Benton County SWAC, DSAC members review Trash Talks work‑group drafts and prepare for polling on landfill recommendations

Ken, chair of the Solid Waste Advisory Council (SWAC), convened a joint work session of SWAC and DSAC on March 15 to review subcommittee drafts produced for the county's “Trash Talks” work group and to discuss next steps in public outreach and an informal polling process of the work group.

The meeting focused on three connected topics: (1) subcommittee findings on landfill capacity and longevity, (2) the draft Sustainable Materials Management Plan (SMMP) and how SWAC/DSAC will participate in the consultant selection and review process, and (3) the county's planned public outreach and an informal polling period the work group will use to signal support or objection to findings and recommendations.

Why it matters: the council members said the compiled report and the public outreach could influence future land‑use decisions, including any conditional‑use permit (CUP) application related to landfill expansion. Members stressed the report is intended for the Board of Commissioners and the Planning Commission and could inform later quasi‑judicial review.

Members reported that county staff has planned a multichannel outreach “blitz” including postcards to every Benton County resident, TV and radio ads, and social media notices. Marge Popp, a SWAC member and an ambassador to the Trash Talks work group, said, “a robust multichannel outreach was to commence today,” and described postcards and an April 4 open house as part of that effort.

Daniel, a county staff member who is compiling the draft reports, told the councils that the next draft of the compiled report — referred to in the meeting as “draft number 5” — was scheduled for release imminently. He said, “Our team is currently working on getting that next draft ready for release. Hopefully, today, that's the scheduled date for release for draft number 5.” Daniel also committed to sending the draft to SWAC and DSAC email lists and to a broader interested list.

Several members described diverging experiences within subcommittees. Chuck Gilbert and others said they reached consensus on many items but acknowledged the drafting process felt rushed. One member said they did not feel listened to in a particular subcommittee and described the process as “very strong headwind.” Members urged that points of continued disagreement be captured in the polling process and, if necessary, as minority reports.

Work‑group polling and next steps

Members discussed an informal polling procedure that Sam (county staff) proposed for the work group. Marge Popp described the poll as an agenda‑item polling that would run roughly from the following day through the 23rd; she said items flagged as “2” or “3” would receive additional attention. Mark Yeager summarized the three‑level polling idea: “Number 1 means you're totally in agreement... Number 2 is, you might be able to support... with maybe some modifications. And number 3 is you cannot support...” Members said items that draw many “2”s or “3”s could be escalated to additional discussion or a formal vote and that a minority/majority explanation could be produced for intractable disagreements.

Role of advisory bodies and land‑use process

Members asked how SWAC and DSAC will be involved in any future CUP. Mark Yeager clarified the formal land‑use sequence: the Benton County Planning Commission makes the initial quasi‑judicial decision on a CUP and SWAC would have an advisory role in reviewing any application; the Board of Commissioners would typically act only if a decision is appealed. Yeager said the process can extend to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Oregon Court of Appeals if appealed.

SMMP and consultant selection

Members discussed the planned Sustainable Materials Management Plan and whether SWAC would be involved in writing the RFP and in selecting or advising consultants. Marge Popp and others said the latest drafts include language that SWAC and other advisory groups would be involved in an advisory capacity; Daniel said staff would circle back with details on roles and selection procedures.

Public outreach and timing

Marge and other members described the county’s planned public outreach: postcards to every Benton County resident, TV and radio spots, social media posts, and an April 4 public open house. Members expressed concern that the compiled report might be lengthy and noted that the draft being circulated may omit appendices and additional data. Debbie (member) asked staff to circulate the most current draft so she could review it before the work‑group polling begins.

Other operational notes

Members noted that Republic/Valley Landfills had discussed quarry pre‑excavation with Knife River and that excavation activity at the Knife River site has increased (one member said blasts were occurring roughly every three days). Chuck Gilbert said he would follow up on commitments reported in subcommittee materials, including a near‑term excavation date Republic reportedly placed in a report.

No formal motions or votes were taken during the work session. Members were asked to review the forthcoming draft and submit comments to the SWAC/DSAC ambassadors (Marge Popp and Chuck Gilbert) ahead of the informal polling window.

The councils did not reach a decision on resuming regular meeting cadence; Daniel said the Board of Commissioners is aware and will provide guidance. The chair said he would formally request a return to regular meetings so members can plan for review of the full packet of materials.