Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wawarsing Landfill topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents urge Ulster County Legislature to oppose proposed Wawarsing landfills

2582532 · February 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Dozens of residents told the Ulster County Legislature they oppose siting a landfill near Milk Road and Brown Road in Wawarsing, citing environmental, health and economic concerns and urging support for a resolution by Legislator Craig Lopez opposing the proposals.

Dozens of Ulster County residents urged the Ulster County Legislature on Feb. 18 to back a resolution opposing placement of a landfill at two proposed sites in the town of Wawarsing, commonly referenced as the Milk Road and Brown Road locations.

Speakers who live near the proposed sites described fears about well-water contamination, runoff to local streams, damage to scenic and recreational resources, and declines in property values. Lauren Salovey, who said she lives “2 short miles from the Milk Road dump site,” asked legislators to “support Mister Lopez's resolution opposing citing a dump at either location in Wawrasing,” and said neighboring Sullivan County’s legislature had passed a similar resolution.

The comments continued for more than an hour: residents cited risks to Bear Kill and other streams used for fishing, wetlands mapping and soil conditions they said make the sites unsuitable for landfilling, and the effect on the local tourism and second-home economy. Zach Courtright cited new wetland maps and expressed concern about the site's glacial till soils, which he said increase contamination risk. Several speakers, including Adam Paiva and Scott Carlson, described longstanding community attachment to the land and said proposals had resurfaced repeatedly over decades.

Speakers asked the county to prioritize alternatives, including regional waste diversion and processing facilities, expanded composting and material recovery, and suggested the county examine sites that would have “minimal impact.” Poppy Cannon Reese urged investment in waste-to-energy or other modern processing and called for better regional coordination rather than building a “$200,000,000 landfill.”

Why it matters: The proposed landfill sites have drawn sustained local opposition. Several public commenters framed the issue as environmental justice, saying siting a landfill in the county’s more rural, lower-income areas would harm disadvantaged residents and nearby ecosystems. Several speakers asked the legislature to act now to oppose siting decisions by the Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency or to seek greater oversight and accountability from that agency.

What speakers said: “As elected officials, you are stewards of the environment here in Ulster County and that stewardship demands that you do the right thing,” Lauren Salovey told the legislature. Engineer Devin Bleichrom warned of risks to wells and compared possible contamination to Flint, Michigan.

What the record shows: The public comment period for agenda resolutions included 14 speakers on the landfill topic; the full legislature heard the comments during the meeting’s public-comment segment on resolutions. Legislator Craig Lopez was identified repeatedly in public remarks as the sponsor of a resolution opposing locating a landfill at the Milk Road or Brown Road sites.

Looking ahead: Speakers asked legislators to publicly endorse opposition, press the Resource Recovery Agency for alternatives, and pursue regional waste-diversion strategies instead of siting a new landfill in Wawarsing. The legislature did not take a final, recorded vote on a landfill-specific ordinance during the Feb. 18 session; public comments were recorded for the legislative record.

Ending note: The landfill discussion dominated the public comment portion of the session, with repeated appeals from residents who live adjacent to the proposed sites. Several speakers said they planned to continue attending future meetings until the resolution or other formal action addresses their concerns.