HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/19/2022 - RESOLUTION 2022-079 DIRECTING THE DESIGN AND ISSUA Agenda Item 8
Item # 8 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 19, 2022
City Council
STAFF
Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Sustainability Manager
Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Tyler Marr, Interim Deputy City Manager
Ted Hewitt, Legal
Judy Schmidt, Legal
SUBJECT
Resolution 2022-079 Directing the Design and Issuance of a Request for Proposals for a Residential Waste
Services Program Within the Boundaries of the City
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to consider a Resolution that outline s elements of a contracted residential waste
and recycling program that will be used to inform development and issuance of a Request for Proposals for a
service provider for that program. This action aligns with the Council Priority to explore a districted system for
garbage, recycling and compost for single family homes and multifamily residences of seven or fewer units.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
One of the adopted Council Priorities is to explore a districted system for garbage, recycling and compost for
single family homes. Districting is a sub-type of a contracted trash and recycling system. In order to ensure the
broadest possible conversation in the community, the term “contracting” has been used throughout this
process.
Past Council Feedback
April 12th Work Session
<https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=72&docid=3526466&dt=AGENDA+ITEM&doc_downloa
d_date=APR-12-2022&ITEM_NUMBER=03>
• Continue efforts to pursue contracting
• Continue to engage community members regarding this effort and ensure engagement includes the
benefits of trash contracting
• Engage community members to understand priorities related to contracting and service options and what
community concerns should be addressed via the process
• Refine peer community research to understand best practices in program and R equest for Proposal
development
• Present options for elements of a contracted system at the July 12 Council Work Session
Agenda Item 8
Item # 8 Page 2
July 12th Work Session
<https://citydocs.fcgov.com/?cmd=convert&vid=72&docid=3527096&dt=AGENDA+ITEM&doc_downloa
d_date=JUL-12-2022&ITEM_NUMBER=01>
• Draft a Resolution that directs staff to develop and issue an RFP that reflects the staff recommendations
and Council discussion at the July 12 work session
• Bring the Resolution for Council’s consideration at its July 19 meeting
Alignment with Adopted Goals and Plans
Contracting would enable actions essential to meeting Fort Collins’ adopted goal to produce zero waste by
2030. Fort Collins 2020 Community Diversion Rate goal was 75%, which was not achieved. In 2020, the
Residential Diversion rate was 29% and the Community Diversion Rate (combining residential, commercial
and industrial materials) was 52%. Increased composting is also a critical pat h to achieving our climate goals.
Contracting for trash and recycling aligns with several adopted plans and other Council priorities. Those plans
include:
• Our Climate Future https://ourcity.fcgov.com/ourclimatefuture Big Move 2: Zero Waste
Neighborhoods
• City Plan <https://www.fcgov.com/cityplan/files/city-plan.pdf?1577727132>, Principle ENV 5: Create a
Zero Waste System
• Strategic Plan <https://www.fcgov.com/citymanager/files/20-22326-2020-strategic-plan-
document_final.pdf>, Environmental Health 4.3 Zero Waste
Contracting for single family home trash, recycling and compost also supports the following adopted Council
Priorities:
• Advance Regionalism
• Accelerate Composting
• Improve Air Quality
• Enhanced Recycling Education
Recommended Elements to Include in the Residential Waste and Recycling Program
The chart below outlines the recommendation for the program elements of a contracted syst em that will inform
development of a Request for Proposals for Fort Collins. These elements are reflected in Resolution 2022 -079.
Further information about each of the elements and alternative options are included in Attachment 1.
Agenda Item 8
Item # 8 Page 3
Materials to be Collected and How
Material Recommendation Why
Yard
Trimmings
Service type: Request two
versions of pricing for optional
and bundled pricing to find
optimal balance of highest
diversion for lowest price.
Service frequency: Weekly
collection from April - Nov
Requesting pricing for both service types allows for
understanding of pricing impacts for both options to make
informed decision.
Optional service type allows choice for those who don’t
want / need the service; residents would be signed up for
the service automatically, but could decline the service and
not have to pay for it.
Bundled service type is generally lowest price for service,
but doesn’t allow households to lower their bill if they
decline yard trimmings service.
Bulky
Waste
(Items too
large to fit
in cart)
Request two versions of bulky
waste pricing: a-la-carte (not
in base trash charge) and 2
items / year included in base
trash charge
Allows for understanding of pricing impacts for different
options to make informed decision.
Balances diversion focus with equity.
Provides options for people who don’t have trucks/trailers .
Trash Volume-based pricing (Price
based on size of cart, also
known as Pay-As-You-Throw
(PAYT))
Current System
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-recommended
best practice for waste reduction
Include extra low trash generator rate (<32 gal / wk).
Recycling Pricing model: Bundled with
trash service for no additional
charge. Service frequency:
Request pricing for weekly
and every-other-week service
Current System
EPA-recommended best practice for increased recycling.
Can evaluate pricing to determine whether to keep every
other week or shift to weekly service (which would likely
increase recycling)
Food
Scraps
Do not include in this contract Consider adding when infrastructure that can process food
scraps is within a reasonable haul distance from Fort
Collins (currently pursuing through regional partnership).
System Design
Element Recommendation Why
Home Owner’s
Associations (HOAs)
with current contracts
for trash and recycling
service
Allow exemption from City
contract as long as
current contract meets all
applicable requirements,
including Pay-As-You-
Throw requirements.
Can join City contract if
they prefer
Allows existing contracts to remain in place since
these neighborhoods are already achieving the
goals of a contracted system.
Carts Purchase: Hauler
purchases carts, which
become City property at
Allows for cart purchase without the opportunity
cost of using City funds.
Agenda Item 8
Item # 8 Page 4
System Design
Element Recommendation Why
the end of the contract.
.
Still allows for leveraging of grant funds to offset
cost to residents.
Cost of carts (after grant offset) repaid to hauler
over contract via fee in monthly bills.
Cart purchase and maintenance already part of
service cost in current system.
Cart maintenance:
Provided by hauler and
funded in trash rate on
resident bills.
Cart maintenance already a proficiency of hauler.
After initial purchase, maintenance fee funds
replacement of broken carts. Carts remain at
residences when next contract begins.
Ownership and logo:
Hauler-owned carts with
City logo at households.
Cart ownership transfer to
City at end of contract.
Provides level playing field for next contract
process.
Creates community ownership of program.
Opt-Out Fee Equivalent to smallest
trash cart service cost
Opt-out option permitted by State law and required
to maximize benefits of a contracted system.
This level of fee common among peer
communities.
Discourages opt-outs, which erode the benefits of
the contracted system.
Districts One district Results in lowest price.
Leverage for most environmental benefits.
See more details about multiple district scenario
considerations. (Attachment 13)
Flow Control Direct trash to Larimer
County Landfill
Supports Regional Wasteshed goals and a public
landfill option.
Provides level playing field for hauler proposals.
Customer Service Conducted by hauler;
Require Fort Collins-
focused staff
Aligns with hauler conducted billing.
Ensures most of calls answered by staff familiar
with Fort Collins.
Allow roll-over to national customer service staff to
allow for more customer service hours.
Admin Fee Include a fee to fund City
role in contract
management
Best practice among peer communities.
City staff time investment will depend on final
Agenda Item 8
Item # 8 Page 5
System Design
Element Recommendation Why
contract elements; will be clarified prior to contract
adoption.
Alley Service Included Haulers provide service in alleys where curbside
service is not an option.
Haulers currently provide this service for no
charge.
Valet Service Included Haulers take carts from home down to curb for
servicing and return the carts to the home for
disabled residents.
Haulers currently provide this service for no
charge.
Billing Conducted by hauler City unable to conduct billing at this time. May
consider City billing in next contract.
Multi-family &
Commercial Dumpster
Pricing
Request pricing from
haulers
Would provide a fixed price for dumpster service
for multi-family or commercial customers who
would like to opt-in to the program.
Has been successful in peer communities.
Impacts and Benefits of a Contracted System, Pricing Context
The impacts and benefits of a contracted system as well as current pricing in Fort Collins compared with other
peer community systems are included in the agenda item summary from the July 12 work session.
(Attachment 6)
NEXT STEPS
If Resolution 2022-079 is adopted, staff will:
• Finalize a Request for Proposals incorporating the policy feedback from Councilmembers
• Issue the Request for Proposals in late July or early August and allow time for haulers to prepare
proposals
• Conduct a competitive purchasing process review of hauler proposals
• If a satisfactory contract for services can be negotiated, develop proposed municipal code change s
necessary to enact a contracted residential collection program and present those proposed changes for
City Council consideration in late 2022 or early 2023 or, if no proposal is sufficient or satisfactory, report
that outcome to the City Council by April 15, 2023.
Contracted service would be anticipated to start 12-18 months after contract is finalized to account for enough
time to purchase carts and trucks given global supply chain challenges and also allow preparation time for
community outreach, cart sign-up and cart distribution.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
The Resolution under consideration does not impact City finances.
The residential waste and recycling program would be funded by user fees paid directly to the hauler. The
hauler would provide the funding for equipment necessary to offer the service. The City role in managing the
program would be reimbursed through an administrative fee on hauling bills.
Agenda Item 8
Item # 8 Page 6
Program Element Entity
Carts purchase Hauler, reimbursed over life of contract from user fees
City contract management Funded from administrative fee within user fees
Billing Hauler
Customer Service Hauler
Savings on Street Maintenance City
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
• Economic Advisory Board: Supports a single provider contracted system with bundled yard waste
collection if economically feasible; recommends taking action to reduce the number of trucks in
neighborhoods now. (Attachment 3)
• Natural Resources Advisory Board: Supports a single-hauler contracted system with focus on diversion
options and advocates for lower and zero-emission vehicles. (Attachment 5)
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Staff has engaged with community members, stakeholders, boards and commissions, and haulers throughout
this project. (Attachment 9)
ATTACHMENTS
1. Chart of All Element Options in Contracted System (PDF)
2. Economic Advisory Board Recommendation (PDF)
3. Economic Advisory Board Minutes (PDF)
4. Natural Resources Advisory Board Minutes (PDF)
5. Natural Resources Advisory Board Recommendation (PDF)
6. July 12 Work Session Agenda Item Summary (PDF)
7. The Recycling Partnership Letter of Support (PDF)
8. Fort Collins Pricing Study for Trash July 2022 (PDF)
9. Contracting Engagement Summary (PDF)
10. Curbside Contracting Engagement Report (PDF)
11. Refuse Vehicle Emission Noise Safety Analysis June 2 022 (PDF)
12. Refuse Vehicle Street Maintenance Impact Study (PDF)
13. Multiple District Considerations (PDF)
14. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
Materials to be Collected and How
Material Recommendation All Options Notes
Yard Trimmings
Service type:
Request two versions of pricing
for opt-out and bundled pricing to
find optimal balance of highest
diversion for lowest price
Service frequency:
Weekly collection from April –
Nov
Opt-in, opt-out, or bundled
Weekly or bi-weekly; seasonal or year-
round
•Opt-in requires resident request service and pay a
separate fee for it
o Allows choice; highest cost for service; lowest
participation and lowest diversion
•Opt-out automatically enrolls households in the
service but they can choose to remove the service
and lower their monthly bill
o Allows choice; medium cost for service; medium
participation; medium diversion
•Bundled includes the service in every household’s
bill. Households don’t have to use the service but
refusing the service won’t decrease their bill.
o Lowest cost for service; highest participation;
highest diversion; some households pay for
service but don’t want it or use it
•Weekly increases amount composted, prevents
carts from getting to heavy, prevents odor, and is
higher cost than every other week service
•Haulers prefer weekly b/c grass trimmings get heavy
and stinky if in carts for two weeks
•Seasonal collection common for yard trimmings only
programs
Bulky Waste
(Items too large
to fit in curbside
cart)
Request two versions of bulky
waste pricing:
a-la-carte (not in base trash
charge) and
2 items / year included in base
trash charge
Collection by request:
•A-la-carte pricing (not in base
trash charge)
•Bundled pricing (2 items / year
included in base trash charge)
Collection event: one or two days / year
where all households place bulky items
out for collection
•Bulky item collection important for residents who don’t
have a truck / trailer to dispose of large items
•Bulky item collection price identified as a barrier to low-
income community members’ ability to dispose of
unwanted items
•Unlimited bulky item collection / collection events tend to
increase wasting of items that could be reused
•Goal is to balance collection options for resident needs
while not incentivizing wasting reusable items
ATTACHMENT 1
Trash Volume-based pricing
(Price based on size of cart, also
known as Pay-As-You-Throw
(PAYT))
Volume-based or not volume-based
pricing • Is our current system
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-recommended
best practice for waste reduction
• Studies show volume-based pricing with 80%+ price
differential between cart sizes optimizes waste reduction
• Recommend including an extra-low trash generator rate
(<32 gal / wk)
Recycling Pricing model:
Bundled with trash service for no
additional charge
Service frequency:
Request pricing for weekly and
every-other-week service
Recycling bundled for no separate fee or
by request for a fee
Collection can take place every other
week or every week
• Bundled is our current system
• Bundled recycling is best practice for increased recycling
• Every other week collection
o Most common across the U.S.
o Balances service cost with diversion
• Weekly recycling
o Increase in cardboard from online shopping and more
working from home has increased recycling needs at
homes
o Under evaluation in more communities
Being considered now in Denver
Food Scraps Do not include in this contract
Consider when infrastructure that
can process food scraps is within
a reasonable haul distance from
Fort Collins
Food scraps collection an optional service
from a separate provider
Add food scraps in yard trimmings cart
• Two small companies currently provide curbside food
scraps collection for a separate fee
• When infrastructure to process food scraps is in
reasonable haul distance, many communities include food
scraps in yard trimmings cart and shift to year-round
collection
System Design
Element Recommendation All Options Notes
Home Owner’s
Associations
(HOAs)
with current
contracts for trash
and recycling
service
Allow exemption from City
contract as long as current
contract meets Pay-As-You-
Throw (PAYT) requirements
Allow HOAs with contracts
meeting PAYT requirements to
be exempt from City contract
(and can opt in if they desire)
Require HOAs with contracts to
join the City contract as of a set
date or pay an ongoing opt-out
fee
• HOAs with contracts meeting the City’s PAYT requirements already
achieve the goals of a contracted system
• HOA contracts with haulers often incur high fees to end contract
prematurely
• Requiring HOAs to join the City contract can create significant
resident dissent without adding significant additional benefit
• Approximately 30% of Fort Collins households are in HOAs with
contracts
ATTACHMENT 1
Carts Purchase:
Hauler purchases carts, which
become City property at the end
of the contract
Cart maintenance and
replacement:
Provided by hauler, funded in
trash rate on resident bills
Carts:
City-owned carts with City logo at
households
Carts can be purchased by City
or by the hauler (and can
become City property at the
end of the contract either way)
In either scenario, staff has
secured one grant and
continues to seek additional
grant funding to offset part of
the cost
Cart cost repaid over length of
contract by fee on resident bills
Grant-funded portion would not
have to be repaid by residents
Cart maintenance provided by
hauler or City
Hauler-owned, hauler-logo
carts that must be delivered at
beginning of contract and
removed at end of contract
City-owned carts with City logo
that remain at households when
contracted hauler changes
• City purchased
o Likely lowest cost option for residents
o Would come at opportunity cost for City organization as those
funds could not be used for other purposes until repaid
• Hauler purchased
o City does not have to provide up front funding
o Hauler likely charges financing fee for carts, so is likely higher
cost to residents
o Is a “lease to purchase” where City owns carts at end of
contract
• Grant funding
o Would allow for grant funding to offset part of cart cost no
matter who purchases carts
o Have secured $750k grant for recycling carts from Recycling
Partnership
o Have applied for $3.75M grant for yard trimmings carts from
Front Range Waste Diversion (FRWD) grant
• Cart maintenance already a proficiency of hauler
• After initial purchase, maintenance fee funds replacement of broken
carts
o Generally assume 10% cart replacement / year
o Anticipated lifespan of carts is 10+ years
• Delivering carts to and picking carts up from homes is expensive –
decreasing the times this happens saves residents money
• If hauler-owned carts are at homes, that hauler would have a
significant advantage in next contract proposal round (as they
already own the carts and the carts are already delivered to homes)
• Hauler-logo carts affiliate program with hauler more than community
• City-owned, City-logo carts can remain at households when
contracts change over, which provides a level playing field for all
haulers submitting proposals in the next contract round
ATTACHMENT 1
Opt-Out Fee Equivalent to smallest trash cart
service cost
Pricing determined by
community.
Peer communities have opt-out
rates as low as $4/mo; most set
fee equal to smallest trash cart
service cost
• Opt-out option permitted by State law and required to maximize
benefits of a contracted system
• Low opt-out fees results in high level of opt-outs, which can
undermine benefits of contract
o Community with $4 / mo opt-out fee has opt-out rate of 30%+ of
households
• Opt-out fee equal to smallest trash cart service incentivizes program
participation while not overly penalizing opt-out customers.
o Communities with this opt-out fee see 1-5% opt-out rate, which
retains benefits of contracted system
Districts One district Contract with one hauler per
district.
Can choose to have one or
more districts in the community.
• Multiple districts could result in different prices for same service in
different areas of community
• Single district optimizes environmental benefits and lowest prices
• All Colorado communities with contracts have a single district
• Colorado communities who have explored multiple districts have not
implemented contracts
• For more details, see Attachment 3: Multiple District Considerations
Flow Control Direct trash to Larimer County
Landfill
Can direct trash to Larimer
County landfill (enact flow
control)
or leave trash destination up to
hauler (no flow control)
• Directing trash to Larimer County landfill supports Regional
Wasteshed goals and a public landfill option by providing a
predictable and dedicated amount of material
• Directing trash to Larimer County provides level playing field for
hauler proposals because some haulers own landfills nearby Fort
Collins and can leverage lower landfill tip fees to impact price
offerings
Customer Service Conducted by hauler;
Require dedicated Fort Collins-
focused staff
Can be provided by the City
or the contracted hauler
or each entity provide distinct
customer service elements
• Hauler conducting customer service aligns with hauler conducting
billing
• Requesting Fort Collins-dedicated staff from hauler helps ensure
most of calls answered by staff familiar with Fort Collins; allow roll-
over to national customer service staff to allow for more customer
service hours
• City will need to accept complaints about service
• Cities often create dedicated phone number that remains consistent
no matter which company is providing service for education
consistency
ATTACHMENT 1
Admin Fee Include a fee to fund City role in
contract management
City can fund City costs to
implement and manage
contract from City funds or from
a fee charged in the base trash
rate
• Peer communities fund City staff investments through fee in base
trash rate
• Amount of fee proportional to services provided by City (e.g., higher
if City were to provide billing)
• City staff time investment will depend on final contract elements; will
be clarified prior to contract adoption
Alley Service Included Can provide service in alleys for
homes with alleys (and where
curbside service is not an
option) for no extra charge or
for a separate fee
or require all households to
bring carts to the curb
regardless of alleys
• Alleys are a particular challenge for haulers as they are often more
narrow and less maintained than residential streets. Alley service
often requires specialized (smaller) trucks and servicing bins takes
longer, thus is a more expensive form of service.
