Hennepin Energy Recovery Center (HERC)
BY CAM GORDON
Time for Local Electeds to Step Up and Lead
Community pressure to close the downtown garbage burner continues to grow and county and city officials continue to talk and write about it.
Both the Hennepin County Board and the Minneapolis City Council have formally voted to support closing the trash incinerator, but still appear to be searching and uncertain about who is responsible, how to do it and, sometimes, even if they will do it.
In a July, for example, the Sahan Journal reported that Randy Kiser, the operations and compliance manager for Hennepin County’s solid waste and energy division, emailed Xcel Energy officials in 2024 that “Hennepin County will continue to operate HERC into the future with no plans to terminate operation.”
That appears to have inspired renewed demands from community members, including the Zero Burn Coalition, that the county formally initiates the closure process. Following that, Board Chair Irene Fernando issued a statement titled “On the Future of the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center (HERC).” In it she advocated for the county to begin reducing the solid waste burned at the HERC in 4 steps resulting in a full closure in December 2027 that is consistent with a resolution passed by the city. The first step, she wrote, was ending all burning of the city’s organized residential collection service in February of 2026.
The county estimates that 22% of the waste that comes to the HERC is from the city’s organized residential service that collects trash from 1 to 4-unit buildings. It is estimated that 53% comes from larger apartment buildings and businesses in the city, meaning that 75% of what is burned at HERC is from Minneapolis.
County staff also presented a resolution to the county in early August focused on “accelerating zero-waste implementation in Minneapolis” and threatening to cut funding if a number of action steps were not taken.
Minneapolis officials quickly pushed back with a letter and memo from the City Operations Officer, Margaret Anderson Kelliher.
“Many requirements in the draft resolution are not feasible,” she wrote. “The proposed immediate actions – without a jointly developed plan – would result in significant negative financial and environmental consequences for residents across Hennepin County and potentially far beyond.”
Then, on Aug. 19, county staff returned to a county board committee with a more modest resolution that was ultimately tabled again. Lisa Cerny, the assistant county administrator for public works, said the changes were reached “with numerous conversations with Minneapolis,” but that the purpose of the resolution was still to accelerate Minneapolis’ effort to reduce waste.
“We cannot achieve our zero waste goals without Minneapolis implementing their zero waste plan,” Cerny said, “In 2021 the board defined its zero waste vision and a commitment to preventing 90% or more of all discarded material from being landfilled or incinerated.” she added. “We have made meaningful progress in areas we directly influence, but overall progress has been incremental.”
At the meeting Fernando made clear that whatever action is taken, she wants to ensure that there is no disruption of service, that a solid waste reuse of the facility after it closes is found, and also said, “I am not in favor of more landfilling.”
The Southside’s District 4
County Commissioner Angela Conley also weighed in. Among a variety of concerns, she objected to one provision that called on the city to “evaluate mandatory organics program participation to all city service properties to start in 2040.”
“That should start next year” she said.
“It doesn‘t meet what we need to do to reach the earliest possible closure which is 2028,” Conley said about the resolution. “I’m not seeing the urgency I would expect from the city.”
In all the recent finger pointing, written exchanges and other political discourse, two things are becoming clearer. First, after decades of community harm, we finally have a majority of county and city elected officials formally supporting the closure of HERC as a trash burner.
We have never been this close to shutting it down.
Second, there seems to be agreement that to do so successfully we need to reform our broken waste management system to move towards zero waste. To do that we need our local elected policymakers to step up and do their job: make policy, amend ordinances, and negotiate new contracts.
For guidance in doing that we need look no further than the city and county’s own zero waste plans and the comprehensive “people’s transition plan” developed and approved by Zero Waste USA and the Zero Burn Coalition.
Here are six things policymakers can do now to get us on track for zero waste and zero burn.
1. Approve a closure date and set a series of phased-in burn reduction goals.
2. Make certain that any extended or new contract with Great River Energy, or any other company contracted to operate the burner, includes the closure date and phase out requirements. The county’s contract with Great River Energy ends this December so negotiations are likely underway already.
3. Amend the county and city solid waste ordinances that license and regulate haulers to better organize collection, especially for the multifamily and commercial properties, as called for in the city’s zero waste plan. San Jose’s did it through a request for proposals (RFP) process that encouraged companies to partner with each other and nonprofit organizations to form new companies. In 2010 they changed their commercial waste collection system to an exclusive franchise system that included collection and processing services where, according to the City of San Jose, “no material collected goes directly to landfill.”
4. Make recycling and composting mandatory. San Francisco has had mandatory recycling and composting since 2009 and reports diverting over 80% of their waste from landfills through it. Their ordinance requires all waste generators to separate waste into recyclables,_compostables, and trash and uses regular audits for large generators, with fines for non-compliance.
5. Establish “Pay As You Throw” programs at the city and county levels that include incentives for composting and recycling and disincentives for discarding other materials. “With adequate education, outreach, and technical assistance, residents can potentially pay less for trash service;” said the Zero Burn/Zero Waste USA transition plan, “either by lowering container size or frequency of service as they recycle and compost more.”
6. Lastly, only use landfills and transfer stations that are also a resource recovery facility with reuse, recycling, composting, and material recovery operations.
This change will not be easy and many, especially those in the solid waste industry, may fight it. It will require, education, and collaboration between jurisdictions, community and businesses. Pressure from the individual advocates and organizations will be needed to support, and hold elected officials, and the solid waste industry accountable through the transition.
We have been talking about closing the HERC for decades. More of us now see it clearly as a manifestation of environmental racism. The negative health impacts are no longer being ignored. Cleaner alternatives exist to generate the heat and electricity it provides.
The back and forth and posturing between county and city has gone on long enough.
“The county’s climate equity and zero waste goals,” said Cerny, “require us to transform the solid waste system.” So does the health and wellbeing of our people.
Let’s set the date, legislate, and get it done.
