfill, but Deputy Commissioner Anya Trundy said during the hearing it intends to. However, the site expansion is separate from an extension of the current 30-year operator agreement that expires in 2034.
Trundy said that building out the landfill to its maximum capacity should allow it to operate until 2040. That is why the expanded capacity would also necessitate extending the contract with Casella so that both line up with the 2040 timeline.
The committee also heard a bill from Sen. Mike Tipping (D-Penobscot) that, if passed, would shape the process of extending that contract. While the executive branch has so far handled the negotiations, LD 1349 would require approval from two-thirds of the Legislature for contract or contract renewal to operate Juniper Ridge.
Maine opens door for landfill expansion despite community objections
Though the Department of Administrative and Financial Services would normally advocate for contracts to go out to bid, Trundy said doing so could sever the indemnification clause in the existing contract. Rather than giving Casella a 'sweetheart deal,' Trundy said continuing the agreement holds them accountable to that clause that would leave them responsible for financial and environmental liability down the road.
Committee members also voiced concern that requiring two-thirds support from the Legislature would be insurmountable; however, environmental organizations who testified in support of the bill were open to changing that to a simple majority because they have concerns over Casella's operation of the landfill and welcomed more opportunity for public input.
Maulian Bryant, executive director for the Wabanaki Alliance, spoke in support of LD 1349 over similar dissatisfaction with the landfill's management. She said changes to air and water quality that can be affected by the landfill isn't communicated to neighbors who can often smell the facility from their front yards.
However, the Maine State Chamber of Commerce opposed the bill, saying that it could politicize the contract process and deter companies from doing business with the state.
Tipping put forward another proposal that was heard Monday seeking to address forever chemicals from landfill leachate entering groundwater and surface waters.
The legislation would require entities discharging wastewater to annually report to the DEP the origin, volume and final disposition of solid waste leachate, sometimes referred to as 'trash juice.' It would also prohibit discharging any wastewater containing leachate from a solid waste landfill unless the discharge satisfies department limits to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, and require third-party testing of leachate for PFAS.
Last session, the Legislature passed a bill that would have required Casella to treat PFAS in a way that ensures levels don't exceed established drinking water standards, but the measure was vetoed by Gov. Janet Mills. The DEP later mandated that Casella install a department-approved system for treating landfill leachate for PFAS before expanding operations.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
Republicans pass parental rights bills as Democrats allege children will be harmed
Rep. Jim Kofalt, a Wilton Republican, speaks in favor of Senate Bill 72, a parental rights bill passed by the House, June 5, 2025. (Photo by Ethan DeWitt/New Hampshire Bulletin) The House and Senate passed a pair of parental rights bills Thursday, sending one to Gov. Kelly Ayotte's desk, as Republicans advanced a yearslong goal to strengthen parents' control over public schools. Both bills, House Bill 10 and Senate Bill 72, would enumerate a number of powers parents have to request information from teachers about their children, including the courses they are taking, the materials being taught, and what their children are saying at school. The House passed another bill, Senate Bill 96, that would also require teachers and school employees to answer questions from parents, and could impose stiff penalties for teachers who don't provide the information. Under that bill, a teacher or administrator could be investigated by the Department of Education for violations and face disciplinary sanctions by the department. Teachers found to have 'willfully violated' the law would face a mandatory one-year suspension of their teaching license. Republicans said the legislation is meant to establish a state policy that parents direct the upbringing of their children — not their schools. 'Today, it's time that we deliver on our promises to Granite Staters by affirming that parental rights are fundamental,' said Rep. Jim Kofalt, a Wilton Republican. But Democrats have denounced the bills, noting that they could force teachers to disclose information about students to their parents that the students do not want shared, such as their sexual orientation or gender identity, and remove supportive spaces for kids. Rep. Peter Petrigno, a Milford Democrat, said SB 72 would destroy trust in schools and leave children who don't feel safe sharing things with their parents with few options. Should they confide in teachers, those teachers might be compelled to share that information to parents who inquire, Petrigno said. 'If troubled kids cannot talk with their parents for any reason, and they know they now cannot talk to their trusted adults at school, then where will they turn?' Petrigno said. But Republicans argued that in most cases, a child's parent is the best person to receive sensitive information about their children, not a teacher. 