• The more alley service in a community, the higher the cost of service
for all residents, unless alley residents pay a higher rate
• Fort Collins does not have a significant number of alleys compared
with other communities
Valet Service Included Can provide or not; can charge
a separate fee or not
(Valet service is when haulers
take carts from a home down to
curb for servicing and return the
carts to the home for disabled
residents)
• All haulers currently servicing Fort Collins provide valet service for
disabled residents upon request for no additional charge
• Valet service supports equitable access to services
• Providing the service for no charge prevents penalizing residents for
having a disability
Billing Conducted by hauler Can be provided by the City or
the contracted hauler
• City unable to conduct billing at in the near future
• May consider City billing in next contract
• Among peer communities, common for City to provide billing in Utility
bill
o Often less expensive for residents
o Makes it easier for City to determine if the hauler is meeting
the contract requirement and to enforce them
Multi-family &
Commercial
Dumpster Pricing
Request pricing from haulers Can choose to include this
option in hauler proposals or
not
• Would provide a fixed price for dumpster service for multi-family or
commercial customers who would like to opt in to the program
• Has been successful in peer communities
• Leverages the benefits of the contracted system for multi-family or
commercial customers if they choose to opt in
ATTACHMENT 1
Economic Health Office
300 LaPorte Avenue
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6505
970.224.6107 – fax
fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 27th, 2022
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
CC: Kelly DiMartino, Interim City Manager;
Josh Birks, Economic Health and Redevelopment Director
FROM: Renee Walkup, Chair – Economic Advisory Board;
John Parks, Vice-Chair – Economic Advisory Board; and
Members, Economic Advisory Board for 2022
RE: SUPPORTING A SINGLE CONTRACTED PROVIDER RESIDENTIAL
WASTE & RECYCLING SYSTEM
On April 20th and June 15th, 2022 the Economic Advisory Board received presentations from city
staff about the proposed residential contracting proposal for waste and recycling service
providers. We were pleased by the findings of the city staff about the advantages of this
proposed system. As community members, we have been concerned and somewhat perplexed
by the plurality of trash and recycling hauler services that frequent our neighborhoods. We also
recognize that making real progress on the road to Zero Waste is one of the priorities of
Council. Reducing the number of trash haulers has been proposed several times before, and
now is the time to implement it.
Therefore, the members of the Fort Collins Economic Advisory Board support the proposal of
adopting a single provider contracted residential waste and recycling system for the
following reasons:
1.The city would save roughly $600,000 in annual road repairs.
2.It would reduce the GHG emissions from redundant waste and recycling trucks.
3.The city could control the rates that the provider charges customers.
4.Increased road and pedestrian safety from redundant trucks.
5.Decreased noise from redundant trucks.
6.There is the potential for more feedback from the provider to customers in terms of
recycling protocols to avoid contamination.
Additionally, the contracted system bundled with yard waste has the additional benefits of
increasing residential participation in the yard waste program dramatically, which would divert a
considerable amount of waste as well as reduce waste related emissions. If bundling the yard
waste in the contracted system is found to be economically feasible, we would also recommend
the inclusion of this option.
Adopting the single provider contracted residential waste and recycling system bundled with
yard waste would help to attain the following city goals:
•2020 Strategic goal: Environmental Health 4.3
o Enhance efforts to achieve 2030 zero waste goals
•2021 Our Climate Future Big Move 2: Zero Waste Neighborhoods
ATTACHMENT 2
ECONOMIC ADVISORY COMMISSION
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
June 15, 2022 4:00 – 6:00 pm
Via Zoom
06 /15 /22 – MINUTES Page 1
*** MINUTES ABBREVIATED TO ONLY INCLUDE ITEMS RELATED TO TRASH AND
RECYCLING CONTRACTING CONVERSATION*****
1.CALL TO ORDER
4:07 pm
2.ROLL CALL
•List of Board Members Present
o Renee Walkup
o Blake Naughton
o Aric Light
o Mistene Nugent
o John Parks
o Thierry Dossou
•List of Board Members Absent – Excused or Unexcused, if no contact with Chair
has been made.
o Brauilo Rajoas
o Denny Coleman
o Jeff Havens
•List of Staff Members Present
o Shannon Hein, Acting Staff Liaison, Economic Sustainability
o Kellie Falbo, Executive Director, Sustainable Living Association
o Dustin Spears, Program Assistant, Sustainable Living Association
o Pete Iengo, Community Engagement, Utilities
o Javier Echeverria Diaz, Sr Analyst, Finance
o Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Sr Project Manager, City Manager’s Office
3.NEW BUSINESS
ATTACHMENT 3
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 2
• Single Family Trash, Recycling, and Compost Contracting
− Presentation from Sylvia Tatman-Burruss.
− This fits into our adopted plans and it is a Council priority. It is part of Our
Climate Future and the big move zero waste neighborhoods that creates a
zero-waste system in the City plans and part of the City Strategic plan.
− There are multiple types of systems. Pure open markets do not have
regulations. Open market with licensing, which is how the City is currently
operating. It requires haulers to be licensed with the City. In Fort Collins, we
currently require recycling to be bundled with trash services. There are some
things that can be required under a licensed system but essentially still open
because the haulers can operate on the same street. HOAs can opt into a
contract where their trash is paid through their HOA dues.
− The City is looking at a contracted system. Multiple municipalities have gone
to this type of system. It is done through a competitive RFP process. It could
be for multiple haulers within a districted system or one hauler. A lot of
communities our size go with one hauler. This is different from a municipal
hauling system. Loveland is the closest community that has municipal
hauling.
− Fewer trucks in the neighborhoods is one of the elements that is specifically
addressed by contracting. Neighborhood HOAs that contract would likely stay
the same.
− Q (Mistene) Will you allow the HOA’s to continue as they are?
− A (Sylvia) That will be a conversation with Council. That is one option.
It is one we are leaning towards because a lot of peer communities do
that, and it can be contentious for neighborhoods that want to stay with
their hauler that already have a contract.
− Q (Mistene) So haulers with HOA contracts would be grandfathered
in?
− A (Sylvia) They could be. We will discuss it with council. They could
continue their current contract. We could require them to come onto
the City’s contract once theirs is over, so they won’t be penalized for
breaking a contract. We could essentially allow them to be
grandfathered in and just stay with their contract. We would hope that
we could incentivize them into the City’s contract by the economy of
scale and that it would be cheaper for them to come on with the City.
− Q (Renee) Would the HOA just pay the City?
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 3
− A (Sylvia) It could be individuals, or we could work with the hauler.
That is something we would need to figure out depending on which
way Council wants to go.
− Presentation There could also be predictable pricing. There probably would
be escalations or ways they could increase pricing for things like gas or
changes we don’t have control over, but it would be more predictable. Equity
and customer service is something that would also be addressed with a
contract. There could be a low-income program. We could also require a
valet service for people who qualify for the driver to go get their bin and bring
it to the curb and then back.
− The contract would only apply to single family homes, duplexes, townhomes,
condos, and multifamily complexes of 7 units or fewer. That is a State law
requirement that it cannot apply to multifamily complexes of 8 of more,
businesses, construction sites or industrial. We might be able to offer it to
them if they want to opt in. Contracts may apply to HOAs that are contracted
for trash and recycling services now.
− Q (Mistene) What is the rationale for the exclusions.
− A (Sylvia) That is State law that it can only apply to single family
homes. We could offer it to them if they want it. Haulers get a lot of
revenue from those, so I think the State wants to protect those
industries.
− Q (Mistene) Do you have any information on what year that law was
passed?
− A (Sylvia) I am sure Caroline does but that is something I can find out
for you. I am not sure if trash contracting was always allowed. I think
that has changed to allow municipalities to do what we are trying to do.
I am not sure on the history of it.
− Presentation We did studies for the waste truck impacts in terms of road
maintenance, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and safety. Our current
system is costing the maintenance fund and community around one million
dollars. A hauler truck is about the equivalent of 1200 cars on a street if they
are at legal weight.
− Q (Renee) So one trip is 1200 cars?
− A (Sylvia) Yes so you can imagine if there are three haulers on one
street picking up trash, recycling, and maybe yard waste every week,
that is where the impact is coming from. These are some general
numbers from the impacts on our roads. We cold get more specific but
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 4
if you were to move up to more haulers, that could increase. If we go
with one hauler in the contracted system, we will get to a much smaller
number around $300k instead.
− Comment (Renee) I didn’t see these numbers on the slide and would
recommend you relay that information to Council in writing.
− Comment (Sylvia) There is a slide coming up with those numbers.
− Comment (Renee) That is what is costing us money, it’s the damage
on the streets.
− Presentation We also did a pricing study, we know that our neighbor could
be paying a different price for the same service with the same hauler. We
collected bills from employees of the City and then the community. We are
still doing the data but the range for the small cart is $10-16/month. We
learned that the $10 is from the new hauler Mountain High and we think they
have that price set to start trying to get in the market share, but they would
likely raise that to be more average. The $16 is from our mor established
haulers.
− Q (Mistene) So the smallest size is the ones you buy at Home Depot, not
the ones the haulers provide?
− A (Sylvia) 32 Gallons is the smallest size you see. 96 gallons is the
big size that you see that the recycling bins also are.
− Presentation The $23-36/month is for the mid-size and the larger size is
$20-45/month. Now most people pay these as a quarterly payment. Yard
waste is only offered by one hauler and that is $13-18/month.
− Q (John) Did you get a decent number of bills?
− A (Sylvia) We did get a decent number. We received a lot from
employees and then the public. I don’t know the exact number, but it
does give us a good range and understanding for the RFP.
− Presentation These numbers are going to be compared to a single hauler
with diesel trucks. Annual maintenance costs would save us ore than $600K.
Green house gasses would decrease by 1200 for MTCO2e. A benefit to the
contracted system is the ability to require things like compressed natural gas
or electric vehicles, which would then save more. The large nationally owned
haulers are better able to do that.
− Q (Mistene) Is there a concern at the City level if they are a “small guy”?
− A (Sylvia) It is interesting timing for this process because pretty much
all the haulers that operate now are nationally owned. Even the new
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 5
hauler is technically not locally owned. Their company is run out of
Kansas City. There isn’t necessarily a small guy.
− Q (Renee) What about Ram?
− A (Sylvia) I don’t believe they are, but Caroline would know. I believe
part of the timing is that there are not longer any of those small local
haulers. They are accustomed to these RFPs and contracted systems.
I think last time Gallegos was struggling with this because they were a
local hauler, but they were bought out by Republic.
− Presentation We are also looking at elements like noise reduction and even
more if we require electric. Safety increases in neighborhoods due to less
trucks. Again, there is the figure of one truck at the normal allowance of legal
weight is equivalent to 1,250 cars. A lot of the trucks weight a lot higher than
that.
− Comment (Renee) If you multiple that by three for the waste, recycling and
possible yard waste over two hours that is on one street…
− Q (John) and they must go down both sides of the street. Is 1,250 when the
truck is full or at its average weight?
− A (Sylvia) I would need to look but believe it is average, not full, or
empty. It also depends on the cars as well, are you looking at a smart
car or truck? I think it is the average overall.
− Comment (John) It would be nice to have that for Council.
− Comment (Sylvia) We do have the reports from a third-party
company in the packets for them. There would probably still be those
three trucks going down the street every week each side because of
the three different services but you won’t have to multiple that by three
or four haulers. They currently must go down the street even if there is
one person being serviced.
− Q (Renee) I know this portion has not been presented to Council yet, but
have you gotten any idea as to appetite on Council’s idea?
− A (Sylvia) Because it is a priority of theirs, they have said we want to
do trash contracting. This is not a staff led effort, it is Council telling us
to do it. That is part of the messaging in the community too as to why
we are doing it now. They see the benefit of it and want to get it done
within their term and to get it done right.
− Presentation Some other potential benefits include a yard waste opt in. We
get about 15% of residential yard waste that is already being diverted. If we
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 6
do a spring and fall pick up, assuming 50-60% of residential waste could be
diverted we would see a 5-6% reduction in waste emission. If it is bundled,
which is what we are recommending, assuming 85-90% could be diverted,
we could see a 9-10% reduction in waste emissions. There is not a lot of
people getting yard waste.
− Comment (John) It would be nice to have the bundled option because I have
neighbors who want it but don’t want to spend the extra money.
− Comment (Sylvia) We would hope that with the economies of scale,
for the RFP process and it being City wide, you would get the price
reduction in trash services so the yard waste could then be added at a
lower rate than what people are currently paying.
− Presentation Food scraps is a future program as we don’t have the
infrastructure for large scale composing in the region. I think Boulder might
have the ability but that is too far. It is in the works and once it comes online,
we could include it in the next contract as part of the service.
− Q (Renee) what kind of composting, only certain foods?
− A (Sylvia) It would depend on the facility and how they break it down.
In communities in Seattle, you can put everything in there and if it
ends up in your trash you can be fined. That is not something we could
offer this round, but we could get 75% effectiveness we could see an
8% reduction in waste emissions if everyone has the option to divert
their food scraps.
− Presentation With a contracted system you can have a base and then work
off it as other services become available like electric vehicles and food
scraps. It would also help air quality because of the methane that comes off
it.
− Comment (John) Methane from landfills is a concern, but in our arid climate
it is not as big as in a humid climate. The methanogens need an anerobic
environment to do their thing, which is when they are wet. It makes me
wonder just thinking about total volume waste diversion might be another
useful metric.
− Comment (Sylvia) We threw it out there since it is not something we can do
right now but that is something we could say as a future savings benefit.
− Comment (Mistene) I don’t see anything on recycling specifically.
− Comment (Sylvia) That is because we already require it.
− Q (Mistene) Does anyone have any feel for recycling from a market
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 7
standpoint on if its really happening right now?
− A (Sylvia) That would be a great question for Caroline as she has a
better understanding of how much is getting recycled and where.
− Comment (Mistene) We were at Taste of Fort Collins and there were
not recycling bins, so my guess is it is not happening.
− Comment (John) There was a recent study in the Guardian that said
in the US 5% of plastics are getting recycled. There was also a recent
bill passed at the state level that the producers are responsible for
recycling. I am not sure how that will play into the full question, but it
will take the burden off the municipalities and put it on the producers.
− Comment (Renee) My husband volunteers at the recycling center and
he reports numbers about it. He was telling me how cardboard is
profitable, and plastic is not. He knew some of the numbers of what
they get back vs what is costing them. Most of it costs the City money,
but some of it doesn’t. I don’t know the numbers, but they are
available.
− Comment (Mistene) It also changes with the market right now. I used
to work at a paper shredding company and sometimes they would
make more money recycling the paper but sometimes they didn’t, and
it would go to the trash.
− Comment (Renee) The critical thing is where is the contamination?
Let’s say its cardboard and its highly profitable and then someone
throws a greasy pizza box in there, it can mess up the equipment. I
don’t know what happens to everything, but they can take trips to the
processing plants and see how it can mess up the machines and
wholesale product. What makes me crazy is I look in the recycling bins
and anything is in there.
− Comment (Mistene) I have teenagers in my house, and it happens to
me too.
− Comment (John) That is something I would like to see come out of
this is more of an educational piece. I get the feeling since there is
market competition that there is no feedback from the haulers to their
customers.
− Comment (Mistene) I am skeptical, I think it is just going to the trash.
I feel like I put all of my stuff in the recycling bin to make me feel
better, but it doesn’t matter because nothing is getting recycled.
− Comment (John) Republic is using the normal trash trucks to collect
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 8
recycling.
− Comment (Mistene) At least we have the façade because the
recycling truck comes by.
− Comment (Sylvia) I wish Caroline was here because she is very
passionate about this, and she could answer that. We can get that
from her because there is something within our licensed system that
recyclers and haulers are required to report contamination rates and
where it is going. They must go to particular places with the current
licensing. Now where it ends up, I am not sure, but we could ask
Caroline.
− Comment (John) It just seems to me that if there is contracting then
they are not concerned about losing customers and they could say this
is contaminated we are going to note that to the customer and next
time we won’t take it or something similar.
− Comment (Sylvia) Part of the contracted system is some more control
like that. There would be requirements for education, customer
service, reporting or etc. more than what we have with the licensed
system. We could also get more requirements in the licensed system,
but I think you are right that there would be some benefit to contracted
and having one hauler.
− Comment (Renee) These are national companies so they might be
working with cities like Seattle that are more particular and diligent.
They would know what is accepted and not.
− Comment (Sylvia) There are those benefits with national haulers and
having the requirements in other communities.
− Presentation Haulers that are not awarded a contract would continue to
serve commercial, multifamily, and construction site customers. It could
continue to service existing HOA contracts. They could shift staff; in the RFP
we could require them to hire folks that were laid off. It is not necessarily
something we will do. They would also have 12-18 months to plan for the
adjustments. Companies like Republic are accustomed to this in other
communities. It doesn’t mean there isn’t an impact on the nationally owned
haulers, certainly each one wants the contract. I am sure they might prefer a
districted system but there is a lot to that.
− For the RFP we would have these different items that needed to be priced
out. Within the RFP we ask for certain things. One of those is pay as you
throw which is volume-based, based on the size of your cart. Recycling would
also still be bundled with trash. Both are currently required under the licensed
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 9
system for us. We are required by state law to have an opt out option which
would look like an opt out fee. This is so we don’t get a bunch of folks opting
out and going with a different hauler, because that would defeat the purpose.
We are recommending a fee equivalent to the smallest trash cart service
cost. These are things recommended to Council, but they could decide
something else. That is particularly true in the districted decision. A lot of peer
communities our size go with one district and that is for a lot of reasons.
Billing is easier because if you have two different haulers you may have to
charge a fee to level out the differences in pricing. The City would probably
not do billing, it would be the hauler doing the billing. Managing two contracts
is also a lot. We would need staff to manage two separate contracts with the
different reporting requirements and things like that. We are recommending
one district. Council could decide to do something else. I think we could look
at an admin fee for reimbursement to fund the contract management. We
could have a way or opt in option to offer service multifamily and commercial
locations. There would also be requirements for GHG reduction and safety
improvements. We are under review for what those percent reduction
requirements might be. These are some of the base recommendations we
are looking at there are some differences between program options.
− We are recommending package A with the other pieces. We would look at
yard timing to be either bundled all year, seasonally, or have an opt in option.
Food scraps to be added when infrastructure is available. For bulky waste
collection, we don’t want people just dumping those items, but we don’t want
to encourage people to off load a bunch of waste, so we are looking at 1-3
bulky items per year by request and might have a size limitation.
− Q (Renee) So like one sofa per year?
− Comment (Mistene) Our neighborhood does a dumpster for three
days following our garage sale
− A (Sylvia) Yes that is one way to do it. I think there is a little bit of
concern there if we do it City wide, its different equipment that brings
out the dumpster.
− Comment (Mistene) And could you even monitor what is going in the
dumpster?
− Comment (Sylvia) Right, it could be great for certain neighborhoods,
and we could price out some roll off dumpsters, but it may not fit within
out waste reduction goals, and so we are trying to find a middle
ground.
− Presentation (Sylvia) Carts are a big deal. I think it would cost around $11
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 10
million to buy carts initially. That is typical and could be financed as a fee that
folks would pay. It could then go down to a maintenance fee after a certain
amount of years. The City would own them, and the hauler would maintain
them. That way if you switch haulers in a different contract, you won’t have to
go pick them all up and redeploy them. You just keep your cart and if you
wanted to switch sizes or needed another one, they could do that.
