Council hears municipal landfill idea, RFP interest; tables code‑compliance letter pending planning work

Green River — The council heard a presentation about possible municipal landfill or debris-handling options and debated a planned code-compliance letter to property owners before tabling the letter to let planning and zoning produce enforcement guidance.

Commissioner Kevin Jensen (introduced on the agenda) said the county’s TRT and road-department resources could be used to tend and bury commercial or construction debris and to help remove dilapidated structures if the city is interested. Jensen said the travel‑related TRT funds and a road crew presence in Green River could justify using county manpower for periodic cleanup, although he emphasized the idea was preliminary and would require formal agreements.

City staff reported the city issued an RFP for private operators to manage waste and construction/debris disposal; several responses and alternative approaches (a private collection pad with rail shipping out of town, an off-site pad four miles away, and private debris-landfill options farther down the line) have been discussed but cost details are not yet defined.

During public comment several residents cautioned against opening a permanent municipal landfill inside city limits because of long-term liability and ongoing operational requirements: “Dumps now are a forever thing, forever,” one resident said, warning that closures and maintenance create perpetual obligations. Another commenter urged the council to favor a collection-and-ship model over creating a local dump.

Separately, the council discussed a code-compliance letter drafted for Main Street and Broadway property owners that would notify corridor owners about expectations for cleanup and enforcement. Council and planning commissioners raised concerns about sending a broad “everyone gets a letter” notice without a clear rubric to distinguish minor maintenance (weeds, trash) from large dilapidation (unsafe structures). Several council members supported an initial informational notice followed by targeted violation letters; others argued the city should wait until planning and zoning completes a priority rubric to avoid perceived discrimination.

The council ultimately voted to table final action on the code-compliance letter until the planning-and-zoning work session produces a rubric that can be used as the basis for enforcement and follow-up notices. No formal decision was made on a municipal landfill; staff and commissioners said they will continue to evaluate RFP responses, private‑sector alternatives and the feasibility of agreements with county TRT and road crews.