County fees used to fund special recycling and waste programs, recycling education, enforcement, and related county staff have been declared illegal by the courts.  The final appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was not even considered following the appeals in Commonwealth Court.

Lycoming County Case
In February 2005, a ruling in the Lycoming Court of Common Pleas declared administrative fees illegal in five northern counties:  Northumberland, Union, Columbia, Montour, and Snyder.  The judge contended that "recycling is not included in the definition of either 'processing' or 'disposal' as it relates to Section 303 of Act 101, which grants counties power to implement an approved plan in regards to processing and disposal of municipal waste.  The ruling for these northern counties was upheld by Commonwealth Court in October 2005.

Lehigh County Case
In May 2005, Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas judge John LaValle had found the fee justified and supported by existing state legislation and "a valid exercise of Lehigh County's legislative authority."  Though the opinion was a long and comprehensive one, two points appeared to form the foundation of the May decision:

• LaValle concludes that, "In our view, the broad language of Act 101 gives it the power to require persons to obtain licenses to collect and transport waste includes with it the power to impose a fee to insure the availability of adequate permitted waste processing."
• The judge also noted in the final page of the ruling that, "We hold, therefore, that the use of the licensing fee to establish programs that reduce hazardous household waste increase safety of haulers and encourage composting are permitted by Act 101 and specifically fall within the power to insure the availability of adequate permitted processing and disposal capacity for the municipal waste generated within its boundaries."

The Lehigh County case contested both the administrative fee and county licensing scheme and was filed by both PIWHA and the Pennsylvania Waste Industries Association (PWIA) as well as several waste industry members of the organizations. The entire Lehigh County opinion can also be downloaded from our website. You can download the Court order or read the (May) Lehigh County decision here. The December ruling on the Lehigh case is also available.

The Appeals
The December 2005 ruling overturned a previous decision made in favor of Lehigh County's Administrative Fee and Licensing Program. A Commonwealth judge found that both were illegal, saying that the fees and licensing do not have any specific legal authorization in Act 101, Act 97 or Act 90, the three state acts that spell out solid waste and recycling related regulations, planning and funding. Lehigh County officials had considered appealing that decision but eventually came to an agreement with the waste industry. All references to administrative fees and licensing programs in the county were eliminated from the solid waste ordinance, effectively ending both in the county.

In the Lycoming Case only one county decided to appeal, the others opted to drop the case as long as the Independent Waste Haulers Association did not ask for fee money from previous years to be returned. But Snyder County officials went on to appeal because the fees were collected through its solid waste authority. They have contended the Municipal Authorities Act allows authorities to collect such fees. However, the appeals judge stated "the Authority is acting pursuant to the power and duty designated to it by Snyder County". (You can download the first Lycoming County decision here). County officials moved forward with a second appeal to be heard at the state Supreme Court. That request was denied in November 2006. At this time, all court issues on this topic that were outstanding are closed.

Many counties have imposed such fees to help fund recycling, special programs, local grant matches, or staffing of recycling and waste management offices. A list of fees and projected income to counties shows that the funds generated for counties appear to be in excess of $6 million annually. The implication of these rulings is significant and is likely to result in the reduction or elimination of a number county programs throughout the state. PROP recently completed a survey of the counties to gauge the impacts and it confirmed that many programs will be affected. PROP continues to encourage discussion among affected parties to discuss ideas and consider legislation that is fair to all parties.