Alamosa City Councilors on July 2 signaled consensus to continue the city’s green‑waste program for Alamosa utility customers and directed staff to develop tighter access and operational controls after hearing that volumes and costs have risen.

The discussion followed a presentation from Harry, a sanitation department staff member, who said the city’s Greenrace program now handles both curbside pickup and a growing drop‑off load at the recycling yard. "We become the free San Luis Valley place to take your green waste," Harry said, describing trailers and neighbors from outside the city bringing material to the yard.

The council’s comments focused on who should be allowed to use the drop‑off site, how the city should verify users, whether commercial haulers should be charged or turned away, and what short‑term steps would control the backlog. "An easy way to address that would be an armed gate with some sort of card that you get in your city bill," Councilor Carson said. "For city residents, I don't think it should go away." Councilor Hensley said charging city customers could push yard waste into household garbage, undermining recycling goals: "If we start charging, people are just gonna throw it in their garbage can."

Harry gave several operational numbers to frame the problem: curbside pickups have grown to about 633 routes on peak weeks; annual curbside revenue was listed at $7,551 against costs of about $7,196; drop‑off material added thousands of cubic yards; and the city’s backstock grew to many thousands of cubic yards that are costly to process or haul. He told the council that taking the city’s current green‑waste volumes to the regional landfill for disposal would raise disposal fees to roughly $57,000 a year and that hauling all existing piled material could cost substantially more. He also described the city’s current disposal method — an air curtain burner in a concrete pit — and said burning is feasible as long as air‑quality rules and weather permit.

Councilors discussed several policy options: limit access to city utility customers (via a card, QR code, or other proof of residence), continue curbside pickup for subscribers, charge commercial haulers or require they go to the landfill, adjust hours or staffing at the drop‑off site, and investigate a one‑time clean‑up of the accumulated piles. Councilor Dominguez asked whether the large, older piles could be ground or mulched; staff said much of the material is large, contaminated, or mixed with trash and would require grinding or hauling to reduce volume.

There was no motion or formal ordinance introduced. Instead, councilors and staff reached a working direction: continue offering green‑waste service to city utility customers, develop a verification and access plan (examples discussed included a scanned card tied to utility accounts or a QR code), and return with operational options that address staffing, gate infrastructure, weekend or limited hours, and potential costs. At the meeting’s close, Harry confirmed the council’s direction: "I think we can get control over it if we slow it down now," and the mayor asked staff to post the plan and follow up.

The council also noted related items for future work: include green‑waste considerations in the upcoming rate study and review city code (chapter 20) language to reflect any changes. Councilors suggested staff bring back cost estimates for a gate/ID system, any required staffing changes, and scenarios for charging commercial users or limiting county access. Several councilors urged prioritizing city residents and preventing use by out‑of‑town haulers unless they pay a fee or present proof of local utility payment.

The discussion did not produce a final ordinance, fee schedule, or immediate staffing change; those items were left for staff to analyze and return with recommendations. Councilors said they expect staff to present options and associated costs before the council makes a formal policy or budget decision.