The ball is in Bigfork’s court to find a viable site for a new green-box collection facility by the end of January.

In the meantime, the Flathead County Solid Waste Board decided Tuesday it will have a consulting firm revisit a 2009 strategic plan to take a second look at consolidating green-box sites.

The board has been moving forward with consolidation of some of the county’s green-box sites, based on recommendations in the strategic plan. That plan calls for closing both the Bigfork and Lakeside green-box sites and consolidating services at staffed and fenced locations at Somers and Creston.

When Bigfork residents voiced concerns earlier this year about the pending closure of the Bigfork site, the board agreed to give a study group six months to come up with alternatives, then extended the deadline to January 2014.

“It’s only fair we honor that time frame,” Landfill Operations Manager Jim Chilton said.

The study group came up with two options: either expand or improve the existing site on Montana 83 or lease adjacent land from Margaret Conley to develop a new site. Those alternatives aren’t workable, the board agreed, primarily because both the board and the county commissioners don’t want to lease land for a new site. Conley will lease land to the county on a long-term basis but has declined to sell any of the property.

“Those options are not acceptable,” board member Wayne Miller said. “They’re off the table.”

Landfill officials and the board are sticking by their assertion that the existing Bigfork site is too small to fence without buying additional property.

“Trying to find a [suitable] property is a problem,” board chairman Hank Olson acknowledged. “No one wants green boxes next to them. We’re not just picking on Bigfork.”

Olson reiterated the safety concerns at the Bigfork site. Illegal dumping of hazardous waste has been a chronic problem, according to Public Works Director Dave Prunty, along with illegal commercial use of the green boxes. Lake County residents also illegally dump their trash at the Bigfork facility, board members noted.

Commissioner Gary Krueger, the commission’s representative on the Solid Waste Board, said Bigfork has an opportunity to come up with a creative solution of its own, perhaps establishing its own collection site and contracting with the county to haul the refuse.

“They’re saying they’re willing to pay for additional services,” Krueger said about Bigfork citizens who testified they wouldn’t mind paying a little more to keep their green boxes. “If Bigfork had its own site we’d haul trash from it if they want to enter into a lease agreement with a landowner.

“There are still a number of options out there for Bigfork,” Krueger added.

Several Bigfork and Lakeside residents attended Tuesday’s board meeting to reiterate their concerns about the plan to close green-box sites in their communities. They don’t see curbside service from a private hauler as a viable option and they maintain closing the sites means a decrease in government service to their communities.

Bob Keenan, a member of the Bigfork study group, wondered if adequate outreach had been conducted with affected stakeholders prior to the adoption of the strategic plan.

Paul Mutascio, also a member of the study group, said the strategic plan is based on the assumption that consolidation is a foregone conclusion.

“There was no serious thought if that makes sense in a rural environment,” Mutascio said. “We do have skin in the game” because residents will pay more for private garbage collection.

“Closing sites is a major, major change,” he said. “It’s not a Bigfork issue; it’s a county issue.”

Susan Repa of Bigfork pointed out that not everyone can afford private hauling.

“This is what government does, guys,” she said about the county’s trash collection system. “Government helps people and most of our citizens are rural.”

In addition to taking another look at green-box consolidation outlined in the strategic plan, the board also agreed to have the consulting firm revisit the county’s role in recycling as officials come up with a plan for paring down the number of blue recycling bins. Faced with a sizable cost increase for Valley Recycling to continue to service the blue bins, the county is considering eliminating some of the recycling sites.

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by email at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com.