− We would probably look at a low-income program, depending on the price we
got back. That would be for people who either qualify for SNAP benefits or
some median income percentage. That would be a qualify only program. We
would also look at alley and valley services. We do have alleys within Fort
Collins, and they are serviced different so we would want to include them.
The valet service is for folks with physical impairment that cannot get their
cart out to the street.
− Q (Renee) So when it’s a residential alley, I wouldn’t think those vehicles can
get in the alleys, are they wide enough.
− A (Sylvia) I think with old town they are serviced by those trash trucks
now, but we would want to make sure those are priced into the
system. I am not sure how they are serviced now if it’s a different truck
or someone hops off and manually loads it.
− Presentation For HOA’s we are recommending them be able to opt in or
they can remain on their own contract if they follow our requirements with
recycling bundled and volume-based pricing.
− We have an option B to show Council some differences but there are not
many differences between them.
− Comment (John) It sounds like it might be nice for us to put together a
memo for Council for June 28th.
− Comment (Sylvia) The next work session is on July 12th and the regular
session is on July 19th. That is basically the resolution that Council uses to
have us move forward with the RFP. We would move forward with decision
making in December.
− Comment (Mistene) It sounds like its not a formal yes or no but we are going
to do this. The real decision will be the bundles and options.
− Comment (Sylvia) July 12th will be a conversation around priorities and
pieces they want. Then they will direct us through the process. They could
later decide they don’t like any submissions and they are not going to do this
or they will do it again. So, the decision to move forward with the RFP
process is what we are looking for on July 19th.
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 11
− Q (Mistene) Are you only submitting the RFP to providers that are already in
our market?
− A (Sylvia) No, I don’t think so. I think it is required to go out to
everyone.
− Comment (Sylvia) As a group for you could recommend anything from these
things. You could weigh in on whether to move forward with the contract or if
you support what we have right now. We could offer our team to come back
with any details you might need.
− Comment (Renee) Usually as a board we create our recommendation, which
is usually in alignment with staff and then we polish it and send it off. We
don’t have quorum anymore so we can just discuss.
− Comment (John) I would support drafting a memo to support the
districting/contracting. What is everyone’s thoughts
− Q (Mistene) I say keep it simple for efficiency for the City. Are you saying
districted or one hauler?
− A (Sylvia) So the contract is either districted or one hauler. Contracted
is different from licensing. Right now, we are licensed; contracting
would be moving to either one hauler or districted. Districted would be
potentially 2 or more districts. It is a bit confusing.
− Comment (Renee) I see districting as geographic
− Comment (Sylvia) Yes so it would be breaking up the City into
districts.
− Q (John) So if we say we support districting that would mean supporting
either one hauler or multiple haulers?
− A (Sylvia) It would be more if you say I support a City contracted
system and then we either do or do not support districting. Districting
would be breaking the City up into two or more areas. A contracted
system could be done with one hauler. A contracted system could also
be done with multiple haulers and then it would be a districted,
contracted system.
− Comment (Shannon) And that would dictate the RFP process and
how it is flushed out.
− Comment (Sylvia) Yes Council could say structure the RFP to be
contracted and districted. Here is the map of the districts.
− Comment (Renee) So we should tell Council that we support, keep it simple.
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 12
− Comment (Mistene) The question is what do we support? It sounds like we
are moving to contracting so for us to say we support contracting doesn’t add
value.
− Comment (Renee) Well it is not decided. Council has a priority, they take it
to the City and the City says we will do research, investigate and then make a
recommendation. That is what they are doing. As a board and we don’t have
to agree with everything, but if we think it is a good idea, we send a memo to
Council saying we support this and here is why. They can listen or the don’t
have to. It is a way for us to have some input
− Comment (Mistene) So we would say we support contracting, should we
take it to the next level and say we support districting or one hauler?
− Q (Renee) We could say one hauler, right?
− Q (John) What would you support?
− A (Renee) I know there are restrictions, but I would say we support
one hauler per district to help with street repairs, traffic, safety. It
doesn’t make sense to have 2 haulers per neighborhood due to
impact.
− Q (John) Based on your presentation, what are you moving towards?
− A (Sylvia) We are moving towards a single hauler as a
recommendation because of the efficiencies it creates. But the
districting could include more than one hauler. The Mayor has asked
about it from a City management of the contract perspective. We see it
would require more resources to do.
− Comment (John) I would support contracted single hauler. I think it makes
the greatest amount of savings.
− Comment (Renee) I agree
− Comment (John) I see no reason to have a choice for your hauler.
− Comment (Mistene) It is trash and it’s costing us a lot of money.
− Comment (Renee) Legally though people must have a choice.
− Comment (Sylvia) You must have an opt out and we would
recommend it being an opt out fee. The fee would be the lowest level
of service, so you might as well just have the service.
− Comment (Mistene) The market will take care of itself. Someone is going to
win he contract. We might have a few HOAs but even the ones with HOAs
might not have enough business.
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15 /22 – MINUTES Page 13
− Comment (Renee) Multifamily housing too.
− Comment (Mistene) It will play itself out.
− Comment (John) The one with the contract will be more efficient than
anyone else.
− Q (John) Mistene, are you agreeing with one hauler?
− A (Mistene) Yes.
− Renee supports as well.
− Sylvia mentioned they can add any of the details, like yard trimmings or
anything important to them. Renee stated they like to keep it simple to better
ensure it will be read.
− Renee will send out an email to the Board that will include the presentation to
get a vote with quorum for the memo.
4. ADJOURN - 6:00 pm
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
June 15, 2022 6:00 – 8:00 pm
Via Zoom
06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 1
*** MINUTES ABBREVIATED TO ONLY INCLUDE ITEMS RELATED TO TRASH AND
RECYCLING CONTRACTING CONVERSATION*****
CALL TO ORDER
6:02 pm
ROLL CALL
•List of Board Members Present –
−Barry Noon
−Dawson Metcalf - Chair
−Drew Derderian
−Victoria McKennan
−Kevin Krause- Vice Chair
−Danielle Buttke
•List of Board Members Absent – Excused or Unexcused, if no contact with Chair
has been made
−Hillary Mizia
−Avneesh Kumar
•List of Staff Members Present
−Honore Depew, Staff Liaison
−John Phelan
−Kira Beckham
−Kelly Smith
•List of Guests
−none
1.NEW BUSINESS
a.Contracting of Waste Pick-up and Hauling – Kira Beckham, Lead Specialist for
Waste Reduction & Recycling, presented and discussed considerations for a
contracted system of waste pick-up and hauling for households within the Fort Collins
community and received feedback on options for the issuing a request for proposals
ATTACHMENT 4
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 2
(RFP) and hauler selection process, prior to a July 12 Council Work Session. (Action)
− Discussion | Q + A
− Danielle – Q – I appreciate data where you can pinpoint wear and tear on
the roads because of the multiple heavy trucks. Is there any data from other
communities on a similar analysis regarding air pollution specifically thinking
about diesel and being that it is one of the most harmful pollutants from a
human health perspective? We are in one of the worst air quality cities in the
nation and there are not that many diesel sources that are this heavy of use.
Kira – A – We have come across that data and have looked at the overall
emissions. What is interesting is when we looked at the emissions that are
impacted, when you bump them up against the overall greenhouse gas
inventory, they are a small percent of the overall picture. We see more
measurable success when we start playing in the compost and waste
diversion. The road maintenance becomes more quantifiable factor for us
than the emissions themselves. Danielle – Comment – If you look
specifically at black soot, PM2.5, and nitrous oxide, you might find more of a
contribution from these trucks as those are unique to diesel trucks and are
higher, the heavier the vehicle. Kira – Comment – One element we didn’t go
into a lot of detail in because we are still exploring it is we can look to require
moving toward compressed natural gas (CNG) or electric vehicles (EV). The
big win with a contracted system is we can start small and grow overtime; it
gives us the foundation we need to start to move in that direction. On one
side you have price and the other hand the different attributes we can ask for.
It will be a tradeoff. Danielle – Comment – I think that is also a great
opportunity to think about those things. Middlebury, Vermont has trash
haulers that use horse and buggy. It can be done and there are other options
out there. I think incorporating language so that this can be flexible and
adaptable based on regulations and technology as it comes out will be key.
Kira – Comment – The contract terms then to be in the range of 3-7 years.
− Danielle – Comment – There is always going to be this chicken and egg
problem. There isn’t going to be a food scrap facility or service until you have
people that are willing to bring it. Market players can have outsized impacts
on development of new markets for these products or development of food
scrap composing. I think that is another incentive point if you are looking at
rating and ranking RFPs; one might have a relationship with a potential food
scrap facility. Kira – Comment – Part of that discussion relates to the Larimer
County Landfill, the Regional Wasteshed, and the capabilities new facilities
may have. So we do have a team working closely with them to understand
what will and will not be possible and how local flow control of various
materials might influence that. They are very passionate about getting to
ATTACHMENT 5
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 3
haulers having those relationships or their own capabilities. It will be key. One
question we have gotten a lot from the community is about what will happen
to the haulers/owners that don’t get selected if we go with a one contract
system. The contract wouldn’t be implemented for 12-18 months after a final
decision has been made so there is time for the haulers to respond and
adjust staffing levels. They will still have several HOA customers that are
already contracted. Three out of four haulers are large national haulers that
are used to these shifts at local markets and also service surrounding areas.
− Kevin – Comment – I love this project and I think it’s so on point and big for
the community based on the data and some of the goals. I just want to
piggyback on Danielle’s point of not just looking at greenhouse gas
emissions. The one thing that came to mind is tire particulate because that
alone for a bunch of heavy trucks is not insignificant. There are a bunch of
these layers that make it so obvious that this is a great path for our
community, and I would love to see as many of those pointed out as possible.
Just as far as other options for actual service for lessening waste in the
community and increasing efficiency has been to do every other week option
for trash; our small bin is still too big for us. Kira – Comment – Those are two
things we have heard loud and clear from our community. They want that
very low volume option, not only for pricing but because it is the right thing to
do. We are looking at an individual bag capability and have explored the idea
of every other week trash. Right now, our base model is assuming weekly
trash and recycling and, if we bundle it, yard waste. The main reason for that
is the efficiency’s but we are looking at all the considerations. I think that also
becomes an even more viable solution as we get increased composting for
food scraps because that eliminates a lot of concerns about rodents and
smell that become a real factor when talking about what’s currently in
people’s trash.
− Kevin – Comment – I am curious if we talk about solar, paying your own way
and equity, I am curious if you start to thread some of these things together.
Let’s say I opt for a 75-gallon bin every week because I throw everything in
the trash and don’t compost or reduce where I can versus being a really low
trash user. Are the heavy trash users paying their own way in the community
because they are increasing impacts on the roads, other facilities, and
emissions? I think this is a bigger discussion for our board later, but it feels
funny to me. Maybe the pricing and incentives will play out. There is the cost
of the disposal but then there is an impact on city facilities like roads but just
having more waste. Kira – Comment – We are looking at that, but it is a little
tricky in terms of the pay as you throw design to charge more from a rate
perspective for the heavy users directly. One of the other things that we have
recognized with the increased price that is incurred from an open market
ATTACHMENT 5
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 4
system today is there are communities that charge a road impact fee
because the city is subsidizing. So, there are considerations on a road
maintenance fee and that fee shrinks a lot when you move to a contracted
system because you have a lower impact on your roads.
− Dawson – Q – What is the timeline on crafting a memo? Kira – A – The July
12th work session materials are due by Wednesday, June 6th.
− Honore – Q – If the Board decides to act related to this item, I saw you
presented on two options. Is there one that is a staff recommendation or are
you presenting them side by side as optoins? I know this board tends to be
concerned about overall ways to reduce waste, emissions and be efficient, so
is there one option that would be more effective in advancing towards
adopted goals? Kira – A – I think it really depends on which one you are
homing in on. Whether you are focusing on diversion, equity, or something
else. We have a recommended package but again that doesn’t narrow on
things like yard trimmings, so I think I would almost suggest focusing more on
some of those nuisances or in general in favor of a contracted system. I think
it might be the independent elements that become more important to Council
and speaks loudly.
− Kira will share slides with Board.
2. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Memo for Contracting for Waste Pick-up & Hauling
− Danielle makes a motion that the Board approve a memo in support for the
waste hauling plan that was presented with the addition of advocating for
incentives to rate proposals that have either lower emissions, zero emissions,
or future for lower emission vehicles and that allows for faster and/or more
accessible food scrap pick up in the contract. Dawson Seconds. Passes 4-0-
1.
− Dawson will work on the memo and will send it out to the Board.
− The Board discussed the option to have an in-person board meeting as it
would be nice to meet everyone in person but for environmental reason go
back to virtual meetings after. They decided on an in-person meeting for their
May 18th Board meeting.
− Board members looked at upcoming subjects through the summer. There
was interest shown in land use code, trash/recycling contracting, active
modes plan draft recommendations, Halligan water supply project update,
ATTACHMENT 5
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
06/15/2022 – MINUTES Page 5
and budget review.
3. ADJOURN - 8:52 pm
ATTACHMENT 5
MEMORANDUM
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
DATE: July 6, 2022
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Natural Resources Advisory Board
SUBJECT: Contracting of Waste Pick-Up and Hauling Proposal
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
On June 15, 2022, Kira Beckham, Lead Specialist for Waste Reduction and Recycling, presented on the
council priority of exploring a districted system for garbage, recycling, and compost, and the subsequent
recommendations for a single-hauler contracted system. The purpose of this memo is to express the
Board’s support for the proposed single-hauler contracted system for waste pick-up and hauling. The
Board further supports the adoption of Package B, the diversion-focused option. As a Board that
prioritizes the conservation of natural resources and the impact they have on the future of our
community, we see the single-hauler contracted system as beneficial because it foremost allows for
fewer haulers to be on the road. The benefits of this include:
●A decrease in greenhouse gas and other harmful emissions
●An improvement in air quality to benefit public health
●A decrease in street maintenance costs associated with having fewer haulers on the streets
●An increase in safety for all users of city streets, especially within our neighborhoods
The Board supports the diversion-focused option, or Package B, and promotes the inclusion of the
following items that will provide additional environmental and social benefits to Fort Collins community
members:
●Yard trimmings to be bundled with waste/recycling
●Addition of composting when available
●Bulky waste collection by request
●Low-income program
●Alley and valet service
1
ATTACHMENT 5
Additionally, the Board would like to advocate for lower and zero-emission vehicle options as it pertains
to the review process of future and/or continued contracts for a single-hauler system. We see this as
instrumental in achieving Our Climate Future goals, particularly as it pertains to the “Big Move 2: Zero
Waste Neighborhoods” and additional environmental health goals outlined in the City’s strategic plan.
Thank you for your time and consideration on this issue and its future implications for the community.
Very Respectfully,
Dawson Metcalf, MS
Chair, Natural Resources Advisory Board
2
ATTACHMENT 6
DATE:
STAFF:
July 12, 2022
Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Sustainability Manager
Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Tyler Marr, Interim Deputy City Manager
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Contracting for Residential Trash and Recycling Service.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to seek feedback on program elements to be included in a contracted system fo r
residential waste and recycling collection in preparation for a Resolution on the same topic at the July 19 Regular
Meeting.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers have feedback about the recommendations to be included in a contracted system for
residential waste and recycling collection program, which will be included in a Request for Proposals (RFP)?
• Materials Collected and How
• System Design
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
One of the adopted Council Priorities is to explore a districted system for garbage, recycling and compost for
single family homes. Districting is a sub-type of a contracted trash and recycling system. To ensure the broadest
possible conversation in the community, this document utilizes the term “contracting.”
Council Feedback from April 12 Work Session
• Continue efforts to pursue contracting
• Continue to engage community members regarding this effort and ensure engagement includes the benefits
of trash contracting
• Engage community members to understand priorities related to contracting and service options and what
community concerns should be addressed via the process
• Refine peer community research to understand best practices in program and RFP development
• Present options for elements of a contracted system at the July 12 Council Work Session
Baseline Recommendations for Elements to Include in the Request for Proposals
The chart below outlines the recommendation for elements of a program for a contracted system that would be
included in a Request for Proposals for Fort Collins. (Attachment 2)
Materials to be Collected and How
Material Recommendation Why
Yard Trimmings
Service type:
Request two versions of
pricing for opt-out and
bundled pricing to find
optimal balance of highest
Requesting pricing for both service types allows for
understanding of pricing impacts for both options to
make informed decision
Opt-out service type allows choice for those who
ATTACHMENT 6
Materials to be Collected and How
Material Recommendation Why
diversion for lowest price
Service frequency:
Weekly collection from
April – Nov
don’t want / need the service
Bundled service type is generally lowest price for
service, but doesn’t allow households to opt out of
yard trimmings service
Bulky Waste
(Items too large to fit in
curbside cart)
Request two versions of
bulky waste pricing:
a-la-carte (not in base
trash charge) and 2 items /
year included in base trash
charge
Allows for understanding of pricing impacts for
different options to make informed decision
Balances diversion focus with equity
Provides options for people who don’t have
trucks/trailers
Trash
Volume-based pricing
(Price based on size of
cart, also known as Pay-
As-You-Throw (PAYT))
Current System
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-
recommended best practice for waste reduction
Include extra low trash generator rate (<32 gal / wk)
Recycling
Pricing model: Bundled
with trash service for no
additional charge
Service frequency:
Request pricing for weekly
and every-other-week
service
Current System
EPA-recommended best practice for increased
recycling
Can evaluate pricing to determine whether to keep
every other week or shift to weekly service (which
would likely increase recycling)
Food Scraps
Do not include in this
contract
Consider adding when infrastructure that can process
food scraps is within a reasonable haul distance from
Fort Collins (currently pursuing through regional
partnership)
System Design
Element Recommendation Why
Home Owner’s
Associations (HOAs)
with current contracts
for trash and
recycling service
Allow exemption from City
contract as long as
current contract meets
Pay-As-You-Throw
requirements
Allows existing contracts to remain in place since
these neighborhoods are already achieving the
goals of a contracted system
Carts
Purchase:
Hauler purchases carts,
which become City
property at the end of the
contract
Allows for cart purchase without the opportunity
cost of using City funds
Still allows for leveraging of grant funds to offset
cost to residents
Cost of carts (after grant offset) repaid to hauler
over contract via fee in monthly bills
Cart purchase and maintenance already part of
ATTACHMENT 6
System Design
Element Recommendation Why
Cart maintenance
Provided by hauler and
funded in trash rate on
resident bills
Ownership and logo:
City-owned carts with City
logo at households
service cost in current system
Cart maintenance already a proficiency of hauler
After initial purchase, maintenance fee funds
replacement of broken carts
Carts remain at residences when next contract
begins
Provides level playing field for next contract
process
Creates community ownership of program
Opt-Out Fee Equivalent to smallest
trash cart service cost
Opt-out option permitted by State law and required
to maximize benefits of a contracted system
This level of fee common among peer
communities
Discourages opt-outs, which erode the benefits of
the contracted system
Districts One district Results in lowest price
Leverage for most environmental benefits
See more details about multiple district scenario
considerations (Attachment 3)
Flow Control Direct trash to Larimer
County Landfill
Supports Regional Wasteshed goals and a public
landfill option
Provides level playing field for hauler proposals
Customer Service Conducted by hauler;
Require Fort Collins-
focused staff
Aligns with hauler conducted billing
Ensures most of calls answered by staff familiar
with Fort Collins
Allow roll-over to national customer service staff to
allow for more customer service hours
Admin Fee Include a fee to fund City
role in contract
management
Best practice among peer communities
City staff time investment will depend on final
contract elements; will be clarified prior to contract
adoption
Alley Service Included Haulers provide service in alleys where curbside
service is not an option
Haulers currently provide this service for no
charge
Valet Service Included Haulers take carts from home down to curb for
servicing and return the carts to the home for
ATTACHMENT 6
System Design
Element Recommendation Why
disabled residents
Haulers currently provide this service for no
charge
Billing Conducted by hauler City unable to conduct billing at this time
May consider City billing in next contract
Multi-family &
Commercial
Dumpster Pricing
Request pricing from
haulers
Would provide a fixed price for dumpster service
for multi-family or commercial customers who
would like to opt in to the program
Has been successful in peer communities
IMPACTS AND BENEFITS OF A CONTRACTED SYSTEM
Street Maintenance Savings
The City commissioned a study comparing the road maintenance impacts from an open market and a contracted
system. The analysis accounts for the fact th at 30% of Fort Collins households live in Homeowner’s Associations
with contracted single hauler collection systems.
