Benton County planning commission continues hearing on Coffin Butte landfill expansion after hours of public testimony

The Benton County Planning Commission on the evening recessed and continued the quasi‑judicial public hearing on LU‑24‑027 — Republic Services’ application for a conditional‑use permit to expand the Coffin Butte Landfill — to June 17 at 6 p.m., after dozens of residents and experts testified and the applicant asked for additional time to respond to new evidence.

The continuation gives planning staff time to prepare a supplemental report (to be available no later than June 10), limits oral testimony at the continued hearing to new evidence, and preserves a post‑record period that allows the applicant at least seven days after the record closes to file final written arguments. Commissioner Mike Struthers moved to continue the hearing; Commissioner John Fulford seconded and the motion carried.

Why it matters: The expansion application drew sustained testimony from neighbors, scientists and current and former county volunteers who told commissioners the proposal raises significant health, safety, environmental and infrastructure questions that they say are not resolved by the materials submitted with the application. Speakers urged the commission to allow more time to add documents to the record and to address what many called gaps in monitoring and enforcement.

Most prominent concerns - Fire risk and emergency response: Resident Virginia Scott told commissioners that the applicant’s fire‑risk exhibit undercounted local responses. She said Adair Rural Fire and Rescue records show 28 calls to the landfill between 2013 and 2025, compared with the applicant’s statement that there have been five fires since 1999. “The applicant drastically underrepresents the severity, number, [and] type of fire to individuals and property in the area,” Scott said.

- PFAS and leachate disposal: Several technical witnesses described elevated levels of PFAS in landfill leachate and questioned the practice of trucking untreated leachate to municipal wastewater plants. Mark Yaeger, a registered civil and environmental engineer and former member of Benton County Solid Waste advisory bodies, said Coffin Butte produces about 40,000,000 gallons of leachate annually and that roughly half of that volume is trucked to the Corvallis wastewater treatment plant and the rest to Salem. “Leachate accepted at those facilities essentially passes through untreated,” Yaeger said, citing state guidance and his review of sampling data. He told the commission that when leachate is mixed with municipal influent and treated conventionally, some PFAS constituents discharged in the effluent are higher than background influent levels.

- Methane and air emissions: Testimony from community members and environmental groups noted prior EPA and DEQ activity at the site and public reports of methane plumes. Witnesses cited CarbonMapper imagery and DEQ inspections and urged further independent monitoring.

- Traffic and road impacts: Multiple speakers raised traffic and pavement‑wear concerns for Coffin Butte Road, Campodare Road and nearby highways. Yaeger and others said the application’s traffic analysis did not account for the removal of millions of cubic yards of material, the practical closure of sections of Coffin Butte Road under the proposed traffic plan and impacts to timber and agricultural freight that use the county’s designated freight route.

- Compliance, oversight and county staffing: Several witness statements cited the Benton County Talks Trash (BCTT) report and argued the county has not proactively monitored compliance with prior conditions of approval. Yaeger quoted a BCTT finding: “Benton County has not and does not actively monitor compliance with many conditions of approval and does not proactively act to enforce compliance.” Kate Harris, a former Air Force evaluator pilot who spoke for herself, said the complexity of the application and repeated documentation and communications problems have strained county staff capacity to review the record.

- Site history and alleged ongoing work: Public testimony included assertions that large‑scale work (identified by one witness as “Cell 6”) is already underway at the landfill and that the county record does not show separate permits or site plan review for that work. Paul Niedfeldt, who said he’d served on a BCTT subcommittee, said the footprint identified in Republic’s presentation corresponds to Cell 6 — “the largest cell to date” — and urged commissioners to consider potential groundwater contamination and to weigh unknowns from that work before approving a new expansion.

Applicant response and technical clarifications Republic Services’ local counsel, Jeff Condit (Miller & Ash LLP), and the applicant’s on‑site representatives made brief rebuttal remarks and asked for time to respond in writing to testimony and new evidence. Area representative Brian Roop told commissioners that design, permitting and construction of a new cell can take many years and that initiating the land‑use process now does not mean immediate construction. He provided comparative topographic numbers intended to clarify final fill heights: Coffin Butte Road sits at roughly 250 feet above sea level; the proposed expansion’s final fill height would be near 450 feet above sea level; Tampico Ridge ranges roughly 510–570 feet depending on location. Brent Lurch, identified as an area environmental manager for the operator, said staged final capping has occurred in isolated areas but that full post‑closure reclamation is not triggered until the entire facility is finally closed.

Formal action and next steps The commission approved a motion to continue the hearing to June 17 at 6 p.m. The continuation includes these procedural details provided by county counsel: planning staff will issue a supplemental staff report by June 10; oral testimony at the continued hearing is limited to new evidence, arguments or testimony; if new written evidence is submitted at the continued hearing any person may ask to leave the record open for at least seven days to submit written responses; the applicant will be allowed at least seven days after the record closes to file final written arguments (the applicant’s rebuttal period is not subject to the county’s local decision time limit under ORS 215.427). The commission closed the evening after the motion passed.

What remains unresolved Commissioners and staff did not make a final decision on the conditional‑use permit. The record will accept additional written evidence within the procedural schedule established by the commission; the applicant will also file written rebuttal materials. The continued hearing will allow the commission to hear any new evidence before taking a final land‑use determination.

Votes at a glance - Motion to continue the public hearing on LU‑24‑027 to June 17, 2025, at 6 p.m. — Moved: Commissioner Mike Struthers; Seconded: Commissioner John Fulford; Outcome: approved (motion carried).