PHOTO: Chris Tanner, owner of Elite Recycling and Disposal, protests the proposed increases to the Archuleta County landfill fees, at the June 7 Board of County Commissioners meeting.
Nearly all of the public testimony at the June 7 Town Council meeting — regarding the proposed RV park on Put Hill — came from adjacent neighbors, questioning the wisdom of putting more vehicles on Pike Drive…
…and the wisdom of unfettered growth in general, considering in particular the current crisis at the County landfill, and the current crisis with the Town’s sewage pipeline.
After the hearing concluded, and the Council approved the requested zoning change, the audience left the room, and missed the opportunity to hear about a different proposed development project near the bottom of Put Hill, that would increase the Town’s population by perhaps 1,400 people. Maybe 25 times more people, driving on the roads, dumping their trash, and flushing their toilets, than would likely be generated by the RV park just up the hill…
I mentioned on Friday that this ‘Pagosa Views’ project also appeared on the agenda of the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District on June 9, because the developers are seeking to be included into the PAWSD water district.
It’s a fairly rare occurrence that members of the public show up to testify at PAWSD board meetings, but at the June 9 meeting, three people came to express their opposition to the ‘Pagosa Views’ inclusion, based on the presumed impacts on the community’s infrastructure. A local realtor was also present to represent the developers’ point of view.
The PAWSD board took no action on the inclusion application, pending further study by the board.
Disclosure: I currently serve on the PAWSD board of directors, but the opinions expressed in this editorial are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the PAWSD board as a whole.
Also discussed at the PAWSD meeting was the projected cost of a replacement water treatment plant on Snowball Road. The current treatment plant, which serves downtown Pagosa Springs and certain properties south of downtown, has been slated for replacement for a number of years now. The projected cost has increased, however, from earlier estimates of around $20 million to the current estimate of $38 million.
Factors that are playing into the increased cost estimate: the price of materials, and the shortage of construction companies willing and able to take on infrastructure projects.
The PAWSD board was scheduled to consider a $25 million loan for the project, but considering the revised cost, took no action on the loan.
If the community is lucky, the new Snowball water treatment plant might qualify for federal infrastructure grants.
But let’s get back to the June 7 Archuleta Board of County Commissioners meeting, where a different infrastructure crisis was on the agenda.
E. Consideration And Approval Of Resolution 2022-50 Approving The Archuleta County Fee Schedule
Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-11-108, the Board of County Commissioners are charged with establishing fees charged for county services. This resolution updates certain fees. Suggested amendments or additions to the fee schedule are highlighted in yellow to ensure transparency in how the county represents changing fees.
The particular fees that attracted a packed audience for this BOCC meeting were increases to the County landfill fees charged to waste haulers and private citizens, which were, indeed, highlighted in yellow in the meeting packet.
The increased fees were defended, during the June 7 hearing, by County Road and Bridge manager Kevin Pogue, who took over the supervision of the Solid Waste Department a few weeks ago, following the rather sudden departure of the Solid Waste manager Matt Archuleta.
The County has been aware of the problems at the landfill for at least the past 20 years, but — perhaps because the facility is located nine miles south of town, and perhaps because no one really wants to think about our embarrassing garbage problem — we are now in what appears to be a crisis situation.
Are rate increases, paid by local residents and visitors, part of the solution?
Here’s a chart created by Salon.com that paints a certain picture about waste, in connection with a 2016 article called “America is a wasteland.” The US states colored in reddish tones have “above average” amounts of trash, per person, now sitting in landfills. The states colored in green have below-average amounts of garbage, per capita, in their landfills.
As we see, only two states — California and Nevada — have more trash per person, collected in landfills, than Colorado. Our state has collected about twice the amount per capita, compared to Texas, and about nine times the amount found in Idaho.
This overall picture is somewhat deceiving, however, because some states ship large amounts of garbage to landfills in neighboring states.
I’ve not heard anyone quantify the amount of trash sitting in the Archuleta County landfill, except in the sense that we have almost run out of space. The County staff is telling us that the landfill will reach its capacity in maybe four years. They are also telling us that it normally takes 8-10 years to get a new landfill approved by the state.
They staff is also reminding us that, when landfill rates get too high, and waste haulers have to increase their fees, people start taking their trash out into the forest and dumping it alongside the road. We have a lot of roadsides out in the forest, around here. That roadside garbage eventually has to be gathered, by someone. At a cost. And still needs to be put somewhere.
We are listening, here, to Heidi Tanner, representing Elite Recycling and Disposal at the June 7 BOCC meeting, reading from a letter her company sent out to customers:
“We believe that a price increase may be needed, but doubling the prices is a very steep increase, with little notice. We feel that Archuleta County Solid Waste Department is rushing this decision, and doing so without a thorough evaluation of the current state of the landfill’s operations.
“We would ask that a detailed plan be provided before rates are raised. We would ask, if you are going to raise your rates, where exactly is the additional money going to go? And that goes back to to a plan.
“Can we see a plan, that we can all look at, and evaluate?”