Wear and tear on residential roads is directly related to the weight of a vehicle. Because they are so heavy, every
trash truck causes impact equivalent to 1,250 passenger vehicles on residential roads .
The study found that Fort Collins spends $603,000 more per year on street maintenance due to the impacts
of multiple haulers on residential and collector streets, and that $14 million of the unfunded street
maintenance backlog is due to the impacts of having had an open market system.
Three additional haulers have recently contacted City staff with interest in starting service in Fort Collins if the City
does not move forward with a contract. If there were seven haulers (the existing four plus three new companies)
operating in the community, the City would pay $1,251,000 more per year on street maintenance .
Further detail can be found in the Refuse Vehicle Street Maintenance Impact Study . (Attachment 4)
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction
Hauling system:
• Shifting from the current system to a contracted system for residential trash and recycling collection would
reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 1200 Metric Tons of CO2e. This is equivalent to
~150 homes’ annual electricity use.
Additional yard trimmings composted:
• The greenhouse gas emissions reductions from additional yard trimmings composting depend on the system
design and will be available to inform the final decision.
More Recycling and Composting
The recommended elements of a contracted system could provide additional recycling and yard trimmings
composting. Staff recommends getting pricing for these elements in hauler proposals so the potential diversion
can be compared with the additional cost for these services.
ATTACHMENT 6
Increased recycling and composting expected depend on system design and will be available to inform the final
program design.
Increased Equity and Lower Pricing
Homeowner’s Associations (HOAs) often contract with a single hauler for trash and recycling service and often
receive rates 50% less than those paid by open market customers due to the efficiencies of servicing every
household on the street.
Since lower income households are less likely to live in neighborhoods with HOAs, this means lower income
households often pay more for the same service from the same companies as higher income households
living in HOAs while experiencing three times the noise and pollution. A contracted system provid es a
predictable cost of service for all community members and may lower prices overall.
Vehicle Emissions Reduction
Reducing the number of miles driven is the primary method for reducing trash and recycling truck vehicle
emissions. Contracting for residential trash and recycling service reduces the miles driven. If shifting from four
haulers on residential streets to one hauler, vehicle miles traveled, and related emissions would reduce by 75%.
Electric vehicles in the future or trucks fueled by compressed natural gas (CNG) in the short term can also reduce
vehicle emissions. A contracted system would allow the City to request these trucks and would provide the
leverage for these technologies far sooner than if Fort Collins remains in an open market s ystem while also
reducing the upstream greenhouse gas emissions of materials for road repair.
Less Noise
Various elements of trash and recycling collection in neighborhoods generate noise: truck engine noise, backup
alarms, sounds of materials being em ptied into the truck and engine revving during collection. The more trucks
operating in a neighborhood, the more of this type of noise and greater the frequency. Reducing the number of
trucks servicing a neighborhood reduces the amount and frequency of noise in neighborhoods.
Improved Safety
Trash and recycling collection vehicles can pose safety risks due to their size. Having fewer trash and recycling
collection vehicles in neighborhoods on fewer days of the week supports safe neighborhoods .
Operating a trash or recycling truck can also be dangerous for employees. They are most at risk when outside the
cab of the vehicle. The recommended elements of a contracted system allow for collection to be fully automated,
which allows drivers to remain safe inside their vehicles.
Further details about vehicle emissions, noise and safety can be found in the Refuse Vehicle Emission Noise
Safety Analysis Study. (Attachment 5)
TRADEOFFS OF A CONTRACTED SYSTEM
Household Choice of Hauler
The primary benefit of an open market system is that each household can select the hauler they prefer to collect
their trash and recycling. In a contracted system, households can still select a hauler other than the contracted
hauler but must pay an opt-out fee. The opt-out fee is generally equivalent to the smallest trash cart service,
which is currently between $10-$20 per month for the 32-gallon cart but has potential to be lower in a contracted
system.
ATTACHMENT 6
Concerns About Competition
Many community members have shared concern that shifting to a contracted collection system would reduce the
competition for haulers in Fort Collins and result in higher prices for service. However, peer communities have
found long-term reduced rates in a contracted system when compared with an open ma rket and have found
haulers continue to operate in their communities.
Since a contracted system only applies to single-family and small multi-family complexes, haulers retain their
customers in other sectors and remain in the community. The single family open market sector accounts for ~20%
of the trash and recycling business in Fort Collins; HOAs with contracts are ~10%, construction and demolition
sites ~30% and commercial & multi-family locations ~40%. This means that ~80% of the trash and recycling
market in Fort Collins would not be impacted by the single-family contract.
PRICING IN OPEN MARKET AND CONTRACTED SYSTEMS
Variability in Current Pricing
In an open market system, each household negotiates their own price for service. Community members sh ared
their bills and City staff found significant disparities in pricing within the community. Some community members
are currently paying $10-$15 more (sometimes twice the price) than others for the same service. Prices are
even different from the same company in the same area of town.
Examples of Monthly Pricing in Open Market and Contracted Systems
The following table includes pricing found in peer communities with different collection systems. Knowing that
increased yard trimmings collection is a key step toward achieving zero waste goals, this peer community pricing
shows that the most affordable system for increased yard trimmings collection is a contract. It also shows that
Fort Collins HOAs currently receive a lower price for service than th e open market customers.
$13
(50%)
difference
$15
(48%)
difference
ATTACHMENT 6
Fort
Collins
Open
Market
Fort
Collins
HOAs w
contract
Boulder
Open
Market
Golden
Single District
Contract
Lafayette
Single District
Contract
Bundled services
(for no extra charge)
R R R, YT,
FS
R, YT, FS, BI R, YT, FS, BI
Services for extra charge YT, BI YT, BI BI All bundled All bundled
Smallest trash cart price $10-20 $6-11 $35 $11.50 $9.50
Yard trimmings price $13-18 Seeking
information
$0 $0 $9
Total cost for trash +
recycling + yard trimmings
$23-38 To be
determined
$35 $11.50 $20.50
Cost reduction when
compared with Fort Collins
open market pricing
n/a - $4 to - $9
(no YT)
40% to
45% less
+ $13 to
-$3
56%
more to
8% less
-$11.50 to
-$26.50
50% to 70%
less
-$2.50 to
-$17.50
11% to 46%
less
R = recycling; YT = yard trimmings; FS = food scraps; BI = bulky items
Community Engagement
Since the April 12 work session, engagement has focused on the details and tradeoffs within options of a
contracted trash and recycling collection system.
Engagement included connecting with the general community and targeted engagement to members of
historically underrepresented groups.
Engagement tools included a general survey, a targeted survey, two virtual community conversations, tabling at
community events and community facilities, and information in the utility bill insert and other newsletters.
The engagement built on the wide engagement conducted prior to April. It focused on deeper conversations and
tools that ensured only one response per participant. Staff connected with ~325 community members during this
phase of engagement. Themes heard from community engagement demonstrate different perspectives but are
not a statistically valid and are not considered to represent community-wide sentiments or opinions.
Priorities with the highest percentage of “extremely important” responses in surveys
All Responses Targeted Survey Responses
Reducing air pollution (60%) Reasonable cost (90%)
Reasonable costs (59%) Stable, uniform rates (86%)
Quality customer service (52%) Quality customer service (75%)
Consistent recycling education
Reducing illegal dumping (tied, 47%)
Reducing air pollution (67%)
Note: To explore community feedback in greater depth, please refer to the Curbside Contracting Engagement
Report. (Attachment 6)
Hauler Engagement
City staff also continued to engage with haulers servicing the community. The new hauler servicing the
community has not responded to staff requests to engage since the April 12 work session, but staff has met
regularly with the other three haulers about details of a contracted system.
ATTACHMENT 6
Perspectives from the haulers has not shifted since April: Republic / Gallegos Sanitation, Waste Connections /
Ram, and Waste Management all support exploring a contracted system. Mountain Hig h does not support a shift
to a contracted system.
NEXT STEPS
If consistent with feedback from Council at the July 12 Work Session, staff will:
• Draft a resolution with policy elements to be included in the Program and reflected in a resolution for
Councilmember consideration at the July 19 Regular Session
• Finalize a Request for Proposals incorporating the policy feedback from Councilmembers
• Issue the Request for Proposals in late July or early August and allow time for haulers to draft proposals
• Conduct a competitive purchasing process review of hauler proposals
• Return to Council to discuss elements of the final proposal to make remaining policy decisions
• In late 2022 or early 2023, schedule a Regular Session for Council to consider the ordinance change s
required to shift to a contracted system
Contracted service would be anticipated to start 12-18 months after contract is finalized to account for enough
time to purchase carts and trucks given global supply chain challenges and also allow preparation t ime for
community outreach, cart sign-up and cart distribution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Chart of All Element Options in Contracted System (PDF)
2. Multiple District Considerations (PDF)
3. Refuse Vehicle Street Maintenance Impact Study (PDF)
4. Refuse Vehicle Emission Noise Safety Analysis (PDF)
5. Curbside Contracting Engagement Report (PDF)
6. Economic Advisory Board Recommendation (PDF)
7. Natural Resources Advisory Board Recommendation (PDF)
8. Economic Advisory Board Minutes (PDF)
9. Natural Resources Advisory Board Minutes (PDF)
10. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
ATTACHMENT 6
125 Rowell Court
Falls Church, VA 22046
RECYCLINGPARTNERSHIP.ORG
Caroline Mitchell, Waste Reduction and Recycling Manager
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80521
July 12, 2022
Dear Ms. Mitchell,
The Recycling Partnership is a national nonprofit organization working to grow residential recycling in the United
States. I am writing to present the City of Fort Collins, Colorado with this letter expressing our support for the
City’s efforts to enhance its public recycling efforts by moving towards a single hauler, municipally organized
curbside recycling program. The Recycling Partnership works with communities across the country, and we have
found that municipally organized curbside recycling programs that contract with one hauler and automatically
provide residents with a recycling cart and collection service are the best way to maximize the performance of
public recycling programs.
A municipally organized universal curbside recycling program is associated with the following benefits:
•Maximized collection system efficiency through scale;
•Creating a single system where service is automatically available maximizes participation and the diversion
of materials from disposal;
•Enables the opportunity for single-source consistent recycling education and program messaging;
•Provides opportunity for local government to control and focus on customer service, placing a premium on
delivering value to citizens;
•Results in reduced truck traffic by eliminating different recycling service providers serving households on the
same street. This also creates additional associated benefits such as reduced roadway wear and tear,
decreased collection vehicle emissions, and smaller greenhouse gas footprint.
As the City of Fort Collins evaluates its options, we hope that City leaders will decide to move forward with a
universal public curbside recycling program. The Recycling Partnership believes that this represents the City’s
best path for maximizing public recycling. The decision to implement a single-hauler curbside recycling program
will send a strong signal to your residents that your community supports efficient and robust recycling while
setting a powerful example for other communities in the region.
Should the City decide to implement a universal, single-hauler, cart-based curbside recycling program, The
Partnership is prepared to work with the City to provide additional support that would include grant funding and
technical assistance to help enhance the City’s curbside recycling program. General grant support for a program
like Fort Collins is considering could include the following:
•Cash Grant to purchase recycling carts – The Partnership provides up to $15 per cart for cities or haulers
to purchase carts as they establish universal curbside recycling. While a best management practice is for
ATTACHMENT 7
RECYCLINGPARTNERSHIP.ORG
the local government to purchase and own the recycling carts, The Partnership is able to grant the
hauler selected by the City as long as the hauler is able to pass the savings on to the residents.
•Cash Grant for education support: The Partnership offers $1 per house for printing, postage and digital
education to accompany cart distribution and roll out of the new service.
•In-Kind Assistance and Support: In addition to the cash grant described above, The Recycling Partnership is
offering to provide no-cost in-kind technical assistance beyond the cash grant, to include the following
elements:
•Access to Recycling Partnership outreach campaign materials as well as technical support and assistance
with the design, planning and implementation of a recycling outreach campaign; and
•Technical assistance to the community’s team as needed to help project the impact of transitioning to a
universal cart-based curbside recycling program that provides weekly or every-other-week collection
service.
For more detailed information about The Recycling Partnership cart grants, our formal request for proposals for
cart grants is located on The Recycling Partnership website: Residential Curbside Recycling Cart Grant Request
for Proposals.
Improved recycling supports industry and employment across the U.S., protects the environment and enhances
the cleanliness and sustainability of our communities. The Recycling Partnership is supportive of the City of
Fort Collins’ consideration of this important transition to a single-hauler collection system and ready to help
through technical assistance and granting.
We look forward to working with you to advance recycling in your community!
Sincerely,
Rob Taylor, Senior Director of Grants and Community Development
The Recycling Partnership
Email: rtaylor@recyclingpartnership.org
Phone: 919-777-3964
ATTACHMENT 7
1
Fort Collins Residential Waste and Recycling Pricing Study Initial Summary July 2022
Key initial takeaways
Pricing varies significantly for the same size trash cart service within Fort Collins
o $10 - $15 per month; $120 - $180 per year
Pricing varies even in the same area of town and for service provided by the same company
Why Conduct a Pricing Study
When connecting with peer communities, City of Fort Collins staff learned that residents in open market trash and
recycling collection systems often pay different prices for the same service. To understand the current state in Fort
Collins and determine if the same variability exists in this community, City staff initiated a pricing study in May 2022.
Methodology
City staff requested residents share their residential trash and recycling service cost either via sharing their actual
invoices or by reporting the information through an online form. As of July 1, 2022, 53 responses had been received and
are reflected in the following summary. City staff will continue to keep the request for pricing information open to
further understand average pricing and variability in pricing within the community.
$20
$39
$46
$18
$33
$38
$10
$26
$31
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
$45
$50
Small Medium Large
Fort Collins Monthly Open Market Trash Price by Cart Size
All Haulers Combined; Data Recieved as of July 2022
Average
$10 (100%)
difference
$13 (50%)
difference
$15 (48%)
difference
ATTACHMENT 8
Residential Waste and Recycling Contracted Hauling Engagement Summary
Engagement
The general level of engagement along the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum is “Consult”
with aspects of “Involve” where goals and proposed outcomes are discussed. Examples of “consult” tools include seeking
public comment on proposed action, presentations to neighborhood groups, Homeowners’ Associations (HOAs), Boards
& Commissions and hosting Open Houses.
Phase I Engagement (prior to April 12, 2022 work session): Focused on understanding the goals, priorities and concerns
our community has when exploring the idea of contracting for household trash and recycling service. Staff connected with
~1,770 community members using engagement tools including a page on Our City, a general online survey and two
virtual community conversations communicated via City platforms, social media, press releases and newsletters, and
through paid third-party advertisements including radio, print, and social media.
Phase II Engagement (April 2022 work session to now) focused on the details and tradeoffs within options of a
contracted trash and recycling collection system. The engagement built on the wide engagement conducted prior to April.
It focused on deeper conversations and tools that ensured only one response per participant. Staff connected with ~325
community members using engagement tools including a page on Our City, a general online survey and targeted online
survey (both requiring a login to ensure one response per participant), two virtual community conversations, and tabling at
community events and facilities. Engagement tactics were communicated via City platforms, social media, press releases,
newsletters, and a utility bill insert as well as through community partner orga nizations.
This list represents a comprehensive set of community members and organizations staff members have connected within
the process since the start of the project. Some conversations have been in -depth while others have been simpler
touchpoints, e.g., replies to emails or a commitment on behalf of an organization to share out the opportunities with their
networks.
Community Members
•Over 2,000 community members engaged in
one or multiple of the platforms including
social media messaging, virtual community
conversations (open houses), online website
and message boards, email, phone calls, and
surveys.
•Worked with community partners and third-
party advertisers to promote Spanish
language survey to Latino/Latina/Latinx
community members.
Environmental Groups
•Sustainable Living Association
•CSU Zero Waste Club
•Next Level Neighborhoods
•Vindeket Foods
Low-Income Organizations
•CARE Housing
•Housing Catalyst
•Harmony Village Mobile Home Park
•Larimer County Food Bank
Focused Community Groups
•Chamber of Commerce: Local Legislative
Affairs Committee (LLAC)
•Downtown Development Authority (declined
a meeting)
•Black and African American Cultural Center
•Queen’s Legacy Foundation
•Nonprofit Human Service Grantees
•Disable Resource Services NoCo
•Fort Collins Habitat for Humanity
•Northern Colorado A Little Help
•La Cocina
•Project Self Sufficiency
Boards and Commissions:
•Natural Resources Advisory Board
•Economic Advisory Board
Homeowners Associations
•Meeting with Clarendon Hills HOA
Waste Haulers
•Republic Services
•Waste Management
•Waste Connections
•Mountain High Disposal
ATTACHMENT 9
DRAFT
1
ATTACHMENT 10
DRAFT
In a contracted system, haulers compete for the chance to provide service to all homes in a
neighborhood. Large multifamily complexes (more than eight units) are exempt by state law,
and households that want to use a different hauler can pay an opt-out fee. Potential benefits of
a contracted system can include receiving lower, “bulk” rates for collection services, reducing
noise, pollution, and road wear-and-tear from truck traffic, and increasing options for recycling
and composting. Potential drawbacks can include a lack of individual choice, reduction in the
number of companies providing services, and a loss of ability to customize services to meet
individual needs.
In June of 2022, City staff gathered feedback at virtual information sessions, in-person outreach
events, and through online surveys and forums. In total, approximately 300 residents shared
their thoughts and priorities for their trash and recycling services. These efforts built on
previous engagement surveys, and sought to prioritize feedback from traditionally
under-surveyed populations (low-income households, etc.).
Many mentioned the urgency of taking action to protect the environment and curb the effects of
climate change. Some expressed a desire for increased recycling and/or composting services,
but low prices were a higher priority, particularly for renters and respondents under 30.
Comments related to personal choice frequently cited a lack of trust in City government, and
uncertainty that the benefits warranted the risks of this potential path.