'If I know that most parents are way more trustworthy than teachers like Pamela Smart, then I will vote to pass this bill as amended,' said Rep. Debra DeSimone, an Atkinson Republican, referring to a former high school employee convicted in 1991 for killing her husband. Republicans also pointed to provisions in two of the bills, HB 10 and HB 72, that allow teachers to withhold information to parents if they have 'clear and convincing' evidence that the infringement upon parental rights is necessary to prevent the child from being abused. Democrats denounced that language, noting that 'clear and convincing' is a higher legal standard than is typically required to report a child to the Division for Children, Youth, and Families and arguing that it would effectively bar teachers from withholding information from parents even if they had suspicion that it could lead to abuse. RSA 169-C:29 currently requires any teacher, school staff member, or other professional who interacts with children to make a report to DCYF if they have 'reason to suspect' abuse or neglect. In regard to that exception, one of the bills that passed, SB 96, differs from the other two. While HB 10 and SB 72 require 'clear and convincing' evidence of abuse for a teacher to opt not to share information with parents, SB 96 allows a teacher to refrain from giving the information 'if a reasonably prudent person would believe that disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect.' But SB 96 allows the exception only if the child has been physically harmed or has been threatened to be harmed 'of such a grave nature by the actions or inactions' of a parent that it justifies withholding information. The bill states the exception does not apply to 'potential or actual psychological or emotional injury' that a parent imposes on a child upon learning information about their child. It does not apply to 'emotions such as anger, disappointment, sadness, disapproval or other behaviors.' HB 10 passed the House and the Senate Thursday and will head to Ayotte in the coming weeks; SB 72 and SB 96 both passed the House but had not yet received a final green light from the Senate as of Thursday afternoon.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
‘The perfect vehicle to further your crime': Colorado theft victims track their stolen phones to EcoATM kiosks
When Anna Hewson's daughter's iPhone disappeared one weekend, she did what any parent would do — she followed the digital crumbs. Using Apple's 'Find My' app, the KUSA 9News producer tracked the stolen device until it ended up at a Walmart in Arvada, Colorado. Inside the store stood an EcoATM, a kiosk that pays cash for used phones. Hewson had a hunch, so she called the police. Moments later, officers unlocked the machine with help from EcoATM's customer service. Inside the bin sat a pile of locked phones, including her daughter's. Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast) Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10) 'At face value, the idea that you can walk in and turn over, sell stolen property to a machine, it seems like the perfect vehicle to further your crime,' Arvada Police Department Public Information Officer Chase Amos told 9News. EcoATMs are automated kiosks found at major retailers, including Walmart. They offer users instant cash in exchange for used electronics. The machines scan a seller's ID, take a thumb print, snap a photo and send the data to live agents for verification. Devices are held for at least 30 days at a processing center in Louisville, Kentucky, which offers a short window where owners can recover stolen property. EcoATM claims to work closely with law enforcement, logging device serial numbers in national databases and cooperating with investigations. 'EcoATM happily and voluntarily cooperates with law enforcement when requested. If a missing phone does end up in one of our machines, it is returned to the rightful owner,' a company spokesperson told 9News. Still, theft victims say recovery isn't always so simple. Despite robust security measures, the high volume of stolen phones and the anonymity offered by kiosks make investigations challenging for law enforcement. Read more: Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says — and that 'anyone' can do it Michael Dill, a Denver veteran, told 9News that he was mugged on St. Patrick's Day in 2024. Hours later, he tracked his phone to an EcoATM in an Englewood Walmart. Though he reported it, Dill said he spent weeks in a frustrating loop trying to confirm the phone's presence at EcoATM's warehouse. Eventually, the company sent him a replacement device. But, he says his old phone later resurfaced in the hands of someone with a UK phone number who texted him and demanded he remove the device from Apple's security system. When Dill refused, the texter threatened to access his data. He contacted Apple, which assured him the phone would remain locked and his data would remain secure. In a statement to 9News, EcoATM said Dill's phone was not found among any devices in its warehouse. 'Because we were unable to locate Michael's phone, we were unable to return it to him,' a spokesperson said. 'However, we did in good faith, provide him with a complimentary replacement device.' On the bright side, there are several ways to help protect yourself from scams involving services like EcoATM. Log your IMEI. Record your phone's international mobile equipment identity and serial number, which can usually be found in the 'About' section of your device settings. Purchase phone cases with anti-theft features. Or, choose phones with built-in anti-theft features and enable tracking apps, like Apple's 'Find My' app, to locate your device in real time. Choose smart insurance plans. Opt for plans with lower deductibles or comprehensive coverage in case of theft. Secure your phone. Help protect your private data by using fingerprint or face recognition to unlock your phone. Enable remote wipe. Set up remote wipe capabilities to erase your information if your phone is stolen. If your device is stolen, report it to your local police department. If you do track it to an EcoATM kiosk, notify the company via their customer service line. But, authorities warn people should never try to go out and find the phone on their own. Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you? Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now This is how American car dealers use the '4-square method' to make big profits off you — and how you can ensure you pay a fair price for all your vehicle costs Like what you read? Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise straight to your inbox every week. This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
What to know about the House and Senate parental rights bills
