Lea este articulo en español aquí.
Over 20 residents spoke at the San Benito County Planning Commission special meeting Oct. 25, with the majority voicing opposition to the John Smith Landfill expansion project. The meeting was one of three the Planning Commission will host about the possible expansion before deciding whether to approve the environmental impact report.
The expansion would add 388 acres to the existing 95-acre landfill. While 17 speakers spoke against the expansion, county officials said that without the expansion residents would be left with a hefty bill.
At the start of the meeting, four commissioners shared they met privately with residents and others to discuss the expansion project.
Commissioner Robert Gibson had conversations with Paul Nelson, the landfill’s representative, as well as residents, staff and outside counsel, he told the meeting.
Commissioner Richard Way had conversations with mostly opponents of the project and said he was sought after only by opponents.
Commissioner Celeste Toledo-Bocanegra met and took a tour of the landfill with Elia Salinas on Sept. 27. On Oct. 5 she met with community members to receive input on the expansion, then met with Devon Pack, a former planning commissioner, on Oct. 6. On Oct. 17, Toledo-Bocanegra met with residents Maureen Nelson and Brigitte Baumaun-Thorp and county counsel.
Commissioner Robert Scagliotti met with Nelson several times, and with county counsel.
Appointed at the start of the meeting, new Commissioner Vincent Ringheden said he had not met with anyone.
Presentations from county staff, landfill staff and Waste Connections included:
- A project description
- Requested approvals
- An overview of the California Environmental Quality Act process
- Alternatives to the expansion
- Proposed and alternative truck routes, including noise and air quality
- A fair share road impact analysis
Alternatives to the expansion project include selecting a transfer station that would reduce the amount of waste going into the landfill. A county staff report said that a transfer station may mean higher prices for county residents and businesses.
According to the staff report, the advantages of expanding the landfill include rate stabilization for residents and businesses; the construction of a new re-use shop at the landfill entrance, which would allow residents to drop off or purchase household items with proceeds being donated to local charities. In addition, the San Benito County Board of Supervisors would have full control over the future of solid waste and gross revenue of up to 27%, based on tons received at the landfill, going to the county.
The report adds that the county would receive $69.4 million over the first 15 years of the expansion and $410.4 million over the entire life of the landfill.
Nelson, who presented the landfill’s report at the meeting, said the landfill took out-of-county waste because small, low-tonnage landfills don’t survive, as the cost per ton is too high. This reduces the customer base and leads to closure.
The proposed hauling routes aim to reduce the number of trucks using Fairview Road.
Stan Ketchum, the county’s principal planner said the current hauling route to the landfill travels south on Hwy 101, turning onto Shore Road and Fairview Road. One proposed route would have trucks use Hwy 25, turn onto Wright-McCloskey Road then turn onto Fairview Road. Another proposed route would have trucks travel on Hwy 25 and exit at Fairview Road and 25, turning left at the Gavilan College site to the landfill. A third proposed route would have trucks travel on Hwy 25 and exit on Best Road, then proceed to the landfill.
The environmental impact report analyzed the potential traffic noise and air quality each proposed route would create.
Measured in decibels (dBA), the current route has a 63 dBA. The first proposed route would increase noise from 63 to 64.1 dBA; the second route would increase from 67.7 to 68.2 dBA; the third from 51 to 58 dBA.
According to Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the recommended exposure limit for noise is 85 dBA over an eight-hour period; exposures above that level are considered a hazard.
For reference, a soft whisper measures at 40 dBA, urban residence measures at 50 dBA, classroom chatter measures at 70 dBA and a construction site measures at 100 dBA, OSHA states.
Paul Miller with RCH Group, a Sacramento-based consulting firm that provides environmental, project management and owner representation services, said even though the Best Road route would increase by 7 dBA, it’s because there is little traffic in that area and even with the increase, the noise level would not exceed the county transportation noise threshold of 60 dBA.
Since the hauling routes won’t change the amount of waste being transported, the South Fairview Road and Best Road routes would only alter vehicle miles, not the number of trips, Miller said.
The air quality emissions and greenhouse gas emissions would not change as a result of hauling route changes, Miller said.
Among 21 total speakers, 17 spoke against the expansion.
Hollister City Councilmember Rolan Resendiz held up a ‘Don’t Dump on San Benito’ sign at the lectern and said he was speaking as a resident, not a councilmember. He questioned the commissioners meeting with stakeholders, saying though they had the right to do so, it was in “poor taste.”
“You have to listen to the voice of the people. You have to protect their interests and not put profit over the public’s interest,” he said. “Do not dump on San Benito County. You should be working to preserve it. Shame on you.”
Sandy Patterson said she has driven semi-trucks and that she was concerned about the amount of tonnage that’ll be on the roads.
The proposed hauling routes “aren’t going to last 20 years,” Patterson said. “There’s too much tonnage. It’s ludicrous to put that much tonnage across these roads. They’re going to collapse.”
Annette Perez, a county resident, was one of a handful of residents who donned a yellow ‘Don’t Dump on San Benito County’ T-shirt.
“Waste Connections will be the big winner in our county and its people will suffer the consequences when we are left with almost 500 acres of decomposing waste,” Perez said.
Perez said when she took a tour of the landfill, Waste Connections staff showed her a liner that was intended to be used for 30 years, but the landfill expansion is supposed to last for 65 years.
“If you approve this massive expansion our kids will be the ones to suffer the consequences when the leachate gets into our groundwater,” she said. “We are a rural, agricultural community and the landfill was never intended to be a regional solution for five other counties that are depositing their trash in our landfill.”
Four speakers spoke in support of the project.
Tony LoBue, a resident of San Benito County, supports the effort to expand the landfill.
“We have a golden opportunity here to allow the private sector to pick up and take care of one of our infrastructure problems that we have,” LoBue said. He also mentioned the lack of infrastructure for water, sewer, roads or schools in the county. “The concept that we’ll be able to build another landfill is not realistic and the opposition here tonight is just a taste of what the opposition will be like in the future if we don’t have a landfill in San Benito County,” LoBue said.
Elia Salinas said the county has two options, approve the expansion or find a location for a transfer station, which would involve the county looking for the correct location, paying for another environment impact report and approving it.
“We need to think about the future,” Salinas said. “The future of where San Benito County is going to put their garbage. If you don’t allow for an expansion, you have maybe 11 to 12 years for local garbage.”
Alex Larson, who lives in Gilroy but has interest in bringing his business to the county, said it bothers him that there is angst in the audience and it’s “just people talking” and not referring to studies.
He said he thinks the landfill expansion is “something that’s needed, and with moving my business down here, I can see that we’re going to need the extra space also.”
After public comment, none of the commissioners had comments or questions.
The Planning Commission will host its second meeting on the landfill expansion Oct. 27 and will cover:
- Mitigation measures and conditions of approval
- Significant and unavoidable impacts, including greenhouse gasses and aesthetics
- Groundwater and water supply
- Economic analysis
- Public comments on the above topics
We need your help. Support local, nonprofit news! BenitoLink is a nonprofit news website that reports on San Benito County. Our team is committed to this community and providing essential, accurate information to our fellow residents. It is expensive to produce local news and community support is what keeps the news flowing. Please consider supporting BenitoLink, San Benito County’s public service, nonprofit news.
You must be logged in to post a comment.