Finally, while specific services for “low-generators” who do not have or currently underutilize
their trash service was not a priority in the survey, it came up frequently in comments as
important to uphold the goals of a contracted system and maintain low, fair pricing.
2
ATTACHMENT 11
DRAFT
Demographic Summary
The City received 211 responses through an open survey posted online on the OurCity
engagement page. In addition, 29 responses were received in person and online through
targeted outreach to typically under-surveyed populations, including low-income households
and renters for a total of 240 survey responses. An additional 61 comments were received
through an OurCity open forum (43), and through email to City staff (18), and approximately 25
people participated in two online events regarding a potential contract.
No demographic information is available for emailed comments, forum comments, or event
participants, but survey respondents were asked to fill out optional demographic information on
their age, income, and homeownership status, among others. Thus, in the following sections we
distinguish “respondents” from “commenters,” and any demographic information only refers to
those who filled out the surveys.
The City used a targeted survey in an attempt to reach typically under-surveyed populations like
renters and low-income households. Targeted engagement efforts were successful in reaching
more low-income households and better reflecting community rates of homeownership, but
residents under 30, Spanish-speaking residents, and those in manufactured housing remain
under-represented in this sample.
Category All responses Targeted survey
Age 60+ significantly
over-represented
20-29 under-represented
60+ significantly
over-represented
20-29 under-represented
Income Low income households
under-represented
Low-income households
over-represented
Homeownership status Homeowners significantly
over-represented
Homeowners slightly
over-represented
The following sections include some breakdowns by homeownership status, income, and age in
an attempt to better represent the perspectives of our diverse community. Renters and
respondents under 30 frequently had similar priorities. While these groups overlapped to some
extent, not all renters fell into the under 30 category (and vice versa), and each should be treated
as a distinct group.
Overall, it is important to treat these results as a “slice” of community feedback and not a
representative sample of community sentiment. More detailed information on the survey
sample, and how it compares to Census Bureau estimates of community characteristics will be
available as an appendix to the final report.
3
ATTACHMENT 11
DRAFT
Overall Feedback and Priorities
Key Findings
●Environmental impact, low, stable costs, and quality customer service were most
important to survey respondents
●Low, stable rates were particularly important for low-income households and renters.
The majority prioritized lower prices over additional services, though some commenters
expressed a desire for more options for composting, yard trimmings, and other services
that would support waste reduction.
●While personal choice was extremely important to about 20% of respondents, most
groups ranked it the lowest of the six priorities.
●Among commenters, 43% submitted comments in opposition. Many of these comments
cited the importance of personal choice. 30% of comments were in favor of a
contracted system, citing a mix of potential benefits to the environment, costs, and
services.
Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of a variety of different priorities related
to environmental quality, cost, and services. Environmental impact, low, stable costs, and
quality customer service were most frequently cited as “extremely important.”
Priorities with the highest percentage of “extremely important” responses
All responses (240)Targeted survey responses (29)
Reducing air pollution (60%)Reasonable cost (90%)
Reasonable costs (59%)Stable, uniform rates (86%)
Quality customer service (52%)Quality customer service (75%)
Consistent recycling education
Reducing illegal dumping (tied,47%)
Reducing air pollution (67%)
Among all responses and in the targeted survey, alley pickup and personal choice were among
the least likely to be “extremely important.” Personal choice was “extremely important” for 22%
of all respondents.
When asked to rank across different priorities, more than half of all respondents (53.4%) said
that meeting environmental goals was the highest priority. About 17% of respondents ranked
personal choice as their top priority, though for most it was the lowest priority. Another 15.5% of
all responses said that low prices were their top priority.
4
ATTACHMENT 11
DRAFT
All responses Targeted
survey
Under 60K Renters Under 30 Over 60
Environmental
goals
Environmental
goals
Environmental
goals
Environmental
goals
Environmental
goals
Environmental
goals
Lowest price Customer
experience
Lowest price Underserved
populations
Underserved
populations
Lowest price
Customer
experience
Lowest price Underserved
populations
Lowest price Lowest price Customer
experience
Underserved
populations
Underserved
populations
More services More services More services Personal
choice
More services More services Customer
experience
Customer
experience
Customer
experience
More services
Personal
choice
Personal
choice
Personal
choice
Personal
choice
Personal
choice
Underserved
populations
The following sections contain illustrative quotes and key findings for each priority area, in order
of prioritization by respondents to the targeted survey.
Environmental Goals
Zero waste and other environmental goals are the highest priority for me since it
affects all others. If we trash our planet and continue to pump CO2 into the
atmosphere we are all in big trouble.
Without a healthy environment/zero waste there will be nowhere safe to live. We
have to take care of our earth!
Key Findings
●Making progress towards zero waste and environmental goals was the top priority for
respondents. Comment in the survey, online, and through email expressed the urgency
of taking action to address climate change.
●Reducing air pollution from trash trucks was of high importance to many respondents,
with an average rating of 4.28 out of a possible five. Renters and respondents under 30
gave this a higher priority ranking.
●Consistent recycling education was also a relatively high priority (4.2 out of 5).
5
ATTACHMENT 11
DRAFT
Improved Customer Experience
“I want the best possible pickup service and a customer service dept. that is
staffed with friendly, helpful and knowledgeable employees to solve pickup
problems in a timely manner.”
“The present system is the best I have dealt with in the many communities I have
lived in. I have lived in communities with community run trash collection and it was
very poor compared to service in communities with private servers.”
It’s important to me to be able to speak with a local representative…. I like smaller
businesses because I feel the service is better, all-around.
Key Findings
●Current experiences of customer service were mixed. Just over half of respondents had
a positive experience with customer service. Respondents to the targeted survey were
slightly more likely to have had a negative customer service experience.
●Consistent, quality customer service was a high priority, particularly for respondents over
60. Respondents rated the overall quality of the service as more important than a
dedicated local line, but many comments noted benefits of local customer service.
Lowest Price
Trash is an essential service, and I think that having the lowest price possible will
help reduce cost burdens on low-income families.
“To me, the lowest-cost solution is most important.. Please do not shift to a city
contracting system, as it places everyone at risk for hiked rates due to low
competition and squeezes out true market competition that keeps prices low.”
Key Findings
●Low prices were extremely important, particularly for low-income households.
●In the targeted survey, stable rates were a higher priority than low-income rates, even
though many respondents may qualify for a low-income rate. Some respondents over 60
shared that they were on a fixed income, and expressed concern about rising prices.
●When asked to choose between lower prices or more services, two-thirds of respondents
chose lower prices. 80% of renters prioritized lower prices over more services.
6
ATTACHMENT 11
DRAFT
More Services
“ I live alone and have very little trash, but must pay as much as those who have
four times as much.”
I would love for the City to contract for city-wide waste hauling service that
includes yard waste and food scrap waste for everyone. I don't like that yard waste
is presently a separate charge…and is more expensive than trash service, which
does nothing to encourage people to adopt the habit of composting food scraps.
Key Findings
●Most respondents had traditional curbside trash and recycling service. Few had existing
service for yard trimmings (20%) or food waste (5%).
●Some commenters who received contracted service through their HOA wanted to keep
their existing contracts and not participate in a Citywide contract.
●Additional pickup services for yard trimmings and bulky items were only moderately
important for survey respondents. Commenters were more supportive of additional
services, particularly food waste pickup/composting services.
●Options for “low-generators” were not highly prioritized in most survey responses, but
were extremely important for commenters. They emphasized that a low-generating
option was important for fairness, keeping costs low, and meeting zero waste goals.
●Approximately 60% of respondents preferred an “opt-in” model for things like bulky items
and yard trimmings. There was slightly more support for bundled service for bulky
items, especially among respondents to the targeted survey.
Access for Underserved Populations
Without first addressing the underlying inequity in society, I fear that we won't be
able to successfully tackle issues like reducing environmental waste, etc.
I find that the underserved get a raw deal in Fort Collins. I'm new to [the] area. Also
zero waste and environment are crucial for me.
Key Findings
●Renters and respondents under 30 prioritized services for vulnerable and underserved
populations more highly than other respondents.
●Access for non-English speaking households was a moderate priority for respondents.
On average respondents rated it a 3.46 out of 5, though this was higher among
respondents under 30 and those renting their homes.
7
ATTACHMENT 11
DRAFT
Personal Choice
“The personal choice for which company picks up our trash should be ours to
make. We do not need more government telling us as citizens who live in a free
country who we can hire to handle our trash collection.”
“The right to choose the company of our choice for this service is important.
Freedom of choice is necessary, especially for individuals on fixed incomes!"
Key Findings
●Personal choice was the lowest priority for most survey respondents, but people over 60
on average ranked it fourth out of the six priorities.
●In questions about services, respondents generally preferred to choose or “opt-in” to
expanded services rather than bundle them or have the option to opt-out.
●Potential opt-out fees sparked strong negative reactions among some commenters who
felt it punished choice. Comments in favor or undecided also worried that “opt-outs”
would water down potential environmental benefits.
●Commenters felt that the current system was the best way to maintain competitive
pricing and incentivize good customer service because it allowed for choice.
●Comments about personal choice were also closely linked to ideas about the role of
government. Commenters felt that a contracted system was outside the scope of local
government, and did not trust the City to execute a contract well.
Conclusion
Respondents identified progress towards environmental goals, quality customer service, and
low, stable pricing as top priorities for trash and recycling services. The emphasis on quality
and cost was also found among commenters, and many who opposed a contracted system did
so because they were worried it would affect the quality and cost of their services (though some
were opposed to any increased government role in curbside services).
Tensions remain between increasing services to better meet zero waste goals and keeping
costs low. While some have strong feelings about personal choice of hauler, more seem to
prioritize choice in the services that they receive, preferring “opt-in” services and different sizes
of services that allow them to customize their service to their needs and budget. If a contracted
system is implemented, it may be wise to offer different “packages” that meet the needs of
low-generators, budget-conscious, and environmentally conscious households.
Ultimately, though cost is an important component of these services, responses suggested that
this decision is not just a matter of economics. It is important to recognize that, while most
people likely do not think about their trash/recycling service on a daily basis, people still place a
great priority on these services and want to be deeply involved in decision-making to ensure
their values and priorities are accurately reflected in their services.
8
ATTACHMENT 11
1512 Eureka Road, Suite 220, Roseville, CA 95661 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com
June 6, 2022
Ms. Kira Beckham
Lead Specialist
Environmental Sustainability
City of Fort Collins
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
submitted via email: kbeckham@fcgov.com
SUBJECT: Final Report - Trash Collection Vehicle Emission, Noise, and Safety Analysis
Dear Ms. Beckham,
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. (R3) was engaged by the City of Fort Collins (City) to update our trash collection
vehicle emission, noise, and safety analysis that was prepared for the City in 2008. This Letter Report
provides the results of our analysis.
Project Objective
To compare the vehicle emission, noise, and safety impacts of residential trash, recycling, and yard waste
collection vehicles (Refuse Vehicles) of the City’s current open competition system to a contracted or
districted collection system with a single hauler providing services in any given area of the City.
* * * * * * *
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City. Should you have any questions regarding our
letter report or need any additional information, please contact me by phone at (916) 947-4880 or by email
at wschoen@r3cgi.com.
Sincerely,
William Schoen | Sr. Project Director
R3 Consulting Group, Inc
916.947.4880 | wschoen@r3cgi.com
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 2 of 9
Summary Findings
The vehicle emissions from the City’s licensed hauler Refuse Vehicles are in large part directly related to
the number of miles those vehicles drive on the City’s streets. As such, contracting or districting solid waste
collection services and limiting services in any given area of the City to one hauler and reducing the
associated miles driven by Refuse Vehicles, is the most significant immediate step the City can take to
reduce Refuse Vehicle emissions. If you assume that all four licensed haulers provide service on both sides
of every residential street in the City, switching from the open competition to a contracted or districted
system would reduce the number of haulers on any given residential street from four (4) to one (1); a 75%
reduction in the number of haulers and Refuse Vehicle miles driven, with a reduction in the associated
vehicle emissions. If we assume an average of three (3) haulers currently operating on each residential
street the vehicle miles driven would decrease by 67%. At two (2) haulers there would be a 50% reduction
in miles driven and associated vehicle emissions.1
It is estimated that under the current open competition system, and assuming an average of three and a
half (3.5) licensed haulers operating on each residential street, Refuse Vehicles emit approximately 830
carbon equivalent tons annually. Under a contracted or districted residential collection system that figure
would be reduced to approximately 300 carbon equivalent tons annually.
Vehicle emissions can also be reduced by expanded use of compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles, and/or
potentially electric vehicles at some point in the future. Similarly, both CNG and electric vehicles generate
less noise then diesel powered engines. Those and other emission and noise reduction technologies can
be required as part of the City’s hauler licenses or contracts. Requirements we recommend the City
consider include: limiting the age of Refuse Vehicles unless retrofitted with City required emission, noise
and/or safety technologies (e.g., operate-in-gear-at-idle, automatic engine shut off systems, LED headlights
and strobe lights, vehicle safety cameras, “smart” back-up alarms, on-board video event recorders (e.g.,
DriveCam)).
Whether or not the City maintains the current open competition residential collection system or switches to
a contracted or districted system, we recommend that it consider developing an (exclusive/non-exclusive)
Solid Waste Franchise Agreement (Agreement). That Agreement should provide detailed and objective
performance standards with respect to safety, customer service, public education and outreach, required
programs, diversion requirements (e.g., minimum required diversion rates), City fees, and other specifics.
If the City maintains its current open competition system, we recommend that all haulers be required to
agree to the City’s contract (franchise agreement) terms as a condition of doing business in the City. If the
City issues a request for proposals (RFP) for contracted or districted services, we recommend that the RFP
include a draft of the City’s Agreement. All proposers should be required to identify any terms of the
Agreement that they take exception to, and provide acceptable replacement language as part of their
proposals, with the understanding that the City will only consider negotiating those terms identified in the
haulers’ proposals.
Note: A copy of a recently executed franchise agreement between Waste Management and the City of
Beaumont, CA has been provided to the City under separate cover. That document provides an
example of the types of general terms and conditions that Waste Management, Republic and other
haulers have committed to under existing contracts. While the City may wish for a more abbreviated
agreement, we recommend that many of the provisions of that document be included in any
Agreement the City develops.
1 Vehicle emission reductions would be somewhat less than the associated reduction in vehicle miles driven since the
emissions associated with vehicles while they are physically dumping residential carts does not change regardless
of the number of haulers. Similarly, noise associated with vehicles traveling down residential streets would decrease
but the amount of noise generated at the point of collection would not change regardless of the number of haulers
operating on a given street.
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 3 of 9
Background
In Fort Collins, residential trash, recycling, and yard waste services are provided by the following four (4)
licensed private trash haulers:
Mountain High Disposal
Republic Services
Ram Waste Systems (Waste Connections); and
Waste Management
Residents are free to subscribe to collection services from any of the licensed haulers, with trash haulers
competing for market share. Under this open competition system, multiple haulers provide service on each
residential street each week, with resulting street maintenance and other impacts.
Under a contracted system, a single hauler would provide all residential services citywide. Under a
districted system, the City would be broken into multiple service areas (districts), with a single hauler
providing service in each district.
All other factors the same, moving from an open competition residential collection system to a contracted
or districted collection system would reduce the number of Refuse Vehicle miles traveled on the City’s
residential streets. As a result, there would be a significant corresponding decrease in the associated
vehicle street maintenance, emission, and noise impacts, and improved neighborhood aesthetics. All of
the factors the same, there would also be fewer Refuse Vehicle accidents and related property damage
corresponding to the decrease in the number of Refuse Vehicle miles driven in the City.
Refuse Vehicle Emissions
Background / Overview
The greatest contribution to human Greenhouse emissions comes from transportation, followed closely by
electricity generation and industry. There is a tremendous amount of pressure on the top 3 economic
sectors to reduce their GHG emissions, with most goals set for 2035 and 2050. Within the transportation
sector, municipalities deploy the highest GHG-emitting vehicles daily, including public transportation
vehicles and refuse trucks. On a per-mile basis, the refuse truck is the most egregious contributor,2 with an
average fuel efficiency of approximately 2.5 miles per gallon.3
Options for reducing Refuse Vehicle Emissions include the following, which are discussed in more detail
below:
Converting to CNG 4, liquefied natural gas (LNG), or electric engines;
Requiring operate-in-gear-at-idle systems; and
Requiring automatic engine shut off systems.
Natural Gas and Electric Vehicles
Natural Gas Vehicles
While the majority of refuse vehicle fleets are powered by diesel engines, that is changing. By the end of
2020, 53% of Waste Management’s collection fleet had been transitioned to CNG vehicles, comprising the
largest heavy-duty natural gas fleet of its kind in North America. Over half of Waste Management’s CNG
vehicles use dairy or landfill biogas, including gas captured from landfills. In California, Oregon and
Washington, 100% of Waste Management’s natural gas fleet runs on renewable natural gas (RNG).5 By
the end of 2019, Republic had more than 3,100 of its total vehicles running on alternative fuels; more than
2 Source: EPA: Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
3 Source: US Dept. of Energy - Alternative Fuels Data Center
4 CNG is the more economical and accessible option for U.S.-based refuse fleets.
5 Source: Waste Management 2021 Sustainability Report
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 4 of 9
20% of the company’s fleet, and Waste Connections, has been running a fleet of around 1,100 CNG
vehicles; 11% of its fleet. According to NGV America, more than 17,000 refuse and recycling trucks in the
United States run on natural gas and about 60% of new collection trucks on order will be powered by natural
gas.
According to NGVAmerica,6 natural gas vehicles are 90% cleaner than the EPA’s current NOx7 standard
and emit up to 21% fewer GHG emissions than comparable gas and diesel vehicles. When fueling with
RNG, GHG emissions can be reduced up to 382%. While burning natural gas in vehicles emits less carbon
dioxide than burning diesel, the drilling and production of natural gas leaks methane, a potent greenhouse
gas, and those leaks offset some of natural gas' carbon dioxide (CO2) benefit.8
Burning natural gas for energy results in fewer emissions of nearly all types of air pollutants and CO2 than
burning coal or petroleum products to produce an equal amount of energy. About 117 pounds of CO 2 are
produced per million British thermal units (MMBtu) equivalent of natural gas compared with more than 200
pounds of CO2 per MMBtu of coal and more than 160 pounds per MMBtu of distillate fuel oil. The clean
burning properties of natural gas have contributed to increased natural gas use for electricity generation
and as a transportation fuel for fleet vehicles in the United States.9
Electric Vehicles
While natural gas-powered vehicles are the solid waste industries preferred form of alternative fuel, Waste
Management, Republic, and Waste Connections are all testing electric refuse vehicles, which do not directly
generate any vehicle emissions. In July 2020, 15 states, including Colorado, and Washington D.C, signed
a memorandum of understanding to work toward a goal of 100% of medium- and heavy-duty zero-
emissions vehicle sales by 2050. An added advantage of electric vehicles is that they generate significantly
less engine noise.
Eco-Cycle of Bolder recently unveiled what it claims to be the country’s first electric compost truck, and the
move toward electric vehicles is in line with Colorado’s draft Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction
Roadmap, which calls for an accelerated move to electric vehicles.
