Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Supervisors press OC Waste & Recycling after county pauses virtual meeting on Grama landfill tonnage increase
Loading...
Summary
Supervisor Nguyen pressed county staff after OC Waste & Recycling paused a scheduled virtual public meeting about increasing permitted landfill tonnage at the Grama (Prima De Shea) site. Director Tom Petrullis said the action was administrative — an increase in permitted tonnage — and staff extended the comment period while departments brief board offices.
Vice Chair Doug Chaffee opened a largely ceremonial morning with cultural presentations before the Board of Supervisors moved to a contentious non‑agendized exchange about the Grama (Prima De Shea) landfill.
Supervisor Nguyen said she had been told expansion work had been stopped and asked when the effort began and why board offices had not been briefed. Tom Petrullis, Director of OC Waste and Recycling, told the board: "It's actually not an expansion. It is a, increase in permitted tonnage." He said county staff paused a virtual public meeting after receiving further comments and would continue to receive public comment through March 19 while staff "further evaluate the comments and concerns." (Petrullis comment: SEG 1164‑1174 and SEG 1231‑1235.)
Board members pressed for more detail. Nguyen asked whether the department had notified board offices earlier in the administrative process; Petrullis acknowledged there had been some notices but characterized them as "insufficient," and said staff had paused the public meeting to evaluate recent incoming comments. Supervisor Wagner and others emphasized the countywide impacts of landfill permitting, noting both local concerns in District 5 and that landfill operations serve the entire county.
Chief Executive Michelle Geary and other county officials said the pause was limited to the scheduled virtual public meeting and that public comments would still be accepted. Geary said the pause was taken in consultation with county counsel to avoid creating a procedural problem for the EIR process.
Board members asked staff to brief the impacted district offices and to return with a timeline and additional information, including how many comments had been received and any cost implications of the pause. Petrullis said he did not have precise tallies for comments at that time but agreed to follow up with the board. Several supervisors requested a district briefing before the matter returned to the full board for any formal action.
Next steps: staff said they would continue to accept comments until March 19, evaluate them, and report back to the board with next steps and briefings to district offices.
Sources: Board discussion and staff responses during the public meeting (Tom Petrullis: SEG 1164‑1240; Supervisor Nguyen, multiple comments in SEG 1159‑1275; Michelle Geary: SEG 1550‑1568).
