City Moves to Shut Recycling Plant

Lancaster, Pa., city officials, fed up with numerous zoning violations they say started the day a recycling center opened in 1995, have closed the business.

A Lancaster County Court judge in June approved an injunction sought by the city against Shell's Disposal and Recycling Center. The injunction "permanently" prohibits owner Willie E. Shell, who owes the city almost $400,000 in business loans, from "operating a municipal waste-disposal business."

The injunction was originally filed last December but was challenged by Shell's former attorney, Joseph Kalasnik of York County. Judge Paul K. Allison, however, approved it in June.

Attorney Neil Albert, representing the city, said an injunction to close a business is rare.

"This is a very unusual procedure," he said. "You don't get to this point very often. You don't usually see this against commercial properties. Usually, somebody who goes into business makes more of an effort to do things properly."

The closing of the business is the latest development in a seven- year battle between the city and Shell over a lengthy list of alleged zoning violations.

In 1995, Albert said, the city's zoning hearing board allowed Shell to open his business but told him he must comply with a number of conditions.

He was told to operate a recycling center, not a trash-hauling service. He was told to collect only newsprint, cardboard, glass and aluminum cans. He also was told to operate only between 7:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. (later extended to 6:30 p.m.). And Shell was told to keep his containers covered at all times and to refrain from storing trash outside his building.

Almost from the day he opened the recycling center, Albert said Shell violated those conditions.

According to court records from Sept. 10, 1999, to Aug. 2, 2001, Shell was cited for having uncovered containers more than 175 times. He was cited for storing containers outside nearly 40 times and for exceeding hours of operation more than 180 times.

Shell also allegedly collected trash.

"He has never been in compliance," Albert said.

There also have been numerous complaints from neighbors about Shell's business.

Telephone calls to Shell were not immediately returned. Kalasnik, however, said his former client "has consistently denied that he has been out of compliance of the conditions."

As for neighbors' complaints, Kalasnik said, "Some neighbors say he's in violation, and others say, no, he's not. Unfortunately, based on his being closed down, the court has accepted the adverse testimony."

Albert, however, said Shell never tried to comply with the conditions. When cited for violations, Albert said, Shell either ignored them or turned to the zoning hearing board for help.

"When code enforcement tries to deal with him to get him to do something, he doesn't respond," Albert said. "When we file prosecution, he runs in and files a variance request before the zoning board to modify the conditions we say he's violating."

Albert said Shell's requests for variances were filed simply to "get out from under" the limits set by the zoning hearing board.

"There was no reason why he couldn't comply," Albert said. "He just didn't want to comply."

Albert said the injunction was brought against Shell because other measures failed.

"Nobody wanted initially to put him out of business," Albert said, explaining why the case has dragged on for seven years. "We were hoping to get him into compliance, just nudge him into doing what he was supposed to do."

Shell could reopen his business, Albert said, but it requires "an agreement of the parties submitted to the court to modify the injunction in some way. Otherwise, it stays."

Shell's present attorney, J. Allen Taylor, said there are negotiations under way to allow his client to reopen, but he declined to elaborate.

Mayor Charlie Smithgall said he did not want to shut down the business but does want Shell to obey the law.

"It's been a long process, but we just want him to abide by regulations everyone else must abide by," he said. "I hope we can come to terms and get him back open as soon as possible."

Shell's zoning problems aren't the only issue facing the recycler. Shell received numerous low-interest loans from the city and state when he started his recycling center, but he has not paid them back.

In September 1994, the state awarded Shell a $275,000 loan from the state Minority Business Development Authority.

Shell also received two PRIDE redevelopment loans of $25,000 each, as well as two Enterprise Zone loans from the city. The first EZ loan, in June 1994, was for $135,000; the second, in October 1996, was for $188,000. Interest on the EZ loans is 2 percent over 10 years.

While city officials do not know how much Shell has repaid the state, little has been paid back on the city loans. As of June 30, Smithgall said, Shell owes $390,337.

Including interest, this includes $17,004 and $24,501 on the two PRIDE loans, $146,708 on the $135,000 EZ loan and $204,114 on the $188,000 EZ loan. Intelligencer Journal (Lancaster, PA)