Operate-in-gear-at-idle Technology
Operate-in-gear-at-idle technology can also reduce emissions. Operate-in-gear-at-idle systems allow an
engine to run at much lower revolutions per minute (RPM) and thus conserve fuel when compared with
collection vehicles that do not have the technology. Operate-in-gear-at-idle systems save fuel by using a
larger hydraulic pump that produces the extra flow of fluid needed for a trash collection vehicle to load and
compact garbage at standard speeds while the engine remains at idle. Without the systems, truck operators
must shift the transmission and throttle the engine to power the hydraulic system every time they make a
route stop or want to pack the load. There is minimal effect on truck performance and fuel savings of as
much as 20% have been attributed to operate-in-gear-at-idle systems.10 Operate-in-gear-at-idle technology
is generally standard on new side loading equipment.
An added advantage of operate-in-gear-at-idle technology is that it significantly reduces engine noise. Most
of the loud engine noise associated with garbage trucks comes from revving the engine to pack the load.
With an operate-in-gear-at-idle trash truck the hydraulic system is capable of packing without revving the
engine and generating the associated engine noise.
6 Natural Gas Vehicles for America (NGVAmerica) is a national organization of roughly 200 companies and organizations
dedicated to the development of a growing, profitable, and sustainable market for vehicles, ships and carriers powered by
natural gas or biomethane.
7 Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are a collective term for toxic gas molecules that are chemical compounds between nitrogen
and oxygen and are an essential component of air pollution.
8 Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/13/natural-gas-leaks-methane-beyond-epa-
estimates/5452829/
9 Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration; https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/natural-gas-
and-the-environment.php
10 Ideal Idle Idea; K. Simpson, Waste Age, Sep 1, 2006 12:00 PM
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 5 of 9
Automatic Engine Shut-Off Systems
Idling engines can burn up to one (1) gallon of fuel per hour. A 2013 report from the Argonne National
Laboratory-Center for Transportation Research estimated that garbage trucks waste approximately 27.5
million gallons of fuel per year through idling, whether they’re waiting in line to drop off a load or providing
a comfortable place for a driver to take a break.
On-board engine controls can be installed that automatically cut off the engine after a set time period if a
driver leaves it idling. Waste Management, Republic, and Waste Connections all have installed automatic
engine shut off devices that shut the engine down after five minutes of idling on some of their vehicles. This
five-minute standard is consistent with the proposed time frame in EPA’s Model State Idling Law and in
accordance with the American Transportation Research Institutes Compendium of Idling Regulations.
Waste Management has mandated an idle shutdown policy, which means all of the company’s trucks with
electronic engines are programmed to shut down after five minutes of idling. Additionally, with the
installation of on-board computer GPS tracking technology, Waste Management can review how, when,
and where trucks idle, which will inform them as they develop new policies on the issue.11
Diesel Fuel Emissions12
A diesel engine, like other internal combustion engines, converts chemical energy contained in the fuel into
mechanical power. Diesel fuel is a mixture of hydrocarbons, which during an ideal combustion process
would produce only carbon dioxide (CO2), and water vapor (H20). Diesel emissions, however, also include
other pollutants, most of which originate from various non-ideal processed during combustion. Common
pollutants include unburned hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NOx) or particulate
matter. Total concentration of pollutants in diesel exhaust gases typically amount to some tenths of one
percent, with much lower, “near zero” levels of pollutants emitted from modern diesel engines equipped
with emission after treatment devices such as NOx reduction catalysts and particulate filters. Given the
relatively low levels of those pollutants, our review of diesel emissions focused on the production carbon
dioxide, which is the major greenhouse gas produced by burning diesel fuel.
Contracted/Districted vs. Open Competition System Vehicle Emissions
Projections
Implementing a contracted or districted collection system would also reduce overall vehicle emissions as a
result of the reduction in the number of residential trash collection vehicle miles traveled. Table 1 provides
a comparison of projected Refuse Vehicle engine carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions for a contracted or
districted collection system, with one hauler per residential street, versus an open competition collection
system with an average of 3.5 and 7.0 haulers per residential street.
Table 1
11 Solving the truck-idling Problem; Laura Waldman 2013; Sustainable America.
12 Source: https://dieselnet.com/tech/emi_intro.php
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 6 of 9
As shown, one hauler operating in the City providing weekly solid waste and yard waste service, and
biweekly recycling, is estimated to generate approximately 300 tons of carbon equivalents annually.13,14
Assuming that on average 3.5 licensed haulers provide service on each residential street under the current
open competition system, a total of 828 carbon equivalent tons are generated by their Refuse Vehicles;
52715 more carbon equivalent tons annually.
Recommendations
Contract or district collection services to reduce Refuse Vehicle emissions.
Require all Refuse Vehicle engines be equipped with emission after treatment devices such
as NOx reduction catalysts and particulate filers.
Require all Refuse Vehicles to be equipped with operate-in-gear-at-idle technology, and
automatic engine shut-off systems.
Consider requiring the testing/use of at least one electric Refuse Vehicle should the City
contract Citywide services to a single hauler.
Refuse Vehicle Noise
Background / Overview
Noise from trash trucks can be related to a number of factors including:
Engine noise;
Backing alarms;
Noise at the point of collection (dumping material such as glass in curbside recycling systems);
Time of collection; and
Vehicle maintenance.
The specific strategies and options to reduce those noise impacts depend in large part on the source of the
noise. Some jurisdictions have established specific noise standards that haulers must comply with during
collection operations (e.g., decibel ratings within a specified distance from the vehicle).
Engine Noise
Engine noise associated with residential trash trucks is largely related to revving of the engine when the
vehicle is packing. Diesel garbage trucks can generate noise levels of up to 100 decibels. Two of the most
significant options available to reduce trash truck engine noise are:
Converting to CNG, LNG, or electric engines; and
Using “operate-in-gear-at-idle ” technology16.
In addition to the above options, a well-built, tight-fitting, well-maintained vehicle can also help reduce noise.
13 A CO₂ equivalent (CO₂e) is a unit of measurement that is used to standardize the climate effects of various
greenhouse gases.
14 This is for on-route miles driver only and does not account for miles driven back and forth from the route to the
corporation yard, landfill, and yard waste and recyclable material processing facilities.
15 The analysis assumes that 30 percent of the City’s residential streets are in home owners associations with a
single hauler providing service on those streets.
16 With non-operate-at-idle vehicles the engines need to rev when the body is packing. With an operate at idle vehicle
there is a hydraulic system on the body which is capable of providing the hydraulic pressures need to pack without
revving the engine, which creates noise.
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 7 of 9
A study in the Netherlands found there were noise reductions with natural gas vehicles of 90% inside the
truck, 98% beside the truck, and 50% behind the truck compared to diesel powered vehicles.17 Our
understanding is that Waste Management has its own natural gas fueling station and currently operates a
natural gas fleet in the city, while the other licensed haulers operate diesel vehicles. Electric vehicles offer
the potential for further significant vehicle noise reduction, although their technical viability within the solid
waste industry has yet to be proven.
In addition to fuel savings, operate-in-gear-at-idle technology also significantly reduces engine noise. Most
of the loud engine noise associated with garbage trucks comes from revving the engine to pack the load.
With an operate-in-gear-at-idle trash truck there is a separate hydraulic system on the truck body. This
separate hydraulic system provides the pressure needed to pack the load without revving the engine and
generating the associated engine noise. Many Refuse Vehicle manufacturers offer operate-in-gear-at-idle
technology standard on vehicle models, including Heil and McNeilus.
Backing Alarms (Beepers)
Vehicle backing and noise associated with vehicle backing alarms are most often associated with
commercial collection activities. Placing limits on the time of commercial collection activities near residential
neighborhoods can help address related noise issues. “Smart” back-up alarms can also be used. These
alarms sense the level of ambient noise and adjust accordingly. In quiet conditions the alarm beeps at a
much quieter level. Smart Alarms are also available that sound at a minimum decibel level only when radar
detects an object and makes a sound only as long as the danger exists.18
Noise at Point of Collection
Noise at the point of collection (i.e., emptying containers) can be reduced by taking various actions to
reduce engine noise, as discussed above. In addition, efforts to reduce noise associated with the dumping
of materials, particularly glass recovered through the curbside program can also be taken. These include
commingling of glass with other recyclable materials, reducing dump heights and potentially eliminating
glass from the curbside program, although we are not recommending the City consider doing so.
Overall noise associated with residential collection operations at the point of collection would not be reduced
under a districted collection system since it does not reduce the number of pickups, only the number of
vehicles making those pickups. The noise produced in transit from point-to-point would be reduced however
due to fewer vehicles. The noise associated with collection operations would also be limited to a specific
day in each neighborhood.
Time of Collection
Section 15.423 of the City’s Municipal Code [Hours of Operation] states that, “No collector shall operate
any vehicle for the purpose of collection of solid waste, recyclables, food scraps, or yard trimmings on any
non-arterial street as designated by the City’s Master Street Plan between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00
a.m.” Time restrictions placed on residential collection activities are common. Some jurisdictions also limit
the time of commercial collection activities, which by their nature are noisy, within a specified distance of
residential neighborhoods (e.g., not before 7:00 a.m. within 200 feet of a residential area). The City’s
municipal code does not place any limits on the time of commercial collection other than as specified above.
Vehicle Maintenance
Effective vehicle maintenance can also reduce noise. Assuring that vehicles are well built, tight-fitting and
well maintained will help reduce vehicle noise.
Recommendations
Contract or district collection services to reduce Refuse Vehicle noise.
Require all Refuse Vehicles to be equipped with operate-in-gear-at-idle technology.
17 Ahhhh…the Peaceful Sounds of Garbage Trucks; N. Stiles; MSW Management May/June 2007.
18 Note: Any vehicle specification requirements need to consider applicable local, state and federal requirements.
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 8 of 9
Consider requiring the testing/use of at least one electric Refuse Vehicle should the City
contract Citywide services to a single hauler.
Refuse Vehicle Safety
Background / Overview
Solid waste operations can pose safety risks to employees and the general public. The consideration of
“Safety First” is central to an effective solid waste management operation as safe operations enhance
productivity and profitability.
According to the Department of Labor Statistics, Refuse and Recyclable Material Collectors have the one
of the most dangerous jobs in the country with a fatality rate approximately 10 times the national average.
A University of Miami study found that the leading cause of on-the-job fatalities for refuse and recyclable
material collectors is impatient motorists who try to pass the garbage truck and hit the collector.
Trash collection activities also result in interaction with the general public and as such generate the potential
for public safety issues. Efforts to reduce those interactions (e.g., contracted or districted collection), make
the public more aware of collection vehicles and drivers (e.g., signage, lights), and providing drivers with
additional training and tools to provide for safer collection operations (e.g., video recorders) all contribute
to increasing public safety as it relates to trash collection services.
Waste Management, Republic Services, and Waste Connections all have reported safety records that
compare favorably to the industry average. Waste Management Inc., the largest solid waste services
provider in the country, has a model “Mission to Zero” plan and has significantly reduced worker injuries
since the model was implemented. Republic, the second largest solid waste provider in the country, has
paid particular attention to vehicle safety, including adding or replacing all incandescent lights with LED’s
and additional LED strobe lights on each side and the front of the vehicles.
Many of the vehicle specifications, and other best practice industry safety initiatives have been embraced
by the National Haulers to varying degrees. Best practice vehicle safety systems include:19
Collision Avoidance Systems and Advance Driver Assistance Systems - Smart vision sensors
can detect possible collisions with other vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, and fixed objects and alter
the driver visually and audibly to take proper measures to avoid collisions. The addition of smart
sensors to the sides of large trucks addresses the blind zones and obstacles experienced by the
operators.
In-Cab Recording Systems - Automotive recording systems have become a staple for many
companies. In-cab recorders typically have two cameras, one facing inside the cab and the other
showing the view outside of the windshield. Most systems allow for extra cameras that can offer
supporting views including backup views, side views and extra interior views. Recorders serve
multiple purposes for both the operator and fleet manager. For the driver, most recorders also
incorporate an event alert system that will chime when an event such as speeding or harsh braking
occurs. The chime reminds the driver to take action to correct or avoid another event. Many are
used as a “what happened” tool after an accident and can provide irrefutable evidence to exonerate
drivers if they are the subject of a false liability claim. In-cab recorders can also offer live tracking
and streaming via 4G LTE allowing managers to track vehicles throughout the route.
Multi-Camera Systems - Camera and monitor kits can act as extra eyes and ears for drivers. The
most commonly used camera is the backup camera used to show the otherwise “blind area” behind
a vehicle during reversal. This may be sufficient for standard cars, but larger vehicles have many
more blind zones to cover around the vehicle. New surround view camera systems provide a 360°
aerial view of the vehicle and cover the immediate perimeter around the vehicle. This is achieved
by “stitching” together the image from multiple cameras—typically four. This is a game changer for
19 Source: https://wasteadvantagemag.com/how-to-maximize-the-safety-for-waste-trucks-and-operators/
ATTACHMENT 11
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 6, 2022
Page 9 of 9
waste truck operators. With the use of a surround view system, immediate blind zones around the
vehicle are visible to the truck operator.
The City may also wish to require haulers to report overweight vehicles periodically (e.g., monthly or
quarterly) and potentially establish fines for overloaded vehicles. Overloaded vehicles present a safety
hazard and are of particular concern with respect to Refuse Vehicle impacts on the City’s streets, most
notably residential streets. The impact of Refuse Vehicles on the City’s streets increases exponentially with
weight, and as such overloaded vehicles exert significantly greater impacts on the City’s streets than
vehicles that do not exceed their legal load weights.
Recommendations
Contract or district collection services support increased Refuse Vehicle safety.
Consider requiring that all Refuse Vehicles be equipped with the state-of-the-art safety
technologies as conditions of the City’s hauler licenses or contracts.
Consider requiring haulers to track and report overweight vehicles.
ATTACHMENT 11
1512 Eureka Road, Suite 220, Roseville, CA 95661 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com
June 11, 2022
Ms. Kira Beckham
Lead Specialist
Environmental Sustainability
City of Fort Collins
300 LaPorte Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80521
submitted via email: kbeckham@fcgov.com
SUBJECT: Final Report - Trash Collection Street Maintenance Impact Analysis
Dear Ms. Beckham:
R3 Consulting Group, Inc. (R3) was engaged by the City of Fort Collins (City) to update our trash collection
street maintenance impact analysis that was prepared for the City in 2008. Specifically, to compare the
impacts of residential trash, recycling, and yard waste collection vehicles (Refuse Vehicles) on the City’s
residential streets and associated street maintenance costs for the City’s current open competition system
as compared to a contracted or districted collection system with a single hauler operating in any given area
of the City. This Letter Report provides the results of our analysis.
Project Objectives
To project the impact of the City’s licensed haulers’ Refuse Vehicles on the City’s residential and
collector streets, and determine the associated annual street maintenance cost for the current open
competition system.
To calculate the associated annual street maintenance cost savings that would result from a
contracted or districted collection system.
Limitations
Our analysis is based on a number of underlying assumptions for which reasonable ranges exist, including
the average number of vehicle trips per day per residential street, the percentage of those trips made by
various vehicle types, and the associated axle loadings of each vehicle type. Changes to those assumptions
can have a material impact on the resulting findings.
* * * * * * *
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City. Should you have any questions regarding our
letter report or need any additional information, please contact me by phone at (916) 947-4880 or by email
at wschoen@r3cgi.com.
Sincerely,
William Schoen | Senior Project Director
R3 Consulting Group, Inc.
916.947.4880 | wschoen@r3cgi.com
ATTACHMENT 12
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 2 of 12
Summary Findings
Street Maintenance Budgeted Expenses
Under the current open competition system with an average of three and a half (3.5) licensed haulers
operating on each residential street, Refuse Vehicles are projected to be responsible for 24.4% of the
vehicle impacts (i.e., wear and tear) on those streets, and 10.9% of the vehicle impacts on collector streets.
The portion of the City’s annual residential and collector street maintenance budget attributed to Refuse
Vehicles currently operating within the City’s open competition system is projected at $889,000 annually.
Under a contracted or districted system, Refuse Vehicles are projected to be responsible for 8.0% of the
vehicle impacts on residential streets, and 3.3% of the vehicle impacts on collector streets. The portion of
the City’s annual residential and collector street maintenance budget attributed to Refuse Vehicles
operating under a contracted or districted system is projected to be $286,000 annually; $603,000 less than
under the current open competition system.
Street Maintenance Unfunded Backlog
The City’s current residential and collector street maintenance unfunded backlog expenses are $82 million
and $43 million, respectively. Based on the vehicle impacts reported above, and all other factors the same,
approximately $16 million of that current $82 million residential backlog expense can be attributed to
residential Refuse Vehicles, and approximately $5 million of the $43 million collector backlog attributed
to Refuse Vehicles. Had the City historically had in place a contracted or districted system, all other factors
the same, the total residential and collector street backlog would be $14 million less.
Refuse Hauler Vehicle Impact Fees
If the City’s costs to repair street pavement impacts caused by Refuse Vehicles where charged back to the
haulers in the form of a Refuse Hauler Vehicle Impact Fee, under the current open competition system the
monthly charge to the haulers would be $1.50 per month per residential account. Under a contracted or
districted system that charge falls to $0.50 per month; $1.00 less than under the current open competition
system. Those fees do not account for any recouping of the existing backlog attributed to Refuse Vehicles,
which if considered would increase those fees.
Contracted, Districted and Open Competition Systems Considerations
If effectively implemented, the City can move from an open competition residential collection system to a
contracted or districted system and likely realize a cost (customer rate) savings, and/or improved services.
This is due to the significant operational efficiencies and economies of scale that contracted and districted
collection provides versus an open competition system. A contracted system with a single contracted hauler
serving the entire City is the most operationally efficient and cost effective collection system.
There is currently a competitive market place in the region with the three largest national haulers competing
for regional market share. The regional market is likely to remain competitive regardless of what happens
with the City’s residential collection system. Under a contracted or districted system rates can be effectively
controlled and flow control can be maintained. Moving to a contracted or districted collection system will
not create a monopoly and likely will not significantly impact the three national haulers (Republic Services,
Waste Management and Waste Connections). It is not known what the impact would be on Mountain High
Disposal if it lost its residential market share.
As a condition of a contracted collection system, the City could require the selected hauler to hire all
qualified displaced drivers and mechanics as a condition of the award of the contract. The City could also
require the selected hauler to maintain displaced employee seniority, honor any scheduled vacations,
provide a matching 401K program, and/or other conditions it may wish to establish.
A contracted or districted collection system does not enable residents to select their hauler although
residents could opt-out of those services if they choose to. The City can however charge an opt-out fee for
doing so. To the extent that residents were to opt out of a contracted or districted collection system, the
benefits associated with contracted or districted collection would be negatively impacted. The City’s
regulatory oversight would also need to increase with an opt-out provision with multiple haulers to regulate.
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 3 of 12
Background
In Fort Collins, residential trash, recycling, and yard waste services are provided by the following four (4)
licensed private trash haulers:
Mountain High Disposal
Republic Services
Ram Waste Systems (Waste Connections); and
Waste Management
Residents are free to subscribe to collection services from any of the licensed haulers, with trash haulers
competing for market share. Under this open competition system, multiple haulers provide service on each
residential street each week, with resulting street maintenance and other impacts.
