Carter v. City of Haleyville

Citations: 669 So. 2d 812; 1995 Ala. LEXIS 314; 1995 WL 444824Docket: 1931626

Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; July 28, 1995; Alabama; State Supreme Court

Combined Opinion SummaryCombined Opinion Original

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Fray Carter, Jr. appealed a Winston County Circuit Court order that dissolved a preliminary injunction preventing the City of Haleyville from conveying or leasing its landfill. The landfill, operational from 1981 to October 1993 under a permit from the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), received waste from several municipalities. Facing closure due to new EPA regulations, the City contracted with Solomon of Nu, Inc. to develop a new landfill. Carter filed a lawsuit on March 2, 1993, seeking a restraining order and injunction, asserting that the City did not provide public notice or a hearing regarding the sale, violating due process. 

Initially, the trial court granted a preliminary injunction on March 12, 1993. Carter later added claims about zoning compliance and violations of state law regarding the landfill's operation. After further hearings, the court issued an injunction on August 19, 1993, stating the City had not adhered to the Winston County Ten-Year Solid Waste Management Plan. Subsequently, ADEM cited the City for multiple violations, prompting the City to declare a state of emergency and seek to address these issues through new contracts. The City opted out of the county plan to create its own solid waste management plan, proposing to transfer the landfill property and disposal permit to a newly established authority.

The Authority will regulate solid waste disposal in Haleyville, which includes developing a closure plan for the existing sanitary landfill, operating the current inert landfill, and constructing a new inert landfill area. The Authority plans to establish a 1500-tons-per-day Subtitle D municipal solid waste landfill facility on or near the current site and expand the service area to cover all Alabama counties. On September 27, 1993, the City signed a letter of intent with Peerless Landfill Company, Inc. for the closure and development of the Subtitle D landfill. A lease agreement with Peerless was executed on September 29, 1993, to address landfill violations and implement the City's Waste Management Plan. The City announced a public hearing on December 21, 1993, to accept comments on its Solid Waste Management Plan, which involves opting out of the Winston County Ten-Year Solid Waste Management Plan in favor of its own. The proposed plan is available for public review at City Hall, with a comment period from November 17 to December 23, 1993. Additionally, the notice includes a proposal for the transfer of the landfill property and permit to the Authority, which would be tasked with the landfill's closure, operation of existing and new landfill areas, construction of the Subtitle D facility, service area expansion, and post-closure care.

The City of Haleyville has announced a public comment period for its Solid Waste Management Plan proposal, starting on November 17, 1993, and concluding on December 23, 1993. A public hearing is scheduled for December 21, 1993, at 6:00 p.m. at Haleyville High School. Mr. Toby Yarbrough is the contact for additional information. Following the public hearing and comment period, the City submitted its Solid Waste Disposal Plan to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM), which approved it on March 18, 1994, allowing the City to transfer landfill property to the Authority for implementation. On May 11, 1994, the City sought to dissolve a preliminary injunction from August 19, 1993. The Circuit Court granted this request on July 7, 1994, citing the City’s opt-out from the Winston County Ten-Year Solid Waste Management Plan and the approval of its independent plan as reasons to lift the injunction. Carter, the appellant, argues that the City could not hold the public hearing until receiving final approval of its plan in March 1994, and claims the initial notice was inadequate. The appeal centers on legal interpretations rather than factual disputes, leading to a de novo review of the law’s application. Carter concedes the City’s authority to submit its solid waste plan but contests its ability to approve proposals under the plan before receiving final approval from ADEM. He cites Alabama Code 22-27-48(a), asserting that municipal approval of a solid waste disposal proposal is contingent upon prior final approval of the corresponding management plan.

The analysis of the Solid Wastes Disposal Act indicates that after the City of Haleyville opted out of the Winston County Ten-Year Solid Waste Management Plan, any proposal related to solid waste management services should be considered under the City of Haleyville Solid Waste Disposal Plan rather than the Winston County plan. There is no requirement in sections 22-27-47 or 22-27-48 for the City of Haleyville Solid Waste Management Plan to be finalized before considering proposals under it, and Carter has not demonstrated how this situation prejudiced his rights.

Carter claims the City did not provide adequate notice regarding the proposal, violating section 22-27-48(a) and due process rights under the Alabama Constitution. Section 22-27-48(a) mandates at least one public hearing on proposals related to solid waste management, with specific notice requirements, including publication in a local newspaper and a minimum notice period of 30 to 45 days prior to the hearing. The notice must detail the proposed action, its relevance to the local solid waste management plan, and provide a contact person for further information.

Carter argues that the notice from November 17, 1993, was insufficient because it should have indicated consistency with the Winston County plan and failed to mention the availability of the plan for public review. However, since the Court concluded the City was no longer bound by the Winston County plan, these arguments lack merit. Additionally, regarding the notice's adequacy, Carter contends that it didn't inform the public about obtaining copies of the Proposal; however, the notice identified a contact person, Toby Yarbrough, for additional information, and testimony confirmed that copies of the Proposal were accessible at city hall during the comment period.

Carter's argument asserting insufficient notice regarding Peerless's role in managing the City landfill was found unpersuasive. The record indicates that Carter and his attorney received a "letter of intent" detailing Peerless's involvement nearly two months before the December 21, 1993, hearing. Although the letter did not encompass all terms of the Proposal discussed at the hearing, it provided adequate notice of the City's proposed actions. At the hearing, Carter was present and had the chance to express his concerns, with his attorney speaking extensively against Peerless's involvement and the proposed contract. The court concluded that Carter was granted sufficient notice and opportunity to be heard, thereby affirming that his due process rights under both the Alabama Constitution and the Solid Wastes Disposal Act were not violated. The order dissolving the preliminary injunction was affirmed, with concurrence from Justices Maddox, Kennedy, Ingram, and Cook.