East County residents press Multnomah County on filtration-plant impacts, enforcement

Residents near the Portland Water Bureau filtration-plant site pressed the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners during public testimony to explain who is enforcing the project's land-use conditions and to take action on road damage, uncovered truck loads and potential water pollution.

Community members said construction has continued despite a Land Use Board of Appeals remand and that county oversight of permit conditions is not visible. "Who's enforcing the conditions of approval?" asked Tammy Wensink, a resident near the site. Suzanne Quarter, another nearby resident, said the Land Use Board of Appeals had found errors in the county's prior review and asked why work had not stopped pending the remand.

Speakers described recurring safety and environmental concerns: uncovered dirt loads leaving the site, heavy truck traffic damaging roads and blocking pedestrian paths, trucks failing to cover loads and running stop signs, and settling ponds placed near Johnson Creek that residents fear will overflow during storms. "The ADA accessible path on Carpenter Lane has been blocked constantly by mud and debris," Wensink said, adding that a family member recovering from knee surgery could not use the path. Chris Quarter said the settling ponds sit close enough that overflow would reach Johnson Creek during rain. Howard Prank described damage to local roads and oil sheens on streets that he said run to the Sandy River.

Several residents also questioned the project’s total cost and county budgeting implications. Terry Ceecco contended the filtration project and related expenses are large — stating a contractor figure and other associated costs — and said county budget pressures could affect homelessness services; the dollar amounts were presented by the speaker and recorded as such in testimony.

Board members acknowledged the concerns and said staff would follow up. When a commissioner asked for a non‑privileged summary of the county’s role vis-à-vis the City of Portland, county staff said they would provide information to commissioners' offices and that Margie Bridal (county staff) would be available to answer questions where the ongoing litigation did not create privilege limits. Division staff also offered to provide additional information about the project and the county’s responsibilities on county land.

Why this matters: residents describe immediate public-safety and environmental impacts (road damage, traffic safety, blocked accessible paths and runoff) and want clarity on enforcement of permit conditions after a LUBA remand. The board did not take a formal vote on the matter during this meeting; staff committed to follow-up briefings to commissioners' offices.

What’s next: County staff said they would provide non‑privileged information about the county’s role and the project to commissioners’ offices and would follow up with the offices that asked for more detail. Several speakers also provided their contact information to staff for follow-up.