Judge clears way for Gwinnett's controversial trash plan

“I am pleased by this ruling and look forward to implementing this carefully considered solid waste plan designed to increase recycling and reduce the volume of trash going into landfills,” said County Commission Chairman Charles Bannister.

The county’s garbage plan will affect about 185,000 households in unincorporated Gwinnett County. These residents will see billing for 18 months of service in their property tax bills that go out next month.

Pannell’s ruling may not end a lawsuit brought by Waste Industries, but it clears another legal hurdle for a plan that has sparked multiple lawsuits and public outcry.

“I resent having to pay for it. I’m paying for something I don’t need,” said Daryl Cook of Norcross, who recently asked to opt out of the county’s new mandatory garbage collection plan. His request was denied.

Gwinnett County currently permits residents to pick their own garbage collector from a list of qualified companies. County officials want to change that system to promote efficiency and standardize service.

In 2008, the county tried to launch a system that would cut the number of waste haulers to two and mandate recycling. Under that plan, the county would have contracted with a nonprofit agency to oversee trash collection.

Several trash haulers sued, and in December 2008, a Superior Court judge blocked the plan, saying it violated state law by delegating government functions to a private entity.

A settlement in that lawsuit ultimately gave each of the five trash haulers who sued the exclusive right to collect garbage in part of the county. That means residents accustomed to choosing their service provider will no longer have a choice.

That prompted Waste Industries -- not a party to the settlement -- to file its own claim in federal court. The company said it stands to lose 26,000 residential customers under Gwinnett County’s new system.

Among other things, Waste Industries claimed the county’s new plan illegally reduces competition and was adopted without competitive bidding.

The county and several waste haulers who will divvy up collection say the county is free to limit the number of trash haulers who get county business. They also say state law does not require competitive bidding for garbage contracts.

Pannell will outline his reasons for denying the preliminary injunction at a later date.

Legal or not, the county's garbage plan has proved unpopular with many residents accustomed to choosing their own trash hauler.

Critics say the lack of competition will lead to higher prices in the long run. They object to the county’s plan to collect 18 months worth of payments upfront. And they decry a provision that for the first time will force residents to obtain garbage collection service.

Cook, the Norcross resident, said he lives alone and tries to recycle as much as he can. What little trash he generates he takes to his engineering business, where he has to pay for garbage collection anyway.

“I hope they’ll consider there are folks who just don’t need the service,” he said.

Supporters say the plan will reduce illegal dumping and standardize pricing and service.

Bannister, the commission chairman, said the plan will “reduce truck traffic, road wear and noise while improving safety and air quality in our neighborhoods.”