In 2008, R3 assisted the City with a Trash Services Study to determine opportunities to reduce the impacts
of trash collection services in the City and increase diversion. That review included projecting the relative
impact of trash, recycling, and yard waste vehicles (Refuse Vehicles) on the City’s streets and associated
street maintenance costs for the City’s open competition residential collection system. The analysis also
projected Refuse Vehicle street maintenance impacts associated with a “districted” residential collection
system under which the City would be broken into service districts with a single hauler operating in each
district. Moving from an open competition collection system to a districted collection system would reduce
the number of Refuse Vehicle miles traveled on any given residential street with a corresponding decrease
in the associated street maintenance impacts.
All other factors the same, moving from an open competition residential collection system to a districted
collection system would reduce the number of Refuse Vehicle miles traveled on the City’s residential
streets. As a result, there would be a significant corresponding decrease in the associated vehicle street
maintenance, emission, and noise impacts, improved neighborhood aesthetics, and fewer Refuse Vehicle
accidents and related property damage.
Overview
Road maintenance is based on deterioration. While roads will deteriorate if simply left unused, most
deterioration is associated with use, and the damage caused by vehicles increases exponentially with size
and weight. Therefore, costs associated with maintenance are greater for trips made by heavy vehicles. A
single large truck can cause as much damage as thousands of automobiles, and the configuration of the
truck can affect the amount of damage as well. If the load is spread over more axles, there is less weight
on each wheel, and damage is reduced.1
Refuse Vehicles are typically the heaviest vehicles regularly operating on residential streets and are a
significant contributor to the wear-and-tear experienced by those streets. While Refuse Vehicles also
contribute to the wear-and-tear on commercial streets, those streets are designed to a higher standard
and experience significantly more vehicle trips and large truck trips than residential streets. As such, the
relative impact of a Refuse Vehicle on commercial streets is significantly less than that on residential
streets.
The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a common unit of measure used to rate the condition of pavements.
The PCI rates pavements on a scale of 0 to 100, with a higher value indicating better pavement condition
(see Table 1 below). Rapid deterioration of pavement typically occurs after roadways drop to a PCI of 60
or lower, and studies have shown that every dollar spent performing preventative maintenance on a
roadway with a PCI of 70 or higher saves $4 in the future – it would otherwise cost about $5 to rehabilitate
the same roadway once rapid deterioration occurs2 (Figure 1). Assuring adequate funding for an effective
pavement management system is therefore critical to achieving a cost-effective pavement management
system.
1 A. Rufolo, Cost-Based Road Taxation, Cascade Policy Institute, November 1995.
2 J. Gerbracht, Bay Area Roads Close to “Tipping Point”, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Street Talk,
March 2006.
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 4 of 12
Table 1 - PCI by General Street Condition Rating (Class)
Figure 1 - Pavement Life Cycle
Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission
The goal of a pavement management program is to bring all roads up to “good” or “excellent” condition
where they can be maintained most cost-effectively.3 The strategy often recommended is referred to as the
“best first approach”, which concentrates spending initially on routine and preventative maintenance on
roads that are currently in fair to good condition. This extends the useful life of those roads, preventing rapid
deterioration. Spending money now on routine maintenance prevents additional spending in the future on
more expensive repairs.
The average PCI of the City’s streets is 74, which is in the “Satisfactory” range. Attachment A provides a
projection of the City’s PCI based on a number of funding scenarios. As shown, based on the assumptions
noted, the City’s PCI is projected to drop from 74 (Satisfactory) to 68 (Fair) by 2032; approaching the point
at which maintenance cost begin to escalate dramatically.
Relative Impact of Refuse Vehicles
The relationship between axle weight and inflicted pavement damage is not linear but exponential, and a
single Refuse Vehicles can have an impact on the City’s streets equivalent to more than 1,000 automobiles.
As part of the analysis of trash truck impacts we evaluated the impacts of trash trucks relative to other types
of vehicles, including delivery trucks and buses. Table 2 below provides a comparison of the average
PCI range Class
85-100 Good
70-85 Satisfactory
55-70 Fair
40-55 Poor
25-40 Very Poor
10-25 Serious
0-10 Failed
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 5 of 12
equivalent single axle load (ESAL) factors for the various vehicle types noted4 to the estimated ESAL’s of
residential trash and recycling trucks operating in the City. The impacts are presented in Passenger Car
Equivalents.
Table 2 - Comparison of Refuse Vehicle Street Impacts with Other Vehicle Types
As shown, it is estimated that residential recycling vehicles exert an impact on the City’s streets of more
than 900 automobiles, while residential trash and yard waste trucks have an impact equivalent to 1,250
automobiles. The above analysis is based on a passenger car ESAL Factor of 0.0008. R3 is aware of
other analyses that use a passenger car ESAL Factor as low as 0.0004, which if used would double the
Passenger Car Equivalents for residential recycling and trash and yard waste trucks shown in Table 4.
Approach
Our approach to projecting Refuse Vehicle street maintenance impacts is based on common principals of
pavement design and vehicle loadings. The basic premise is that all vehicles, including Refuse Vehicles,
exert an impact on streets that can be quantified. That impact or “vehicle loading” can be expressed as an
ESAL, which is a function of the vehicle’s weight and the distribution of that weight over the vehicle’s axles.
By projecting the number and type of vehicles (i.e., cars, trucks, Refuse Vehicles) that travel on a street
over its design life, and the average ESAL associated with each vehicle type, the total ESALs that street
will experience can be calculated. The relative impact associated with a specific type of vehicle (e.g., Refuse
Vehicle) can then be determined based on the percentage of total ESALs attributed to that vehicle type.
Refuse Vehicle impacts, as determined above, were projected for the current open competition system
under a “base case” assumption that, on average 3.5 licensed haulers provide weekly residential refuse
and yard waste collection and every other week recycling collection services on each residential street,
making two passes down each residential street to provide each service. This equates to a total of five (5)
passes down each residential street each week for each, for an total of 17.5 total Refuse Vehicle passes
down each residential street each week. Under a districted system, with one hauler providing all three
services in a given geographic area of the City, the total number of weekly residential Refuse Vehicle
passes on a given residential street is five (5); two passes each for refuse and yard waste, and one (1) for
recycling service; approximately 30% of the vehicle passes under the open competition system.
4 Based on sample data reported by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.
General Classification AASHTO Classification
Cars Passenger Cars 2 0.0008 1
Vans/Pickups Other 2-Axle/4-Tire Trucks 2 0.0052 7
Large Pickups / Delivery Vans Panel and Pickup Trucks 3 0.0122 15
Large Delivery Trucks 3 or More Axle Trucks 3 0.1303 163
Local Delivery Trucks 2-Axle/6-Tire Trucks 2 0.1890 236
Residential Recycling Trucks 2 0.7500 938
Buses Buses 2 or 3 0.6806 851
Residential Trash/Yard Waste Trucks 3 1.0000 1,250
Long Haul Semi-Trailers Various Classifications 3 - 5+ 1.1264 1,408
(1) AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures; Table D-21 with exception of Refuse Vehicles
Vehicle Type Passenger
Car
Equivalents
ESAL
Factor (1)
Number of
Axles
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 6 of 12
Methodology
》 The City’s budgeted residential and collector street maintenance costs were assigned to Refuse
Vehicles in proportion to the projected impacts of Refuse Vehicles as a percentage of the vehicle
impacts on the City’s residential and collector streets.
》 The City’s existing residential and collector unfunded backlog costs were assigned to Refuse
Vehicles in the same proportions as for the current street maintenance budgets above.
Major Assumptions
Funding / Backlog Expense
》 The City’s current residential street maintenance annual budget is $5.5 million.
》 The City’s current collector street maintenance annual budget is $2.0 million.
》 The City’s current residential street maintenance backlog expense is $82.0 million.
》 The City’s current collector street maintenance backlog expense is $43.5 million.
Residential Street Impact and Budget Allocation Assumptions
》 Thirty percent (30%) of residential streets are in home owner associations that are serviced by one
(1) licensed hauler. It is assumed that 30% of the City’s residential street maintenance budget is
spent on those streets. Switching to a contracted or districted system would not change the impact
of Refuse Vehicles on those streets or impact that portion of the residential street maintenance
budget.
》 Twenty percent (20%) of residential streets have solid waste service provided in alleys, with those
residential streets not experiencing any Refuse Vehicle impacts. It is assumed that 20% of the City’s
residential street maintenance budget is spent on those streets. Switching to a contracted or districted
system would not change the impact of Refuse Vehicles on those streets or impact that portion of the
residential street maintenance budget.
》 Fifty percent (50%) of the City’s residential streets receive curbside service from an average of 3.5
licensed haulers operating on each of those streets each week. It is assumed that 50% of the City’s
residential street maintenance budget is spent on those streets. Switching to a contracted or districted
system would change the impact of Refuse Vehicles on those streets. This portion of the City’s
budget, which is impacted by Refuse Vehicles, is referred to as the “Impacted Residential Street
Maintenance Budget” in the analyses below, and equals $2.75 million annually.
Vehicle Loadings / Impacts
》 ESAL loadings for residential and commercial Refuse Vehicles, cars and other trucks are based
on data from various sources including the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
Residential Streets
》 There are an average of 1,000 vehicle trips per day on a typical residential street each day, with
3.0% of those trips made by heavy trucks, not including Refuse Vehicles.
》 Each licensed hauler’s vehicles make a total of five (5) passes down each residential street that
they provide services on each week, with refuse and yard waste service provided weekly, and
recycling provided every other week.
Collector Streets
》 There is an average of 2,500 vehicle trips per day on a typical collector street, with 3.0% of those
trips made by heavy trucks, not including Refuse Vehicles.
》 Each licensed hauler’s vehicles make a total of five (5) passes down a typical collector street each
week with refuse and yard waste service provided weekly, and recycling provided every other week.
》 All residential accounts on collector streets receive curbside service.
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 7 of 12
Findings
Street Maintenance Budgeted Expenses
Our analysis considered the following two scenarios, each assumes an average of 1,000 vehicle trips per
day per residential street and 2,500 vehicle trips per day per collector street, with 3% of those trips made
by trucks other than Refuse Vehicles. For each scenario the annual street maintenance costs for the current
open competition system are compared to the costs for a contracted or districted collection system with a
single hauler providing service on each residential and collector street.
Scenario 1
An average of 3.5 licensed haulers operating on each residential and collector street, each making
a total of 5.0 weekly vehicle passes; 17.5 total weekly Refuse Vehicle passes residential and
collector street per week.
Scenario 2
An average of seven (7.0) licensed haulers operating on each residential street making a total of
5.0 weekly vehicle passes; 35 total weekly Refuse Vehicle passes per residential and collector
street per week.
Scenario 1 – 1,000 Vehicles per Day per Residential Street - 3.5 Haulers
Under this scenario, the projected annual street maintenance cost savings to the City for a contracted or
districted residential collection system, versus the current open competition system is $603,000, as shown
in Table 3 below.
Table 3 – Scenario 1 Analysis
Under the City’s current open competition collection system it is estimated that, on average, Refuse
Vehicles account for 24.4% of total vehicle impacts on the City’s residential streets. Under a districted
collection system with only one licensed hauler providing services on any given residential street that impact
is 8.0% (67% less). Refuse Vehicles have much lesser impacts on collector streets as they represent a
smaller percentage of all vehicle trips, and there is a larger percentage of other truck traffic on collector
streets.
Residential Street Assumptions Collector Street Assumptions
3.5 Licensed Haulers 3.5 Licensed Haulers
1,000 Vehicles per Day 2,500 Vehicles per Day
3.0%Truck Percentage 3.0%Truck Percentage
Annual
Impacted
Residential
Street
Maintenance
Budget
Refuse
Vehicle
Impact as
Percent of
Total Vehicle
Impacts
Portion
Attributed to
Residential
Refuse Vehicles
Annual
Collector
Street
Maintenance
Budget
Refuse
Vehicle
Impact as
Percent of
Total Vehicle
Impacts
Portion
Attributed to
Residential
Refuse
Vehicles
Open Competition 2,750,000$ 24.4%670,000$ 2,000,000$ 10.9%219,000$ 889,000$
Contracted or Districted 2,750,000$ 8.0%220,000$ 2,000,000$ 3.3%66,000$ 286,000$
Annual Savings with Contracted/Districted Collection = 450,000$ 153,000$ 603,000$
Residential Streets Collector Streets
Total
Annual
Cost
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 8 of 12
Scenario 2 – 1,000 Vehicle Trips per Day per Residential Street – 7.0 Haulers
Under this scenario, the projected annual street maintenance cost savings to the City under a contracted
or districted residential collection system, versus the current open competition system is $1.251 million, as
shown in Table 4 below. That is roughly double the projected Refuse Vehicle cost impact for Scenario 1
above.
Table 4 – Scenario 2 Analysis
Sensitivity Analysis
Changes to the assumptions used for the above analyses can have a material impact on the results. To
provide a sense for the sensitivity of the resulting financial impacts to changes in the underlying
assumptions we considered the following changes to Scenario 1:
Scenario 1A
2,000 vehicles per day per residential street with 3.0% of those trips made by trucks other than
Refuse Vehicles.
Scenario 1B
1,000 vehicles per day per residential street with 5.0% of those trips made by trucks other than
Refuse Vehicles.
Table 5 provides the resulting financial impacts for each of the above sensitivity scenarios. As shown, as
the number of vehicle trips per day and the percentage of those trips made by trucks other than Refuse
Vehicles increases, the associated impact of Refuse Vehicles decreases, although is still significant.
Residential Street Assumptions Collector Street Assumptions
7.0 Licensed Haulers 7.0 Licensed Haulers
1,000 Vehicles per Day 2,500 Vehicles per Day
3.0%Truck Percentage 3.0%Truck Percentage
Annual
Impacted
Residential
Street
Maintenance
Budget
Refuse
Vehicle
Impact as
Percent of
Total Vehicle
Impacts
Portion
Attributed to
Residential
Refuse Vehicles
Annual
Collector
Street
Maintenance
Budget
Refuse
Vehicle
Impact as
Percent of
Total Vehicle
Impacts
Portion
Attributed to
Residential
Refuse
Vehicles
Open Competition 2,750,000$ 41.2%1,133,000$ 2,000,000$ 20.2%404,000$ 1,537,000$
Contracted or Districted 2,750,000$ 8.0%220,000$ 2,000,000$ 3.3%66,000$ 286,000$
Annual Savings with Contracted/Districted Collection = 913,000$ 338,000$ 1,251,000$
Residential Streets Collector Streets
Total
Annual
Cost
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 9 of 12
Table 5 – Sensitivity Analyses
Street Maintenance Unfunded Backlog
The above cost projections do not account for the City’s current deferred (unfunded) street maintenance
backlog. That unfunded backlog consists of pavement maintenance that is needed but cannot be performed
due to lack of funding.. The City has a $82 million residential street unfunded backlog and a $43 million
collector street backlog. If it is assumed that Refuse Vehicles contributed to those backlogs in a similar
proportion to Refuse Vehicles current projected impact on residential and collector streets, it is reasonable
to assign an associated portion of those costs to Refuse Vehicles.
Table 6 provides that allocation for Scenario 1 (1,000 vehicle trips). As shown, it is projected that $20.7
million of the total residential and collector street unfunded backlog expense is attributed to Refuse
Vehicles. Had the City historically had in place a contracted or districted system, all other factors the same
the total residential and collector street backlog would be $14.0 million less.
Table 6 – Scenario 1 Backlog Allocation to Residential Refuse Vehicles
Alley Maintenance Costs
The above analyses are specific to the City’s residential and collector streets, and as noted assume that
20% of residents receive alley service. While information was not available that would allow us to perform
a specific analysis of the impact of Refuse Vehicles on the City’s alley repair costs, the City spends
approximately $60,000 annually on residential and commercial alley repair. It is reasonable to assume that
Current
Residential
Street
Maintenance
Backlog
Expense
Refuse
Vehicle
Impact as
Percent of
Total Vehicle
Impacts
Portion
Attributed to
Residential
Refuse Vehicles
Current
Collector Street
Maintenance
Backlog
Expense
Refuse
Vehicle
Impact as
Percent of
Total Vehicle
Impacts
Portion
Attributed to
Residential
Refuse
Vehicles
Open Competition 82,000,000$ 24.4%15,978,000$ 43,000,000$ 10.9%4,703,000$ 20,681,000$
Contracted or Districted 82,000,000$ 8.0%5,247,000$ 43,000,000$ 3.3%1,427,000$ 6,674,000$
10,731,000$ 3,276,000$ 14,007,000$
Total
Annual
Cost
Collector StreetsResidential Streets
Scenario 1 Scenario 1A Scenario 1B
Licensed Haulers 3.5 3.5 3.5
Vehicles per Day 1,000 2,000 1,000
Truck Percentage 3.0%3.0%5.0%
Open Competition 889,000$ 587,000$ 590,000$
Contracted or Districted 286,000$ 286,000$ 286,000$
Savings with Contracted/Districted Collection 603,000$ 301,000$ 304,000$
Residential Street Assumptions (1)
Total Annual Residential Refuse Vehicle Street
Maintenance Cost
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 10 of 12
Refuse Vehicles are responsible for some, potentially significant portion of that expense specific to the
maintenance of residential alleys.
Refuse Vehicle Hauler Impact Fees
Regardless of whether or not the City decides to maintain its current open competition residential collection
system or move to a contracted or districted collection system, it may wish to consider charging licensed
haulers a fee to offset the street maintenance cost impacts of their residential Refuse Vehicles. While we
are not aware of any cities in Colorado that charge such a fee, “Refuse Vehicle impact fees” have been
applied in California for more than 15 years and in many cases the amount of those fees were based on
studies that used the same methodology R3 used for this analysis. Table 7 provides the projected monthly
and annual Refuse Vehicle Impact Fee charge per residential account for Scenario 1 (3.5 haulers)
As shown, under the current open competition system a monthly fee of $1.50 per residential account would
fund the portion of the City’s current street maintenance budget associated with Refuse Vehicle impacts.
Under a contracted or districted system that monthly fee would be $0.50 per residential account; $1.00 less
per month than for the open competition system.5
Table 7
Note: The calculated fees in Table 7 do not account for any recouping of the existing unfunded backlog
attributed to Refuse Vehicles, which if considered would increase those fees potentially
significantly depending on the period of time over which they were recouped.
Contracted, Districted, and Open Competition Systems Considerations
R3 is a consulting firm that has worked exclusively for municipal agencies for more than 15 years, we do
not work for private haulers. We do however have good working relationships with Waste Management,
Republic Services, and Waste Connections (National Haulers), as well as many other regional and local
haulers, and regularly interact with their local and regional staff on behalf of our clients. We have direct
experience with all types of residential and commercial solid waste collection system structures, and
specifically contracted, districted, and open competition services.
In support of the City’s consideration of contracted or districted solid waste collection services we offer the
following considerations, based on our experience:
1. Community Outreach and Education is Critical - Residents typically have a lot of questions
about how they would be impacted by a contracted or districted residential collection system. It is
important that they receive accurate information, that addresses the major issues and concerns so
that residents have an informed understanding of the associated impacts.
