Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Forest Lake Landfill Resolution topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House resolution opposing a landfill beside Forest Lake draws bipartisan support at hearing

2159575 · January 28, 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

HR 13, a nonbinding resolution opposing permitting a landfill next to Forest Lake State Park in Dalton, received broad public comment and multiple local residents told the committee they fear PFAS and leachate risks to the lake and downstream waters.

Representative Jared Sullivan introduced HR 13, a House resolution expressing opposition to permitting a landfill adjacent to Forest Lake State Park in Dalton. Sullivan and many public commenters framed the measure as a symbolic bipartisan statement against siting a landfill next to a state park and an important message to state officials and the public.

Testimony featured residents and community leaders from the North Country. John Swan (Safe Forest Lake) summarized monitoring and permit details from other facilities and urged lawmakers to protect the watershed; he said monitoring reports submitted for the Bethlehem facility showed PFAS detections and increases at several wells. Nancy Morrison (Whitefield) and Carolyn Choate (Nashua) described personal and public‑health concerns and urged lawmakers to act.

Representative Sullivan acknowledged the resolution is nonbinding but argued it could raise the profile of the question and make clear the House’s stance. Committee members noted a resolution requires a simple majority in the House and can be placed on the consent calendar; several members emphasized that passage would be largely symbolic but politically resonant.

No committee action was taken at the hearing; the committee closed the public comment and indicated it would move the resolution forward in the legislative process if members so choose.