Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County court weighs litter‑patrol plan, ODOT supplies and volunteer protections
Summary
Gilliam County commissioners discussed a multipronged approach to freeway and county‑road litter, including youth volunteering limits for biohazard safety, ODOT‑supplied bags/gloves, possible county‑funded dumpsters, and coordinating with the sheriff’s office and local groups.
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gilliam County commissioners spent a substantive portion of the April 15 meeting discussing recurring litter and illegal dumping on county roads and freeway off‑ramps, and potential responses that combine volunteer efforts, limited county funding, and interagency coordination.
Commissioners and staff noted that much of the litter is truck‑related and occurs on state highways and off‑ramps, which complicates enforcement. A commissioner summarized the problem and said the county would need a "multifaceted approach," including outreach, signage, and partnerships with ODOT and volunteer groups.
"We need to do more than just that. We need to, you know, create a lot of campaigning," a commissioner said, noting prior examples where juvenile programs and youth volunteers have helped but raised biohazard concerns.
Participants said the local ODOT office can provide yellow bags, gloves and other supplies for cleanups but not labor; the chamber (represented in discussion by a participant identified as Britney Dart) warned that youth volunteers require safeguards when biohazard waste is present. Sheriff Bord (the county sheriff) said the office had previously supported litter efforts and could possibly re‑engage.
Ideas floated included weekend volunteer events, targeted dumpsters at problem locations (with caveats about inviting illegal dumping), camera signage to deter unlawful dumping, and a county advertising campaign to "keep Gilliam County clean." The court asked staff and interested commissioners to continue discussion and return with a concrete plan that addresses liability and biohazard safety.
No formal motion was recorded; the court emphasized follow‑up coordination with ODOT, the sheriff’s office, and community partners.

