It took three hours on a Saturday morning to come up with a way to take the sting off of closing Baltimore’s most popular trash and recycling facility, but the task force Mayor Brandon Scott formed after last summer’s Sisson Street trash transfer facility relocation debacle finally crafted it.

Charged with recommending whether Baltimore leave 2840 Sisson Street alone (Option 1), shut it down  (Option 2), or move it elsewhere in the city (Option 3), they chose Option 2.

Allow the city to sell it, with conditions.

Before they got to the conditions, though, they had to figure out what to do about the nearly 400 emails the task force had received from the public.

Would a tally be released ahead of the panel’s vote?

No, task force chair Odette Ramos ultimately decided.

A significant number of the letter writers, it seemed, favored Option 1, leaving the trash operation where it is. But some task force members argued that a number of these pro-Option 1 emails were duplicates or too “nuanced” to be easily counted.

(This was in contrast to the clear-cut letter shown above – left on the screen at the start of the online meeting for some reason – from a person who said she opposed the sale of the property “full stop.”)

A significant number of letter writers appeared to favor Option 1, leaving the trash operation where it is. But no tally was released by members of the task force Saturday.

“So many of them say, ‘We would basically take either option. We like 1, but we’d do 2, if this or this happens,’” said Remington resident Jed Weeks, executive director of Bikemore. “Like, you can’t really tally that as a 1 or 2.”

“That’s correct, yeah,” agreed another task force member, Greater Remington Improvement Association (GRIA) Treasurer Samantha Horn.

Some of those keep-Sisson letter writers were not thoughtful enough to be easily counted, Weeks also remarked.

“I don’t really know how to take those comments into consideration if they don’t recognize the actual challenges of the site and the fact that we cannot rectify those challenges on the site with more investment,” he continued.

“How do we even tally that?” agreed Councilman and Task Force member Jermaine Jones, concurring with Weeks.

A screenshot of votes from the Nextdoor website was submitted multiple times and should only be counted once, he said.

“I think coming up with a hard number is impossible,” Weeks concluded. ”Saying ‘the community is split,’ I think, is a fair summation.”

Ramos agreed.

Eventually, Weeks said, he believes the task force will release a spreadsheet tally that will include all option 1 submissions, as well as option 2 submissions and will count the nuanced positions separately.

Seawall’s Agenda

When the Scott administration held a meeting last summer announcing plans to move the Sisson trash facility to a site in the Jones Falls floodplain, among those in the room was Seawall, the Remington developer who has long coveted the city-owned property.

Scott eventually backed off the plan to put the garbage operation on the Potts & Callahan property on Falls Road after intense public opposition scorched Scott – and Council representative Ramos, who had supported the move.

Instead, the 13-member Task Force was formed consisting of community leaders and the Bikemore representative and three city council members.

Since then, the task force has studiously avoided referencing Seawall and its plan to incorporate the property into its mixed-use development on Sisson Street. Weeks tried to bring up Seawall’s plans on Saturday, which GRIA is on record as enthusiastically supporting.

“We’re talking a lot about trash recommendations in here, but we’re also talking about development recommendations,” he began. “The reason we’re moving forward with Option 2 is the neighborhood wants the site redeveloped.”

Ramos firmly shut him down and reframed the issue as follows:

“The reason we’re moving forward with Option 2 is we want to reduce dependence on Sisson because we’re putting all these other infrastructures in place,” she said.

“The development is not the only, is not the reason we came up with this decision, okay?”

Future Promises

How could the city justify closing what one of the task force members dubbed the “DPW’s best brand?”

Staffed by efficient, widely praised employees who direct residents to the large roll-off cans where they can drop recyclables, miscellaneous garbage or large bulk items, Sisson has double the rate of the next most popular trash facility.

It is located in central Baltimore, but a survey found that nearly half of its users come from zip codes that are closer to DPW’s Eastside (6101 Bowley’s Lane) trash facility or its Westside (701 Reedbird Avenue) operation in Cherry Hill.

Getting rid of it creates an equity problem, Reservoir Hill’s Keondra Prier stated.

“We’re basically removing a site from a white neighborhood and relying on two Black neighborhoods for our sanitation infrastructure,” Ramos agreed.

Coming up with a rationale for closing the Sisson site meant some acknowledgement by Ramos and the panel of the many flaws elsewhere in DPW’s current solid waste operations.

“We will make headway on our Zero Waste goals,” was one the conditions the task force came up with.

DPW “will significantly improve” its bulk trash system, was another.

As for who would ensure these promises are kept, Ramos had this to say: “Accountability will obviously live with DPW.”

Timelines for improvements will be presented in the task force’s final report to the mayor after consultation with DPW.

Before the closing  of Sisson can take place, the following conditions should be met, according to the task force.

• That Reedbird, currently undergoing renovations, is reopened and upgrades at Bowley’s Lane stay on track.

• That recycling, as well as material from the city’s benefits districts, be directed to DPW’s 4325 York Road site.

• That household hazardous waste drop-off days, held now at Sisson, be moved to another location.

• “That there will be a very specific and intentional and robust and consistent education campaign about everything to do with our sanitation.”

• That DPW will “significantly improve” bulk trash services.

• That the city “will make headway” on Zero Waste goals

• And that if Sisson is to be closed, “that there will be a productive use with community input” for the  property. (This came after a concern by some panel members that development plans be allowed to move forward and not delayed until the above conditions are met.)

As for who would ensure these promises are kept, Ramos had this to say: “Accountability will obviously live with DPW.”

“We’re also relying on the Sustainability Commission,” she continued, “and whatever committee we assign it to, which right now is Public Health and Environment, to hold DPW accountable prior to closing Sisson.”