Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste Green Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sierra County outlines safeguards for burning oversized green‑waste piles, seeks $8,000‑per‑site mitigation
Summary
After large green‑waste piles accumulated at a Sierra City transfer site, the board endorsed a suite of mitigation measures — cameras, water tanks, sheriff dispatch monitoring and standard operating procedures — and asked staff to return with funding details, prioritizing Sierra City.
Sierra County supervisors on Feb. 3 directed staff to put safeguards in place before burning accumulated green‑waste piles at the county’s transfer sites, prioritizing the Sierra City dump where crews estimate roughly 2,500 cubic yards of oversized material.
Interim Public Works director Mr. Penman told the board the issue is both short‑term — how to safely burn down existing piles — and long‑term: how the county will handle growing green‑waste volumes. "There’s tremendous pressure from communities to make it as easy and cheap as possible to dispose of green waste," he said, "but the reality is it costs money and some sites are risky to burn." He asked for direction to pursue mitigations and bring back a formal funding request.
Staff and the Solid Waste Task Force recommended immediate steps before lighting any large piles: stop accepting additional green waste at Sierra City until the piles are reduced; maintain a 10‑inch maximum accepted diameter for material; finalize standard operating procedures that include notification to the Forest Service and local fire departments; install upgraded, continuously‑connected cameras (night vision + Starlink); provide dedicated water tanks/pumps/hydrants or a controllable sprinkler system at sites; and arrange for sheriff dispatch to periodically monitor camera feeds.
A county staff estimate put the equipment and connectivity costs at about $8,000 per site, with a priority order that would spend up to $40,000 to cover all five county transfer sites. "For $40,000 we can get tanks, pumps, hydrants, cameras, Starlink — everything going at all five sites," Mr. Penman said. Supervisors acknowledged the cost but emphasized that public safety, forest service and local fire concurrence would be required before burns proceed.
Several supervisors and the Fire Safe Council representative noted operational trade‑offs and community expectations. One supervisor said closing or charging for sites risks driving residents to dump in the forest, worsening fire hazard. The board asked staff to move quickly on the mitigation measures, order items that fall under existing single‑purchase limits where feasible, and return with a detailed funding plan and recommended source of funds.
Next steps: the Solid Waste Task Force will continue work on long‑term alternatives (hauling, chipping, regional processing or grant‑funded options). Staff will present a formal funding proposal and a finalized set of standard operating procedures for board consideration before any large‑scale burns resume at Sierra City.
