Condon Container Site

I do NOT want a transfer site. We already have garbage service that comes to our property, which is very convenient! Besides, the bears would have a "hay-day"!! Danni Parcell

We do NOT need a trash transfer site in the Condon area! We already pay for trash pickup on a regular basis, and it works just fine. This is an active grizzly bear corridor and a site located in the Barber Creek area would only exacerbate the problem as well. This is an unnecessary project that is being sponsored with good intentions but will cause many more problems than it solves.
S/F, Robert E. Parcell

I personally would like to see the site located at the Condon Work Center instead of Barber Creek. This community has talked about something like this for years and it would help alleviate some of the bear problems in our community and thus make our community safer for people and bears. Also, include recycling.
Thanks
Steve Lamar

This proposed site is the only one in the Swan valley that is located less than 100 yards from the highway and local residents. In addition according to FWP this is the 3rd most traveled bear corridor in North America. We have never had bear problems with our garbage as we use a bear proof container. Injured bears from being hit on the highway are areal danger for local residents and our grandkids.
Disrespectful Campers will throw their trash over the locked fences causing even a greater morbidity rate to bears.
The smell of garbage when the wind blows from the south is going to blow directly into our residence.
Please consider at the very least the location of this terrible idea.
I like to jog, take our grandchildren and dogs up Barber creek Rd., now the bear encounter risk will be very high.
Thank you for reconsidering this site location.

This is the only site proposed in the Swan valley within 100 yards of highway and residence, along with this, FWP did a bear study in the recent past showing this exact spot as the 3rd largest bear crossing in North America. When you consider this and the fact that it works be located

I live off Barber Creek Rd and thus have the classical NIMBY arguments to make. I like walking and biking down Barber Creek Road, including the area along the proposed disposal site. With the increase of traffic comes subsequent increase of dust and the smells definitely wouldn’t get better. I have no data on this, but my hunch is that bears will naturally be attracted to a concentrated area of smells. The other concern is property values; again I don’t imagine a garbage disposal site down the road is beneficial for said values. I realize that being part of a community is always going to entail friction between individual and communal interests and as such could submit to a disposal site in the neighborhood, if overall the community would benefit. Alas, I doubt this proposition holds up.

It doesn’t make sense to centralize garbage disposal in such a decentralized valley. The Swan Valley has an excellent program with bear resistant garbage containers and I believe this system is very practical. Usually I put out the can the night before garbage pickup, sometimes the morning of if I’m aware of neighborhood bear activity. If we’re planning to be gone for the weekend, I can put out the garbage on Friday. It’s a very flexible and user-friendly system. The service hasn’t failed once in the 8 years we’ve used street side pickup, which includes trash collection on holidays (such as New Year’s Day). One could make the counter argument that one centralized location with a big heap of trash has less impact on wildlife (mostly bears) than many small depositories (hopefully bear resistant containers). But the assumption you’d have to make is that folks store their garbage in a responsible manner at their homes before running it to the disposal site. That’s a big assumption.

The costs go beyond the increase in property taxes. For one, it’d be a double expense for those who’ll continue to use curbside garbage pickup. But think about the costs in terms of lost time as well as the monetary costs of running a vehicle; my guess is that currently many folks who take their trash to a disposal site in Seeley Lake or Lake County combine it with a ‘town run’ to get groceries etc. This may prove impractical with the proposed site in Condon being only open two days a week and thus requiring a separate ‘dump run’. When Republic Services runs around they’re on the clock, generating revenue and thus adding to productivity; folks are making a living. When locals have to get out of their way to dispose of trash, it’s a de facto loss of productivity (both in time and money).

In my opinion, we don’t need a centralized disposal site and currently have plenty of garbage disposal options available. We can aim to keep building on existing programs to minimize bear conflicts.

I own 5 properties in Condon.
Do I get 5 NO votes? Please submit as such.

Unless you put a drive-through coffee/pie shop at the nice trash site house (with internet), I think this project is off the mark. The cost had me grab my glasses and do a double take.This all seems elaborate and unnecessary.

The mandatory funding for this project through my property taxes is a government overreach! I will bet it will go up the first year, so on and so forth, regardless if I use this site or not.

The property owners are the ones who have their garbage in check and either have service established or take it north or south, when they do their errands.

Republic Service is the only one that benefits by grabbing another Missoula County contract.

The residents here all know that this will have a huge impact on the wildlife, traffic, animal freeway crossings (with accidents) and more unwanted trash with folks dumping when the site is closed the other 5 days a week.

I am a 'no' for the trash site, but a 'yes' for the coffee/pie drive through....

We do not need a dump as there are to many Bear problems as it is.

Since Missoula considered using a location 1.5 miles into Lake County why not arrange it so Condon residents can use the existing Lake County transfer Station? It would be much cheaper than the current proposal. And if Lake County's transfer station doesn't need a building, septic, well and internet why does the proposed Condon transfer station need this?

Already a bear problem. There is one site already close and garbage service is available out here.

Currently have Republic Services pick up our garbage. Having a transfer site would be nice at times but the cost and hassle of having to take garbage to transfer site weekly would be a pain. Seeley transfer site isn’t that far for times have more than can fit in dumpster. I’d have to vote no. Jonathan Matthew

Absolutely not! A container site in Condon would be a bear attractant, and an unsightly blight in the valley. Not only would it increase traffic, but it would bring un-wanted litter to our roads. Trash pick-up is available to those who are unwilling to drive to one of the container sites currently available near by.

