Open debate on trash site shows support

A new Bigfork green-box site and improved recycling options attracted broad support at a community meeting last week.

The Flathead County Solid Waste Board sponsored the meeting in Bigfork to gauge public support for the new, proposed green box trash site near the intersection of Montana 35 and Montana 82.

Flathead County Public Works director David Prunty opened the meeting by telling the 80 attendees the three key things the county wanted to know:

Are citizens willing to take on the extra cost, knowing that if they don’t, the Bigfork green box site will be closed?

Are they willing to pay even more for recycling?

How many days a week and what hours does the public want the new site staffed, since that will affect the final tax assessment placed on landowners.

“The Solid Waste Board and commissioners want to know if this is what people want,” Prunty said. “Our job tonight is to listen to you.”

For about the next hour people were given three minutes each to voice their opinion. Most people supported the project and called for improved recycling options.

If the project is approved with improved recycling options, the estimated annual cost to landowners within the rural special improvement district would be $39.75. Without the recycling, it would be $26.69.

Prunty said the new tax fees wouldn’t be assessed until a year after the site has opened, when the county knows for sure what the cost of construction was and how much it costs to operate.

The proposed special fee area would encompass the Bigfork elementary and the Swan River school districts.

A handful of people expressed concerns about the location near CrossRoads Christian Fellowship, the Little Brown Church and the cemetery.

Ron Fetviet with CrossRoads said he felt the location would devalue the church property.

Marguerite Kaminski, who owns property east of the proposed site, also expressed concerns with the location.

“It’s going to be there and it’s going to affect my property,” she said. She said she supports the project but would like it to be somewhere else.

Prunty said the county has been looking for years for an alternate green-box site.

“Over the years we have just looked, because it’s one of the worst sites we have,” he said. “Just in the last six months there were two other properties where we spoke with folks.”

But neither of those properties worked out.

The proposed location, which the county would purchase from Tim Calaway and his father-in-law, Richard Whitaker, was the first real option, Prunty said.

“We never want garbage in our neighborhood, but we all make garbage and we have to have somewhere to put it,” Karin Henion said.

The county plans to make extra efforts to obscure the green-box site so it’s not an eyesore. In addition to fencing, there will be earthen berms with landscaping, which is something none of the other sites have, Prunty said.

Another concern voiced Tuesday was a desire for improved recycling.

The proposal has an option for improved recycling at the new site, with a cardboard compactor and two 30-cubic-yard recycling bins.

Stacey Schnebel, the Democratic candidate for Flathead County commissioner, said she frequents the green box site in Coram and had learned the county was only recycling one percent of its garbage. She wondered if improvements could start with Bigfork.

“Could we use the Bigfork site as an experiment?” she said.

The third major concern voiced at the meeting was safety, mostly regarding the existing sites at Somers and Creston, which Bigfork residents would have to use if a new green-box site isn’t built.

However, supporters of the new site, such as Community Foundation for a Better Bigfork president Paul Mutascio, say the location near the intersection will help slow down traffic, making the new site safer to turn into.

Overall, Prunty said he felt very positive about the meeting.

“I thought there was very good comments,” he said.

The Solid Waste Board will discuss the proposal at its next board meeting on Aug. 26 at 3 p.m. Board members will decide whether the want to recommend to county commissioners moving forward with the project.

 “I’m cautiously optimistic,” Mutascio said.