John Leyzorek’s Opposition to the Solid Waste Fee System

 

John Leyzorek, a new member of the Solid Waste Authority (SWA), actively and vocally opposed the existing solid waste fee system, arguing that it was unjust, encouraged waste, and lacked transparency. His opposition stemmed from a deep-seated belief in a “usage-based” system where individuals pay based on the amount of waste they generate.

Here’s a comprehensive overview of Leyzorek's opposition, drawing on the sources and our previous conversation:

• Fundamental Unfairness of the “Green Box Fee”: Leyzorek considered the SWA’s flat-rate "green box fee" system fundamentally unfair because it didn’t differentiate between those who generated a lot of trash and those who generated little. He believed it was unjust to charge everyone the same amount, regardless of their individual waste production. This conviction led him to extensively research the West Virginia Code regarding solid waste management and SWA regulations, solidifying his belief that SWAs should only charge for the direct use of services.

• Advocacy for a "Pay-As-You-Throw" System: Leyzorek passionately advocated for a "Pay-As-You-Throw" (PAYT) system, a model endorsed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where individuals are charged based on the amount of waste they dispose of. He argued that such a system would incentivize people to reduce their waste and increase recycling, leading to a reduction in the overall amount of trash sent to the landfill. He viewed PAYT as a fairer and more environmentally responsible approach compared to the existing flat fee, which, in his view, offered no incentive for careful waste management.

• Challenging Chairman Riley’s Authority and Actions: Leyzorek directly challenged the authority and actions of SWA Chairman Ed Riley, particularly regarding the handling of the Public Service Commission (PSC) complaint and the hiring of Attorney Sims. He argued that Riley lacked the authority to unilaterally respond to the PSC complaint and engage Sims without a vote from the entire Authority. He accused Riley of misappropriating funds by using SWA resources to cover Sims’ unauthorized representation in the PSC case and highlighted Sims’ poor performance and the financial losses incurred from the lawsuits.

• Refusal to Pay the “Green Box Fee”: Leyzorek personally refused to pay the “green box fee” in protest against the system. The sources, combined with our previous conversation, indicate that this act of defiance likely led to legal action against him by the SWA, represented by Attorney Sims. His willingness to face legal consequences underscores his strong convictions and commitment to changing the system.

• Labelled as a "Freedom Fighter": An Editor’s Note describes Leyzorek as one of the county's “leading freedom fighters,” highlighting his dedication to fighting for a usage-based solid waste system and his steadfast commitment to reducing waste. The note also mentions that he was a “stalwart recycler,” further emphasizing his commitment to environmental responsibility.

Leyzorek's actions and arguments reveal a multi-faceted approach to opposing the solid waste fee system:

• Principled Objection to Unfairness: He fundamentally objected to the flat fee system on moral and ethical grounds, arguing that it penalized responsible waste management practices and failed to incentivize waste reduction.
• Advocacy for a Fairer, Environmentally Sound Alternative: He actively promoted a "Pay-As-You-Throw" system as a more equitable and environmentally responsible approach.
• Direct Confrontation and Legal Challenges: He directly confronted Chairman Riley’s authority and challenged the legitimacy of his actions, including the unauthorized hiring of Attorney Sims and the handling of the PSC complaint.
• Personal Action and Commitment: He refused to pay the fee, demonstrating his personal commitment to challenging the system and facing the potential consequences.

The sources portray Leyzorek as a principled individual who actively and persistently fought for a fairer and more environmentally responsible waste management system. His actions highlight the importance of holding public officials accountable, advocating for change, and challenging unfair systems. Although the sources don't indicate whether he ultimately succeeded in changing the SWA's fee system, his efforts highlight the potential for individual action to challenge established norms and advocate for greater accountability and fairness in public service systems.