Residents urge Logan County to address night noise and smoke from processing plant; manager says enclosure reduced measured noise

Residents of a neighborhood near a local mulch-processing facility pressed the Logan County Fiscal Court on June 9 for more oversight of the plant’s hours, lighting and smoke, saying the operation has disturbed homes for years and worsened in recent months.

At the public-comment portion of the meeting, one resident identified in the record as Mr. Scales told the court the previous month had been “the worst month of the 4 years” because equipment ran all night and the noise sounded “like it was in their backdoor,” a condition he said started after a change in operations. Other nearby residents described constant bright lights and occasional smoke that has entered homes and asked the court to consider operational restrictions, zoning review or other measures.

The court gave the plant manager, who identified himself as Jamie Webster, time to respond. Webster acknowledged complaints, said his company completed an enclosure project for the processing equipment on May 30 and said the firm had spent about $150,000 on the work. ‘‘Before we started the enclosure, we were at 85 decibels,’’ Webster said. ‘‘This morning, it was running, it was 65.7 [decibels] a 150 feet away from it.’’ He told the court the measurement was taken with a meter that he said is recognized by federal occupational-health standards.

Webster also described multiple operational changes intended to limit smoke and fires, including running sprinklers, adding water tanks and using filled totes as temporary barriers. He said the company has installed some sprinkler and water systems and asked that officials inspect the facility so they could see the mitigation steps firsthand.

Magistrates and residents questioned how frequently sprinklers are run, whether water-spraying equipment is visible from public vantage points and whether measures such as directional lighting could reduce light spill into adjacent yards. One magistrate suggested the plant test ‘‘directional lighting that they use on ball fields’’ to limit spill-over to neighbors.

Court leaders said they would continue to address residents’ concerns. The chair asked the complaining residents to provide a written letter of their concerns and said staff would follow up. Webster agreed to allow officials to inspect the site and to continue work on mitigation.

Next steps recorded at the meeting: the court accepted residents’ complaints for follow-up, requested copies of resident letters, and indicated staff would coordinate inspections and further conversations with the operator. No binding operating restrictions, zoning actions or enforcement penalties were adopted at the meeting.