Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landfill Site Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee delays vote on resolution opposing proposed Wawarsing landfill after extended debate
Summary
After an extended debate, Ulster County legislators voted to postpone Resolution 33 — which would oppose establishment of a countywide landfill in Wawarsing — to allow the Resource Recovery Agency time to complete engineering and hydrology studies and to provide additional information to legislators and host communities.
Get email alerts on the Landfill Site Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Ulster County Energy, Environment and Sustainability Committee on Feb. 4 voted to postpone Resolution 33, which would have formally opposed the Resource Recovery Agency (RRA) pursuing a countywide landfill in the Town of Wawarsing.
Resolution 33 identifies two candidate parcels in Wawarsing (referred to in agency materials as Milk Road and Brown Road) among five sites identified in a preliminary feasibility review by consultant Cornerstone. Director Ryder told the committee the Cornerstone work was a desktop/GIS screening that produced five sites for further vetting — two in Wawarsing, two in Plattekill, and one in Esopus — and that the agency has not yet made any formal proposal, purchase offer, or permit application for a landfill.
Legislators raised two central concerns: first, residents and the town expressed strong opposition citing risks to groundwater, traffic impacts on local roads, noise, property values and local quality of life; second, several legislators said the county should wait for completed engineering, hydrology and soil analyses before taking a political position. Nolan, Stewart and others argued that a scientifically based study that rules sites out would avoid repeatedly reopening the conversation and provide clearer grounds for policy decisions. Several members also noted a 2023 legislative resolution that, by restricting bonding options, made it politically difficult to site a landfill in Plattekill — an outcome that may have shifted focus to Wawarsing.
Director Ryder told the committee the agency is pursuing a multi-pronged approach: it may issue an RFP for alternative technologies (biogasification, anaerobic digestion, hydrolysis), is seeking an engineer to complete hydrologic and geotechnical work, and is committed to waste-diversion goals (an 85% diversion target by 2050 tied to state requirements). He said the state enabling statute for the agency authorizes entry onto lands to conduct engineering studies and that the agency contract with the county includes a non-interference clause the agency believes constrains unilateral county action on its operations.
Town officials and residents pressed for clearer communication and questioned whether eminent domain might be used; Director Ryder and staff said the DEC will not permit a landfill that relies on eminent domain and that the state statute permits the agency to enter lands for study purposes. Supervisor Howick said residents initially received inconsistent messaging about whether property could be taken and requested a DEC meeting with town counsel for clarification.
The debate included sharp exchanges. Chair James Gordon of the agency, appearing as a board representative, said the RRA is doing required due diligence and urged more legislative support for diversion projects (including a proposed reuse/innovation center the agency calls the RICK) rather than early political blocks that could block useful technical work. Other legislators urged the RRA to accelerate studies or for the Legislature to assert more direct control over solid-waste planning.
After extended discussion and public representation from Wawarsing residents, the committee voted to postpone Resolution 33 (the motion passed with recorded opposition and abstentions). The postponement was framed by several members as a step to allow the agency to finish technical studies; others said an up-or-down vote now would give residents faster clarity. The committee also asked legislative counsel to review whether prior resolutions and the county–agency contract raise legal conflicts with a blanket county resolution.
The agency clarified it is not requesting county funds for the site studies at this time, though it separately said it may seek county support for reuse/innovation infrastructure. The committee agreed to hold the resolution until the agency provides engineering data, clarifies property-owner engagement and supplies the legal citations requested by legislators.
Next steps: the RRA will continue its site-vetting and engineering procurement; the Legislature asked that results and any state DEC guidance be shared with committee members and the host communities before a final vote on the resolution.