House Speaker Sherman Packard (center) is expected to bring forward a floor amendment to SB 72 on Thursday. (Photo by William Skipworth/New Hampshire Bulletin) Thursday brings a major deadline: the final day in which the House and Senate can pass remaining legislation. And Republicans in both chambers will be pushing to achieve a long-sought priority and finally approve a 'parental bill of rights.' In past years, those votes have failed, often defeated by a handful of votes in the House. This week, the House and the Senate are considering two separate bills: House Bill 10 and Senate Bill 72. Each looks slightly different from past versions. Here's what to know. What are the bills intended to do? Supporters of the bills say they are meant to give parents a toolkit to assert control over their child's education in public schools. The laws outline a number of rights the parents have over that education. Many of those rights already exist in law, such as the right for a parent to choose whether to send their child to a charter school, private school, or to home school them; to learn about school disciplinary procedures and class curriculum; to opt their child out of sex education courses by providing alternative instruction; to receive a report card; to review medical records; and to exempt their child from immunization with a doctor's note or because of religious beliefs. Other provisions of the bills would be new. School boards would be required to develop policies to promote parental involvement in school around homework, attendance, and discipline. They would also be required to pass policies making it easy for parents to examine instructional materials and to withdraw their child from any lesson or material being taught. And the bills would clarify in law that 'no school may infringe on the fundamental rights of a parent to direct the upbringing, education, health care, and mental health of his or her minor child.' But the legislation has inspired fierce pushback from teachers and LGBTQ groups, who say it puts too many burdens on teachers and staff, and that it could force them to divulge to parents details about students' sexual orientation or gender identity against the students' will. Do this year's bills require teachers to tell parents about a student's sexual orientation or gender identity? Unlike past attempts at a parental bill of rights, this year's bills do not explicitly require school staff and teachers to divulge to inquiring parents details about their child's sexual orientation or gender identity. Some bills in the past have included that explicit language, sparking opposition from LGBTQ rights groups and driving some Republicans to vote against them on the House floor. But this year's versions of the legislation do include a catch-all phrase that opponents argue achieves a similar result. Language in a floor amendment to SB 72 expected to be brought forward by House Speaker Sherman Packard Thursday provides parents the right to 'inquire of the school or school personnel and promptly receive accurate, truthful, and complete disclosure regarding any and all matters related to their minor child, unless an immediate answer cannot be provided when the initial request is made.' If an immediate answer is not available, the school employee must provide one within 10 business days. The bill provides an exception to providing the information if there is a 'compelling state interest' against doing so, and it defines that interest as 'an actual and objectively reasonable belief, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that the infringement upon parental rights is necessary to prevent the child from being abused,' under the state's abuse laws. HB 10 includes similar language. Republicans say the requirement is necessary to prevent teachers from withholding information from parents and to allow parents full information about their children. Democrats and LGBTQ advocates say the requirement that the disclosure 'complete' could be difficult to follow, and that the standard that must be met to constitute a fear of abuse, 'clear and convincing,' is too high to meet in most situations. How would the bills affect health care services for students? While Republicans broadly support the parental bill of rights, they have disagreed over one key area: medical care for students. A version of SB 72 recommended by the House Children and Family Law Committee would have included language requiring parents to consent in writing before any biometric scans are conducted by a medical provider on a child, or before any DNA or blood is drawn. That version would also give parents the right 'to make health care decisions unless otherwise provided by law' and 'to be physically present at any health care facility providing care.' However, Democrats and advocates had raised concerns that the medical provisions would violate teenagers' health care and reproductive rights by impeding their ability to receive birth control and pre- and post-natal care without getting parental permission. And House Republican leadership appears aware: The floor amendment from Packard expected to be introduced on Thursday would strike those parental medical rights from the final bill. Meanwhile, both of this year's House and Senate versions of the bills include language to protect confidential conversations between children and counselors. Both bills protect school counselors, psychologists, nurses, or other health care providers from being required to disclose information about children to parents that 'was reasonably expected to be privileged.' What could be the consequences of noncompliance for schools or teachers? Past parental bill of rights legislation has made teachers personally accountable for failing to follow the law, in some cases opening teachers up to litigation or potential disciplinary action by the State Board of Education against their license. But this year, the House and Senate bills do not include direct consequences for teachers. The bills do provide that a parent who claims a violation may sue the school district for injunctive relief or for damages. What should be expected on Thursday? In their current versions, the two bills up for a vote Thursday — HB 10 in the Senate and SB 72 in the House — are largely identical. Both bills include parental rights over medical care that have attracted debate. But Packard's floor amendment, which removes those medical rights, would make SB 72 more moderate, and potentially more palatable for Gov. Kelly Ayotte to sign. Should the House Republican caucus vote to pass that floor amendment, as well as the underlying bill, SB 72 would return to the Senate, which would decide next week whether to accept the moderating changes and send the bill to Ayotte. But if conservative-leaning House Republicans join with Democrats to reject the floor amendment, SB 72 and HB 10 could head to the governor's office in their most robust form yet.
