Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County reviews WSU‑extension agreement to advance organics reduction and update solid‑waste plan
Summary
A proposed agreement would fund two tasks: continued organics‑waste reduction (including a farm building project and food‑recovery work with local partners such as the Port Angeles Food Bank and farms) and targeted chapter updates to the county’s comprehensive solid‑waste management plan; commissioners asked about state targets (50% by 2030), rural exemptions and costs.
County staff presented a two‑task agreement with an extension service to continue organics‑waste reduction work and update selected chapters of Clallam County’s comprehensive solid‑waste management plan.
The presenter (S9) said the contract covers (1) continued organics reduction work and funding for a farm building to support community‑scale composting and (2) assistance updating those chapters of the solid‑waste plan where the extension service has expertise. Commissioners pressed for specifics about the state target (presenters referenced a 50% reduction target by 2030), whether the county currently meets those targets, and whether infrastructure or contract changes (for example with Waste Connections) could enable curbside collection. Presenters said rural counties are excluded from curbside organics mandates based on population and that community composting and farm‑based nodes are the most feasible path in Clallam County.
Details and partnerships: presenters highlighted efforts with the Port Angeles Food Bank, which received an “Earth Tub” grinder from the Department of Ecology to process food donations, and pilot work with Finn River and local farms to accept feedstock including fish‑hatchery waste and invasive green crab shells as compost material. Commissioners asked whether noxious‑weed biochar projects or other feedstock recovery could be tracked and counted toward organics diversion; presenters said that would be possible if programs document tonnage.
Costs and implementation: staff described the county’s role as convenor, educator and planner — noting that many community‑scale solutions require upfront capital and sustained funding. The board directed staff to incorporate the extension’s work into the solid‑waste plan update and to return with clearer performance metrics and timeline for the two contract tasks.
What the county will do next: staff will convene partners, refine targets and return with an implementation work plan and budget clarification; commissioners asked for clarity about how diversion is being measured and whether the county should adjust its internal targets to track progress.
