By DAVID BATES
Of the News-Register

The November ballot just got a little bigger in Yamhill County.

Clerk Jan Coleman said late Thursday that an initiative targeting Riverbend Landfill's planned expansion will go to voters this fall, setting the stage for a debate that will play out at the ballot box as well as in the land-use arena.

Almost 300 of the signatures presented by chief petitioners Ramsey McPhillips and Lillian Frease were ruled invalid. However, 2,005 survived several days of intense clerk's office scrutiny, giving the petitioners the margin they needed.

Two weeks before ballots are scheduled for mailing to voters, the county planning commission will hear testimony on a Riverbend plan to expand its existing facility onto 98 acres along Highway 18, nudging the landfill's footprint closer to the South Yamhill River. Petitioners are hoping to head that off with a measure barring the siting of new landfills or expansion of existing ones onto land lying within 2,000 feet of a flood plain.

The timing of the land-use hearing gives Riverbend a chance to make its case to government officials before petitioners get a chance to make their case with voters. However, the Oct. 2 hearing marks the beginning of the land-use process, not the end, so Riverbend will need to win victories on both fronts if it is to proceed.

Myriad factors could influence the duration of the planning commission hearing. And that will determine how soon the docket reaches the county commissioners, who will have the final say based on a hearing of their own.

It's entirely possible the process will stretch past the Nov. 4 election date.

Legal wrangling over ballot title wording left McPhillips and Frease with only one week to collect signatures.

However, they brought in paid circulators to assist their cadre of volunteers, and ended up collecting more than 2,800. With their validation rate running about 85 percent, that gave them plenty of cushion.

"I think it's terrific," Frease said. "We want to thank all the people who worked on the initiative or signed. We really appreciate it."

Riverbend Manager George Duvendack said the landfill would campaign to defeat the measure, which it regards as an end-run around a land-use process that is already very stringent in Oregon.

"We have some very substantial support for our expansion plans, people who are interested in helping us move forward," he said. "We believe that people should understand what's going on, and understand that if Riverbend isn't here, there's a real cost. People's rates are going to go up, and they will go up substantially."

If Riverbend is not allowed to expand, it will soon reach capacity, officials say. When that happens, they say, the county will not only have to find a new place to dispose of its garbage, probably at a much higher cost, but will also see a substantial flow of franchise fee revenue dry up.

This isn't the first time McPhillips, who farms adjacent acreage, has locked horns with Riverbend.

He got an anti-landfill initiative on the ballot in 1992. It passed handily, but was ultimately voided by the courts on constitutional grounds.

That enabled Texas-based Waste Management Inc., one of the world's largest disposal companies, to develop an operation that is only now beginning to run low on space.

The earlier measure packaged a similar flood plain provision with a provision prohibiting acceptance of trash from out-of-state sources. The courts said the latter interfered with interstate commerce, over which the constitution grants the federal government sole authority.

The next step in the process is for County Counsel John Gray to write an explanatory statement for the measure. Meanwhile, the opposing sides are expected to begin drafting arguments for the voters pamphlet.