(Photo Illustration - MetroCreativeConnection)

PARKERSBURG — A city property owner has filed requests for public hearings and other actions ahead of a decision by Parkersburg City Council on whether to privatize sanitation and recycling services.

In addition to the West Virginia Public Service Commission, Carole Hanlon, who lives outside the city but owns multiple properties in it, has requested public hearings from the state Department of Environmental Protection, the West Virginia Solid Waste Management Board and Parkersburg’s Municipal Planning Commission. She also submitted a request to City Council for an investigation and forensic audit of the city’s sanitation and recycling operations.

City Council voted at its Dec. 9 meeting to schedule a public meeting for Jan. 6 to field questions and share information about the proposed contracts with companies to take over the services long provided by the city itself. That meeting is slated for 6 p.m., with a special council meeting to consider the first readings of ordinances for the contracts at 7:30 p.m.

The city received proposals from Rumpke and Waste Management for sanitation and recycling service, and the administration is negotiating a contract with one of them. A request for proposals for a separate, subscription-based recycling program — under which those residents who want to recycle would pay for the service — was issued in November, with Rumpke submitting the only proposal.

The petition Hanlon filed with the Planning Commission asks for “a formal, duly and legally-noticed public hearing concerning the proposed privatization of the City’s sanitation and recycling services prior to any further action of any kind, nature or character, vote, agreement, or decision regarding the sanitation and recycling services of Parkersburg.”

“While City Council has voted to conduct a ‘public meeting’ to be held on January 6, 2026, there is no provision within the framework of such ‘public meeting’ to address the concerns of the petitioners and ensure that the information and testimony sought by petitioners is forthcoming before contracts have been formalized,” the filing says.

Parkersburg Development Director Ryan Barber, a member of the commission, said Chairman Charlie Matthews has elected not to schedule a hearing on the matter at the panel’s Jan. 16 meeting.

Barber said the Planning Commission generally addresses matters such as subdivisions, annexation and zoning. Sanitation “doesn’t really address land use,” he said.

City Attorney Blaine Myers said it’s his opinion the Planning Commission does not have jurisdiction over sanitation issues.

Among those signing the petition were Councilwoman Wendy Tuck and Councilman Zak Huffman.

Tuck said she signed the petition before council’s resolution for the Jan. 6 meeting was introduced and approved.

“I wasn’t sure, frankly, that we would have any kind of public meeting,” she said. “There’s been almost zero information come to us.”

Mayor Tom Joyce has said council’s role is appropriating money, and the administration procures the funded goods and services. Because these proposed contracts would last longer than a year, they must be approved by council before going into effect.

Joyce has said the deliberative materials will be made available to council and the public once contracts are proposed. Council can accept, reject or amend the proposed contracts.

Hanlon also submitted a request for City Council to open a formal investigation of municipal sanitation and recycling efforts and require a forensic audit of those operations for the last four fiscal years.

“A forensic audit is necessary to distinguish true operational cost from avoidable waste, internal control failures, or distorted reporting,” the filing says. “Without this baseline, any privatization decision is speculative and legally vulnerable.”

Joyce said the annual audit of the city required by the state provides all the necessary information.

“A ‘forensic’ audit is generally performed in search of intentional acts of misrepresentation or misappropriation, or in other words ‘cooking the books’ or theft,” he said.

Joyce noted the city has received unmodified or clean audit opinions for multiple years, including all those covered in Hanlon’s request. He said he would welcome a forensic audit if the intent is to look for acts of fraud or theft, and is confident none would be found.

“If council’s intention, though, is to acquire confidence in the accuracy of the financial results being presented … then our annual audits already provide that assurance,” he said. “As mayor I have full and unadulterated confidence in our finance director as well as our processes and controls with regards to the city’s finances, procurement and spending ”

Incoming council President Andrew Borkowski said he does not believe a forensic audit is necessary.

“I trust our finance director and Finance Department to provide accurate records,” he said.

Tuck said she has questions about the sanitation finances, including Joyce’s statement earlier this month that the city’s recycling center has operated at a nearly $3.8 million deficit since fiscal year 2019 and did not charge to accept recyclable material from private haulers, something the facility recently stopped doing. But she said a cost-benefit analysis of the service and potential changes seems more appropriate than a forensic audit.

“I don’t think there’s wrongdoing,” she said.

Hanlon has previously said she didn’t consider these filings an adversarial process but a means to get answers the public wants and allow the city to justify the decision it ultimately makes.

Evan Bevins can be reached at ebevins@newsandsentinel.com