Court Rules in Favor of Recycler

A Superior Court judge in Indiana has ruled against the city of LaPorte, Ind., in its case against Jason’s Recycling, a recycler of ferrous and nonferrous metals.

The decision follows a decision by the city to amend an ordinance that, the company felt, would restrict the business’ operation.

The decision found that Jason’s Recycling was in compliance with the LaPort’s existing zoning ordinance. What the amendment sought to do, according to Jason’s, was to stretch the ordinance to include many facets that affected the company’s actual operations, including when they could operate, and who could conduct business at the operation.

While the court ruled in favor of the recycling company, the court did not take into consideration whether in fact the ordinance was unconstitutional.

The city can still amend the ordinance regarding any licensing provisions and have the same implemented.

However, wrote Robert Szilagyi, attorney for Jason’s Recycling, “As it now stands, there is no license requirement since the entire ordinance is unenforceable.”

Sponsored Content

SENNEBOGEN 340G telehandler improves the view in Macon County, NC

An elevated cab is one of several features improving operational efficiency at the Macon County Solid Waste Management agency in North Carolina. When it comes to waste management, efficiency, safety and reliability are priorities driving decisions from day one, according to staff members of the Macon County Solid Waste Management Department in western North Carolina. The agency operates a recycling plant in a facility originally designed to bale incoming materials. More recently, the building has undergone significant transformations centered around one machine: a SENNEBOGEN telehandler (telescopic handler).

In its ruling, the Superior Court states the following: At the time that Ordinance No. 39-2003 was adopted, the city of LaPorte had in effect a zoning ordinance which placed the plaintiffs' properties in a light industrial zone. The plaintiffss properties are in total compliance with the zoning ordinance . . . One of the arguments presented by the plaintiffs asserts that (the ordinance) is not licensing, but zoning; and, must be adopted pursuant to Indiana Code 36-7-4, et. seq.

According to local press reports the amended ordinance was aimed at more tightly regulating recycling facilities to improve the appearance of the plants.