I am not for the building of this site. It is not necessary and the plan is too expensive for general tax payers to construct and maintain this elaborate container facility. Additionally, Property owners should not be hit with $300 per year for this as it is not a fair way to pay for it. In my opinion, Republic Services/Garbage is the only ones to benefit, maybe the bears and eagles dumpster diving….

I am perfectly happy to keep our trash/garbage in our bear resistant container inside our garage, which is a separate building from our house, and haul it to Ferndale on our way to town once per month. The tax increase is almost twice as much as we pay to use the facility in Lake County.
GPStaggs

to elaborate and expensive. apply some common sense, tone it down to better meet the needs of this small community. dumpsters and a fence would be fine.

I would be most interested in seeing the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the impact management plan and impact assessment & mitigation report for this and all proposed sights.

I am shocked at how much this disposal site will cost to build and set up for two days a week.

Additionally, the user fees look high especially if you aren't going to use the disposal site or don't have construction trash to dump. The $300.00 per year appears unfair to seasonal and fixed income folks, with no way to opt out.

Perhaps raising (my) property taxes (already increasing each year) is not the way to go.

This is simply not needed nor appropriate for this area. This discussion may be moot after the EIA is done/revealed.

I do appreciate being able to comment here. Thank you.

I vote NO

NO TO TRASH DISPOSAL SITE IN CONDON!
Not needed, and too expensive for residents and seasonal property owners.

We are opposed to this project. We are absolutely in love with this area, the people that live here, and the pristine nature this valley offers. Though we’re relatively new residents to Condon, we currently utilize both Seeley Lake transfer site and the Missoula station. We have incorporated the need to dispose of trash with a bi-weekly drive to Seeley Lake or Missoula to accomplish other tasks, i.e., healthcare appointments, grocery shopping, and other errands. As a former Program Manager, I monitor and measure projects by Cost, Schedule, and Performance parameters. As such, I offer the following observations:
Cost
• According to the Condon Container Site brief dated 19 April 2022, the initial estimated annual operating cost is $228,833, of which I’d assume Republic Services generated in 2018. In addition to this contract, I’d bet Republic Services would be awarded an additional contract to transfer the accumulated material on a weekly basis to the Missoula Station, thus further increasing their profits. It only stands to reason, as they’ve got the monopoly in providing Missoula County with garbage disposal services.
• If this estimate was completed in 2018 and will be revised in 2024, users can EXPECT a rate increase. The COVID-19 pandemic, political administrative policy changes, and social activist’s actions will be the excuse.
• The initial $300 annual fee becomes a rather disproportional financial burden being placed on individuals (single parents, widows, widowers, etc.). These members of the community typically have a single income source, as opposed to multiple income streams for joint households. If these households don’t meet the limit (10 cubic yards per year), they’ve paid more per load, per year. The question becomes, if a household generates just 1 cubic yard of trash in one year, would they still be charged $300?
• As a second order effect of the decision to emplace a container transfer site in Condon, the resale of residential homes could be impacted. Residential home purchases are a critical function of local area economic growth. Specifically, and relative to the purchasing processes is the disclosure of various factors that impact costs attributable to that property. The associated tax burden is one variable, so by adding $300 or an increased amount certainly impacts the potential resale of homes.
• Communities begin projects with the best intentions and for reasons that improve the local society. These projects ultimately grow and so does the funding requirement. Taxation is the typical financial tool used to collect revenue and pay expenses. I’ve never met a tax that didn’t grow, let alone stop when the initial requirement had been fulfilled. Are we placing yet another financial burden on our future generations?
• According to the CONDON CONTAINER SITE Brief dated 19 April 2022, slide 6 reflects various capital expenses, such as:
o The purchase of equipment (backhoe) for $100,000
o A building complete with a well, septic, electricity, and internet for $67,000 that will only be occupied two days a week. On a sidenote, the recently closed transfer site in Lake County, didn’t have a building or associated infrastructure. Why is it necessary here?
o These costs will be borne by the users over 20 years. Who’s responsible for maintenance, repair, etc of these assets?
Schedule
• If this proposed site is anticipated to be open for only two days per week, that limited timeframe doesn’t lend itself to be very “customer-centric”!
• The 2018 Swan Valley Regional Plan is cited as the basis for an evaluation of a trash transfer site. In fact, and as stated “6.8 Refuse Disposal: Household and commercial refuse disposal in the planning area is provided on a monthly fee basis by Republic Services. Collection is once per week, and Republic sends collection packers down most county roads. For a fee, some Swan residents opt to haul trash to Seeley Lake or to the Lake County Transfer site”. Further and as an “Action item” is stated “3. Explore the feasibility of a trash transfer station and community recycling program”. Rather disingenuous to state this is as the basis for such a project.
Performance
• According to the Environmental Protection Agency, in 2018 the average American generated approximately 4.9 lbs. of trash per person, per day or 1,095 lbs. per person, per year. Thus, a family of four generated approximately 4,380 lbs. per year. Using a cubic yard of “household” trash that weighs 175 lbs, a family of four generates 25 cubic yards of trash per year. According to the FAQs listed on missoulacountyvoice.com, every household and business would be limited to 10 cubic yards per year. Utilizing this data, two issues come to mind:
o A family of four (or more) would be forced to pay double what is being advertised as the cost due to their increased accumulation rate. Essentially, the family demographics reflect a younger couple and are the ones least able to afford this mandated “tax”, and
o The only users that could stay under a 10 cubic yard annual limit would be single occupant homes.
We are absolutely interested in supporting a viable solution(s) that remedies the situation of trash disposal, however not at the cost of placing undue financial burdens on residents, enriching and ensuring a long-term corporate precedence, and any destruction of this beautiful area.

Steve Davis
MSgt USMC

Liana Orsolini
RN PhD