Livermore residents ask Humboldt County for more pool support; commissioners debate recycling-distribution fairness

Residents of Livermore used the public-comments portion of the Jan. 13 Humboldt County meeting to request additional county assistance to keep the town pool open and to press the board to re-examine how county recycling funds are distributed among towns.

Billy Scott, speaking for the Livermore pool, asked the board for help covering a projected $103,000 cost to replace the pool's filter system. Scott said the pool draws significant summer use'on very hot days he estimated as many as 100 people'and that the pool operates with limited local fundraising such as a silent auction and a long-running can-bin program. Scott said the county has provided annual assistance in prior years but current amounts have been far smaller (he said historically the annual county contribution had run about $1,600). He described building maintenance needs as well: the pool building dates from the 1970s and needs repairs in addition to the filter work.

Commissioners and staff responded that the county budget "isn't gonna be a good year" and will be tight; they said they will try to help if possible. Staff also encouraged the pool organizers to pursue community betterment grants and local fundraising; Scott said the city had applied for the current year's community betterment grant and was awaiting awards.

During the same public-comment exchange, commissioners and staff discussed the county's longstanding recycling assistance program. Board members traced the program to an initiative started in the late 1990s, when Humboldt (the city) hosted centralized recycling and received a larger share of program funds. Residents from several towns asked why Humboldt received a larger portion of the county recycling allocation and whether the county could redistribute funds more equitably to the smaller towns that operate recycling trailers and haul material to drop-off sites.

Staff and commissioners said the county currently pays recycling costs from its budget, that the county does not receive revenue from most mixed-recycling material (mixed recycling costs the county roughly 2 cents per pound to process), and that cardboard is baled and sold only when market prices justify it. Staff reported roughly 42 to 45 tons of recycling were collected since trailers were received in February (staff made roughly 50 trips to transport cardboard and mixed recycling), and estimated that recycling last year saved the county "just a hair under $10,000" in landfill fees compared with disposing the materials. Commissioners suggested examining a per-capita or other formula to redistribute county recycling funds to communities that actively operate recycling trailers; they asked staff to research whether any formal resolution or agreement currently governs the distribution.

Commissioners did not adopt any immediate changes; they asked staff to track recycling costs and consider options during the board's upcoming budget workshop.

Quotes: "We're here to request money for our pool in Livermore. We're facing, like, a $103,000, new filter system," Billy Scott said in public comment. "We had all mixed recycling and cardboard everything for the year. I think it was 42 or 45 tons of recycling," a county staff member said during the discussion.

Next steps: County staff said they will re-examine the recycling-fund distribution formula during budget work and pursue follow-up information on any past resolution or agreement that governs the current distribution of funds.