By Sid Lelken
With Lane County’s ongoing budget challenges, why would increasing our garbage rates become a way to deal with this issue? Last year the Lane County Board of Commissioners, in a 3-2 vote moved forward on a waste processing facility called Clean Lane.
Clean Lane has been described as a $150 million “public-private partnership,” with roughly $100 million in equipment financed by Bulk Handling Systems. But the public carries the financial risk:
- A $35 million County bond
- Higher disposal fees are charged to homes and businesses
- A contract that guarantees payment for 120,000 tons annually – regardless of actual tonnage equals guaranteed revenue for Bulk Handling Systems.
Based on current projections, Springfield alone could face nearly $48 million in additional disposal costs over the life of the contract. Regionwide, the added cost to ratepayers could reach $350 million.
Study already warned of risk
The County’s own feasibility study for Clean Lane in 2021-22 concluded the project was viable only if cities contractually guaranteed long-term waste tonnage to Short Mountain Landfill. Yet eight cities – including Springfield – had no such agreements. Only four cities had provisions prohibiting waste export.
In late 2022, Waste Connections (Sanipac’s parent company) acquired Rogue Disposal and Dry Creek Landfill. Sanipac informed the County that it was cheaper to haul waste to Dry Creek than to Short Mountain. This was a fundamental change in the region’s waste economics leading to a major question: Did Lane County staff disclose this information to the board before the vote?
Did cities sign agreements?
In 2023, staff tried to secure agreements from cities to guarantee the tonnage that Clean Lane required. They received zero. Instead of reporting that failure, staff simply shifted their narrative, claiming Clean Lane and Short Mountain could “compete” for tons on the open market – despite knowing that haulers already had a cheaper disposal option.
Springfield asked for transparency.
On December 4, 2023, Springfield formally asked the County to pause Clean Lane decisions and address concerns about cost and feasibility. The next day, staff asked the BOC to approve the Clean Lane land purchase, authorize the county administrator to sign the contract once completed, and rate increases of 11% over two years. Was Springfield’s letter in public?
Tonnage declined
- Sanipac stated publicly that Springfield’s waste was being hauled to Dry Creek.
- EcoSort (Sanipac’s construction recycling affiliate) had been sending waste to Dry Creek since 2022.
- Short Mountain’s tonnage was tracking far below what Clean Lane required.
- Staff did not present the waste management budget at the County’s 2024 budget committee — avoiding questions that would reveal the export issue.
When commissioners asked directly whether the County had the 120,000 compacted tons required by the CL contract, the public works director said yes. The actual total for 2025 was 78,356 tons – over 40,000 tons short.
Had Clean Lane been operating in 2025, the County would have owed over $3.2 million in penalty fees to the vendor, Bulk Handling Systems, in a single year for the shortfall.
Residents deserve transparency
After reviewing public documents, which are available, needless to say I was greatly disappointed in Lane County’s staff, and how they mismanaged this process. Lane County cannot blame its budget challenges on a common-sense approach by Sanipac and the City of Springfield by exporting waste.
A necessary course correction is needed. Lane County must acknowledge what happened – not deflect blame. It is time for the County to hire an independent third party to review staff reports, internal emails, feasibility assumptions, and financial projections, and publicly evaluate whether remaining in the Clean Lane contract serves the public interest.
Our communities deserve truth, transparency, and sound planning – not incomplete information and costly commitments built on shifting ground.
