~MP questions VROMI Minister over Fleming Waste Services, costly equipment repairs and the absence of public clarity~
PHILIPSBURG:--- Member of Parliament Darryl York has demanded detailed answers from Minister of Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Patrice Gumbs Jr. concerning the operation of the country’s landfill, the reported departure of longtime operator Fleming Waste Services and questions surrounding unpaid invoices, government-owned machinery and a possible replacement company.
During the continuation of the 2026 budget debate on Tuesday, York said previous assurances from the VROMI Minister appeared to conflict with information now circulating about the landfill. He stressed that several of the matters he raised were based on reports that had not been publicly confirmed and called on the minister to place the facts before Parliament.
York recalled that during an earlier parliamentary meeting on the landfill, the minister said he was working through outstanding issues with Fleming Waste Services and indicated that the contractor had been paid for services rendered.
The MP questioned why, if all outstanding amounts had been settled, the contractor was reportedly pursuing legal action over unpaid invoices.
“If everything was paid to the contractor, why is the contractor suing the ministry for unpaid invoices?” York asked.
He also asked whether the minister followed up on a promised service-level agreement, commonly called an SLA. York wanted to know whether the document was presented to Fleming Waste Services, whether the company refused to sign it, or whether the agreement was never finalized.
No confirmation of the reported legal action, its claims or its status was contained in York’s presentation. Those matters require clarification from the minister and the parties involved.
Was Fleming Waste Services sent home?
York then turned to reports that Fleming Waste Services was no longer operating at the landfill. He repeatedly described the information as unconfirmed and asked the minister to state whether the company had in fact been removed.
If the company’s services were terminated, York said Parliament should be told why the decision was made and whether the operator received formal written notice.
He argued that the company had served the country for more than five years and said it had contributed to improvements at the landfill during a period when persistent fires and World Bank concerns placed the site under intense scrutiny.
According to York, ending such an arrangement without written notification—if that is what occurred—would be disrespectful to the operator. However, he stopped short of presenting the reported dismissal as an established fact and explicitly invited the minister to correct the information.
York also revisited the minister’s earlier rejection of claims that the contractor was being victimized. Quoting remarks previously made on the floor of Parliament, he said the minister had indicated that discussions with Fleming were continuing and that resolving the matter would take time.
The MP argued that a government claiming to protect small businesses should give contractors legal and financial certainty instead of letting them operate for years without a finalized long-term agreement.
Questions over government-owned landfill machinery
A second area of concern involved the heavy machinery being used—or reportedly left idle—at the landfill. York asked for the age and condition of each machine, the estimated cost of repairs and a determination of whether the equipment remains repairable.
He noted that the machinery was acquired with World Bank involvement and questioned reports that the ministry may be considering writing off equipment that is only approximately five or six years old.
“If anybody knows anything about heavy machinery, five years, six years old—practically new. It’s not an everyday car,” York said.
York asked whether VROMI prepared a maintenance budget and plan for the equipment and whether landfill operators had previously submitted formal or informal maintenance proposals that could have prevented the current breakdowns and interruptions.
He also questioned reports that a certified mechanic associated with the operation had been sent home. York said an earlier minister had acknowledged the difficulty of finding another person locally certified to repair the specialized machinery.
The MP requested a total estimate for returning the machines to service and asked who would be responsible for future repairs if the former operator and mechanic are no longer involved.
Who is the reported new operator?
York further claimed that he had received information about a new company operating at the landfill without any accompanying public announcement.
He asked the minister to identify the scope of the company’s work, disclose whether it has a contract or SLA, state the cost and duration of the arrangement, and explain whether the company is using its own machinery.
The MP also requested a comparison between the cost of the reported new operation and the previous arrangement with Fleming Waste Services.
If a longer agreement is being prepared, York asked whether the work will be publicly tendered. If no tender is planned, he said the minister should explain the legal or procurement basis for extending the contract.
The questions go directly to transparency, value for money and continuity at one of Sint Maarten’s most critical public facilities. A change in landfill operations affects not only the contractor but also waste collection, fire prevention, environmental protection, public health, and the country's daily cleanliness.
Cleanliness, unemployment and tourism
York linked the landfill dispute to a broader criticism of the government’s handling of cleanliness and employment. He said public discussion often focuses on crime’s impact on tourism without giving equal attention to unemployment and other conditions that may contribute to crime.
He claimed that the cancellation or non-renewal of roadside-cleaning contracts left more than 100 families without income from one month to the next. York said that while this did not excuse criminal behavior, government should also consider how sudden unemployment affects households and communities.
The MP further argued that the country’s declining cleanliness is itself damaging the tourism product. He cited complaints from repeat visitors and comments from several MPs saying the island's condition had deteriorated.
According to York, government and coalition members have repeatedly called for “course correction,” yet the VROMI Minister’s presentation suggested that the ministry intended to continue on its present path.
Minister’s answers now required
York’s intervention raised serious questions, but it did not establish that Fleming Waste Services was dismissed without notice, that the ministry unlawfully withheld payments, that machinery will be written off or that a new company was improperly appointed.
Those claims and reports remain unanswered and undocumented.
The VROMI Minister should therefore provide Parliament with a clear chronology: the status of all invoices, any pending court proceedings, the contractor’s current legal position, the existence or absence of an SLA, the condition and value of government-owned machinery, the identity and cost of any new operator and the procurement process used.
At a time when government says public trust must be rebuilt, the landfill cannot be managed through rumors, conflicting statements and unanswered questions. Parliament and the public are entitled to know who is operating the site, under what authority, at what cost, and with what plan to protect the country’s equipment and ensure uninterrupted waste management.