Two public commenters urged the Polk County Board of Commissioners to review and delay any final action on a hearings officer decision approving a proposed Apple Tree Holdings solid-waste transfer facility, saying the selected site does not comply with county code and state rules and that the administrative record is incomplete.

E. M. Easterly of West Salem told the board he had attempted an appeal of the hearings officer's decision and, because he was unsuccessful, asked the commissioners to "review between now and January 1 the 8 statutory legal requirements that the hearings officer failed to address." Easterly said he had emailed Director McGuigan but had received no response and asked the board to conduct a public review of the legal underpinnings before any final decision.

Steve Anderson, Land Use Chair for the West Salem Neighborhood Association, told commissioners he was not opposed to locating a transfer facility in the franchise area generally but argued that the specific approved site for conditional use CU 2505 lies on "high value soils," which he said is prohibited by county code (as quoted in his remarks: "PCZO 136 50 z"). Anderson said exhibits showing building layouts did not match soils maps, that his testimony was omitted from the hearings record, and that the approval therefore would be "an illegal act" unless the missing evidence and legal issues are reviewed.

Both speakers referenced the franchise approval documents and attachment A, saying the approved franchise identifies a roughly 78.5-square-mile franchise area while the particular parcel approved on Nov. 6 is not permitted in their view. Easterly and Anderson asked commissioners to postpone a final decision so the record could be reviewed and supplemented before a January 1 deadline mentioned in the comments.

Commissioners did not take formal action on the appeals or on CU 2505 during the meeting. Director McGuigan did not provide a response during the public comment period; the hearings officer (identified in the record as Hal) is cited by speakers as having granted the franchise. The board moved on to other agenda items after the public comment period ended.

Why it matters: The comments raise questions about compliance with Polk County zoning and the administrative process for permitting conditional uses. If the board decides to revisit the hearings officer's decision, it could alter the permitting schedule and require additional staff work or hearings. The speakers requested that the commissioners review the legal issues publicly before any final action.