5 This analysis assumes the calculated cost impact is spread across all residential accounts evenly.
Monthly Refuse
Vehicle Street
Maintenance
Impact Fee per
Residential
Account
Annual Refuse
Vehicle Street
Maintenance
Impact Fee
per
Residential
Account
Open Competition 1.50$ 18.00$
Contracted or Districted 0.50$ 6.00$
Savings with Contracted/Districted Collection 1.00$ 12.00$
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 11 of 12
2. Maintaining Flow Control - Flow control can be established as a condition of any contracted or
districted system. In either case, the City would contractually require the selected hauler(s) to use
City designated facilities (e.g., Larimer County landfill), or allow proposers to offer an alternative
site, which the City could allow at is sole discretion.
3. Benefits of Contracted or Districted System versus an Open Competition System -
In addition to reduced Refuse Vehicle impacts, which can be significant, a major advantage of
districted and contracted collection as compared to open competition are the significant operational
efficiencies to be realized. The operational efficiencies that are gained by collecting every account
on a street rather than only a portion are substantial. As collection operations comprise the majority
of costs (monthly rates), there is a potential for significant cost savings (and/or service
improvements) to be realized within a contracted or districted system.
4. Benefits of Contracted versus Districted Collection System - A single hauler contracted
system provides for economies of scale with respect to required management, administration and
operational resources when compared to a multiple hauler districted system, and there are potential
associated cost savings and/or service improvements that can be realized. City contract
management requirements are also significantly less with a single contracted hauler versus multiple
districted haulers.
5. Opt Out Provisions Undercut the Benefits of Contracted and Districted Collection –
If the City chooses to contract or district collection services, Colorado law preserves the right for
residents to choose their waste hauler, although residents could be charged an opt-out fee for doing
so. If the City contracts or districts collection services, to the extent that residents opted-out from
the City’s selected hauler the benefits associated with districted or contracted services would be
negatively impacted. Our experience has been that in those jurisdictions that have contracted
(franchised) collection the vast majority of residents would not support moving to an open
competition system with multiple haulers operating on their street. Under a contracted or districted
system the National Haulers’ operations while not interchangeable, are from the residents interface
generally similar, with programs and operational standards dictated by contractual requirements.
6. Meeting Zero Waste Goals – Many but not all of the City’s zero waste goals are achievable
under the current open competition system. The next step for the City on the path to zero waste is
to increase yard trimmings, and food scrap collection once infrastructure is available within a
reasonable haul distance. Yard trimmings and food scrap collection can take place under an open
market or contracted system but would be much more affordable under a contracted system. A
contracted system supports addressing zero waste goals and other community livability goals
through the same action.
7. National Haulers Routinely Win and Lose Contracts - The three National Haulers that
operate in the City routinely compete for franchised collection services. Winning and losing
contracts is part of the industry and should any National Hauler not be awarded a residential
collection system contract with the City going forward they would reassign their assets and move
on. The National Haulers are not going to be significantly impacted by losing their existing
residential market share should the City contract with an exclusive hauler. It is not known the extent
to which Mountain High Disposal would be impacted should it lose its residential market share.
Note: It is not uncommon for the winning hauler to reimburse a city for the cost of a competitive
procurement process.
8. There is a Competitive Local Marketplace - Districting for purposes of maintaining
competition in the City is not necessary. If the City enters into an exclusive contract with a hauler,
if and when that contract goes back out for a competitive procurement, all of the National Haulers
and other regional haulers will likely have a significant interest. The most significant step the City
can take to ensure ongoing competition for its residential collection system is for it to own the
corporation yard that its contracted hauler operates out of. Access to a local corporation yard
location is a major factor impacting a hauler’s interest/ability to compete for a collection franchise.
If the City owns the corporation yard any hauler in the State or nationally that wanted to compete
for the City’s contract would have the ability to effectively do so. They simply come in and set up
shop at the City’s refuse corporation yard and pay the City a monthly rent.
ATTACHMENT 13
Ms. Kira Beckham
June 11, 2022
Page 12 of 12
9. Contracted or Districted Services do not Create a Monopoly - Contract term lengths and
the annual rate adjustment mechanism need to be contractually established, and if you have a
strong performance-based franchise agreement that holds the hauler to objective safety, customer
service, public education and outreach, financial and operational standards, you have an effective
regulatory framework.
10. Rate can be Effectively Controlled - With contracted or districted services the competitive
marketplace establishes the reasonableness of the initial rates. An annual rate adjustment
mechanism needs to be defined and made known to the haulers at the time they prepare their
proposals. A Refuse Rate Index (RRI) is one method for annual adjustments that uses a number
of indices (e.g., labor, fuel, vehicle capital cost, vehicle maintenance cost, consumer price), and is
intended to model actual changes in major cost items. An option for an special rate adjustment can
also be provided to address extraordinary circumstances (e.g., change in law, force majeure, costs
beyond contactor’s control). Alternatively, costs can periodically be set to actual expenses, plus a
reasonable profit.
11. Street Maintenance Costs and Refuse Vehicles Contribution to those Costs are
Going to Increase Unless City is Able to Maintain its Current CPI - At current budgeted
levels the average PCI of the City’s streets is projected to decrease from “good” to “fair” by 2032.
The most significant step the City can do to maintain the quality of its residential streets and starve
off the significant street maintenance cost increases that begins as streets fall from good to fair to
poor quality is eliminate the current open competition residential collection system and not allow
for an opt-out provision.
12. City Can Require Winning Hauler to Hire All Displaced Drivers and Mechanics - There
is a shortage of qualified drivers and mechanics throughout the industry, and any hauler that wins
a contract in the City would likely look to hire as many of the drivers and mechanics from those
companies that did not win a contract as it could. Any Request for Proposals can require the winning
hauler to offer employment to all displaced qualified drivers and mechanics as a condition of the
award of the contract. Additional requirements can also be established including require the
selected hauler to maintain displaced employee seniority, honor any scheduled vacations, provide
matching 401K program, and/or any other conditions the City may wish to establish or encourage.
13. Municipal Operations Generally Cannot Compete with Private Sector Operations -
We are not aware of any jurisdiction that has moved from a collection system operated by private
haulers to a municipal operation. The price of entry alone may make this option a non-starter given
that fully automated solid waste vehicles can approach $400,000 each, and obtaining qualified
drivers, mechanics, and other staff is extremely difficult in the current employment market. Even if
the City could afford to implement a municipal collection system, it is very unlikely that it could
effectively compete with a private sector hauler operating under a well-designed performance
based franchise agreement. This is due to the fact that Municipal operations:
a) Do not have the economies of scale of regional or national haulers;
b) Do not have access to the significant corporate safety, customer service, vehicle
maintenance and other resources of regional or national haulers, and
c) Unlike private haulers, municipal collection managers do not have direct control over a
city’s safety, vehicle maintenance, or customer service functions, all of which are
fundamental to collection system performance. It is not uncommon for a city’s safety
resources to be inadequate for the safety management demands of solid waste collection
operations, and for fleet services to prioritize the maintenance of police and fire vehicles
above that of Refuse Vehicle. City customer service functions also commonly fill a broader
demand than just solid waste customer service needs, which can impact performance
versus an industry specific customer service function with objective contractual
performance standards.
Attachments:
A Pavement Condition Projections
ATTACHMENT 13
66.0
67.0
68.0
69.0
70.0
71.0
72.0
73.0
74.0
75.0
66.0
67.0
68.0
69.0
70.0
71.0
72.0
73.0
74.0
75.0
2022 2023 2024*2025 2026 2027*2028 2029 2030*2031 2032
Year
Pavement Condition Projections
3.5% Plus $1M in 2023 Plus 3.0% 2024 - 2032 Annual Budget Increase, PCI drops from 74.1 in 2022 to 72.0 in 2032
3.5% Increase in 2023 Plus 3.0% 2024 - 2032 Annual Budget Increase, PCI drops from 74.1 in 2022 to 70.6 in 2032
$16.471M Constant Current Annual Budget, PCI drops from 74.1 in 2022 to 68.2 in 2032
4.15.2022*Data Collection Years
Pavement Condition
Index (PCI)LOS B
LOS C
Attachment AATTACHMENT 13
Multiple District Options in Contracted Systems
Many communities shifting from an open market to a contracted system explore a districted system as it often seems
like a "middle ground" between an open market with many haulers and a single hauler contract.
Multiple Colorado communities have explored districted systems: Lakewood, Westminster, Arvada and Fort Collins (in
2008). In each community other than Arvada, the contract didn't move forward. In Arvada, one hauler won every
district, and it now functions as a single district contracted community.
All Colorado communities with a contracted trash and recycling system have a single district.
Multiple Districts
•Often perceived as “middle ground” between
open market and single hauler
•No successful models in Colorado
•Dilutes the benefits of a contracted system
•Complications: different prices between
districts for the same service
•Would delay Request for Proposals (RFP)
release
Single District
•Lowest price
•Most environmental benefits
•Many successful models in Colorado
•Haulers remain in community – continue to
service other sectors in Fort Collins and
adjacent areas
•Continued low price, competitive proposals
from many haulers
If Councilmembers are interested in exploring a Multiple District scenario in Fort Collins, it would be important to be
clear about the goal to be accomplished via Multiple Districts. The following chart includes some potential goals of a
Multiple District scenario and potential considerations for each.
Potential Goal Likely #
of
districts
Considerations
Maintain a “backup”
hauler in the
community
2
•No matter the size of the district, haulers right-size staff and equipment to
service needs in the community; if an issue arose with one hauler, it would
still take time to increase capacity of another hauler to begin serving more
areas
•Could incentivize negotiating to a higher price proposal
Keep all haulers in
the community
active in the general
residential market
4
•Not possible to restrict competitive purchasing process to only existing
haulers
•All haulers currently operating in the community will stay in the community
as they continue to service their commercial, multi-family, construction and
demolition and Homeowners’ Association customers
Make at least one
district at a scale that
could be won by a
small hauler
2?
•Cannot guarantee district would be won by small hauler
•Smaller haulers are commonly purchased by large national haulers, so even
if a small hauler won a district, it may not be serviced by a small hauler for
the length of the contract
ATTACHMENT 13
Single Family Tr ash,
Recycling and Compost
Contracting
July 19, 2022
City Council Regular Session
Caroline Mitchell
Lindsay Ex
Additional project team members:
Kira Beckham
Sylvia Tatman-Burruss
Ashley Pace
Sheela Backen
Te ssa Dieter
Molly Saylor
ATTACHMENT 14
2Strategic Alignment
City Plan
Council Priority:
Explore Districted
System for Garbage,
Recycling and
Compost
Principle ENV 5:
Create a Zero Waste
system.
Environmental Health
4.3 Zero Waste
Strategic PlanCouncil Priority Our Climate Future
Big Move 2:
Zero Waste
Neighborhoods
Aligned:
Advance Regionalism
Accelerate Composting
Improved Air Quality
Enhanced Recycling Education
Critical Path to
Achieving Climate
Goals (composting)
3Systems for Tr ash and Recycling Collection
City RolePure Open
Market
Each household chooses their own hauler for trash and
recycling collection. No role of local government.
Municipal
Hauling Utility
A m unicipality owns and operates their own hauling utility
using city staff, resources and equipment.
Open Market
with Licensing
Each household chooses their own licensed hauler for trash
and recycling collection. City license can support safety
requirements and/or policy goals like including recycling.
This is Fort Collins’current system.
Contracted
System
A m unicipality contracts with one or more companies to
provide residential trash and recycling collection.
This is the system under consideration.
4Contracting vs Open Market
M M M M M M M M
M W T F F M TW
Open Market System: multiple haulers, serviced on different days of the week
Contract System: single hauler, serviced on same day of the week
5Impacts of an open market hauling system
Fort Collins’open market trash and recycling hauling system creates an estimated:
$603,000 more street maintenance cost every year (67% more)
$14 million of the $82M street maintenance backlog is due to open market system
If there were 7 haulers in neighborhoods, would be $1.25 million more than single hauler
1200 MTCO2e greenhouse gas emissions from hauling
Equivalent to the energy use of approximately 150 homes/year
More noise
More risk of accidents
More vehicle emissions
=1,250
150
Inequitable pricing
some residents paying 100%more for same service
differences from same companies in same area of town
6Pricing within Fort Collins
Ta keaways:
•Pricing varies
significantly for the
same trash cart size
within Fort Collins
($10-$15 / mo.,
$120 -$180 / yr)
•Pricing even varies
with same hauler in
same area of town
$20
$39
$46
$18
$33
$38
$10
$26
$31
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
$45
$50
Small Medium Large
Fort Collins Monthly Open Market Trash Price by Cart Size
All Haulers Combined
Average
$10 (100%)
difference
$13 (50%)
difference
$15 (48%)
difference
7Fort Collins Open Market Pricing Compared with Other Systems
Fort Collins
Open Market
Fort Collins
HOAs w contract
Boulder
Open Market
Golden
Single District Contract
Lafayette
Single District
Contract
Bundled services
(no extra charge)
Services by request /
for extra charge
To tal monthly cost
(small trash + yard trims)$23 -38
$6-$11
(w/o yard
trimmings)
$35 $11.50 $20.50
Cost compared w FC
open market
-$4 to -$9
(40%-45% less)
+ $13 to -$3
(56% more
to 8% less)
-$11.50 to -$26.50
(50% to 70% less)
-$2.50 to -$17.50
($11% to 46% less)
= recycling = yard trimmings = food scraps = bulky waste
8Engagement Summary
Priorities with the highest percentage of “extremely important” responses:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Reducing Air
Pollution
Reasonable
Costs
Quality Customer
Service
Consistent
Recycling
Education
Reducing Illegal
Dumping
Stable Uniform
Rates
All Responses Targeted Survey Input gathered via:
•Virtual
community
meetings
•Open community
survey
•Ta rgeted Survey
Also continued
engagement with
haulers:
•3 support
exploring
contracted
system
•1 prefers current
system
9Recommended Elements to be Included in Resolution
Material Recommendation
Ya rd
Trimmings
Weekly collection from April –Nov
Request pricing for optional, bundled
pricing
Bulky
Waste
(Items too
large to fit in
curbside cart)
Request two versions of bulky waste
pricing:
a-la-carte (not in base trash charge) and 2
items / year included in base trash charge
Trash Keep volume-based pricing
Recycling
Pricing model: Bundled w trash service for
no extra charge
Service frequency: Request pricing for
weekly and every-other-week service
Food
Scraps Do not include in this contract
Materials to be Collected and How
Element Recommendation
HOAs
with current
contracts
Allow exemption if current contract
meets current requirements; Can
choose to join City contract
Carts
•Purchased by hauler, reimbursed
from fee on monthly bill
•Utilize / seek grant funding to
offset cost
•Hauler maintains carts
•Include City logo, become City
property at end of contract
Opt-Out
Fee
Equal to smallest trash cart service
cost
Districts One district
Flow
Control
Direct trash to Larimer County
Landfill
System Design
Element Recommendation
Customer
Service
Conducted by hauler;
Require Fort Collins-
focused staff
Admin Fee
Include a fee to fund
City role in contract
management
Alley
Service Included
Va let
Service Included
Billing Conducted by hauler
Multi-family /
Commercial
Dumpster
Pricing
Request pricing from
haulers
10Staff Recommendation
Adopt Resolution 2022-079 confirming elements of a contracted system for
residential waste and recycling collection, which will be included in a
Request for Proposals (RFP)
12Differences Between Contracted System and Monopoly
Monopoly Contracted Trash and Recycling System
No competition Competitive purchasing process with many haulers
submitting proposals
Unrestricted price
increases
Contract allows for price increases in predetermined manner
for specific reasons
Generally higher prices Generally lower prices
No other service providers
Haulers remain in community servicing commercial & multi-
family, construction and demolition, Homeowners’Association
customers
Lack of choice for other
options Can pay an opt-out fee and work with a different hauler
13What would happen to a hauler that wasn’t awarded a contract?
•Existing nationally-owned haulers
•Could continue to service commercial, multi-family and construction site customers
(70% of market)
•Could continue to service existing HOA contracts (10% of market)
•Could shift staff to servicing accounts in adjacent communities
•Is significant staff turnover now; possible that existing attrition over the 12-18 month
roll-out period would prevent any jobs ending
•Hauler awarded the contract would likely be adding staffing
•New locally-owned hauler
•Could adjust business model to service other Northern Colorado communities
Haulers would have 12-18 months to plan and adjust
Existing haulers have many other customers in Fort Collins and surrounding areas
14Multiple District Options and Tradeoffs
Potential Goal
Likely #
of
districts
Considerations
Maintain a “backup”
hauler in the
community
2
·No matter the size of the district, haulers right-size staff and equipment to
service needs in the community; if an issue arose with one hauler, it would still
take time to increase capacity of another hauler to begin serving more areas
·Could incentivize negotiating to a higher price proposal
Keep all haulers in
the community active
in the general
residential market
4
·Not possible to restrict competitive purchasing process to only existing haulers
·All haulers currently operating in the community will stay in the community as
they continue to service their commercial, multi-family, construction and
demolition and Homeowners’Association customers
Make at least one
district at a scale that
could be won by a
small hauler
2?
·Cannot guarantee district would be won by small hauler
·Smaller haulers are commonly purchased by large national haulers, so even if
a small hauler won a district, it may not be serviced by a small hauler for the
length of the contract
-1-
RESOLUTION 2022-079
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
DIRECTING THE DESIGN AND ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR A
RESIDENTIAL WASTE SERVICES PROGRAM WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
CITY
WHEREAS, on December 17, 2013, City Council adopted Resolution 2013-011
recognizing that the City’s history of public education regarding recycling and solid waste
reduction and waste reduction goals from 1985 through the adoption of Resolution 1999-139 and
establishing the goal of diverting 50% of the community’s waste stream from landfill disposal by
2010; and
WHEREAS, on January 15, 2019 City Council adopted Resolution 2019-010 supporting
the Larimer County Solid Waste Infrastructure Master Plan (SWIMP) and on April 16, 2019
Council adopted Resolution 2019-047 authorizing the execution of an Intergovernmental
Agreement in support of implementation of the SWIMP as a member of the North Front Range
Regional Wasteshed Coalition, including adopting policies to support the development of the
infrastructure identified in the SWIMP such as flow control of trash to the Larimer County
Landfill; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 2014, City Council adopted Resolution 2014-098,
establishing the City’s Waste Diversion Policy with the goal of achieving “zero waste” by 2030
(with interim goals) and recognizing the City’s “Road to Zero Waste” plan created to achieve
this policy goal and the resulting direct economic and environmental benefits to the local and
global community; and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution 2021-031 approving
and adopting the Fort Collins Our Climate Future Plan as a combined and comprehensive update
to the City’s Climate Action Plan, updated Energy Policy and Road to Zero Waste Plan
articulating a commitment to mitigate climate change, and energy and waste reduction goals,
including recycling and waste diversion as a vital strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions;
and
WHEREAS, by adoption of Resolution 2019-048 and Ordinance No. 040, 2020, City
Council adopted the 2019 City Plan as the City’s comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, the 2019 City Plan includes Principle ENV 5, which sets forth the City’s
policies to create a Zero Waste System, and Policies ENV 5.1 through 5.5 calling for reduction
and reuse, regional collaboration on infrastructure and policy development, landfill diversion,
facilitation of efficient and sustainable practices and employment of a sustainable materials
management approach to waste reduction and diversion; and
WHEREAS, in 2021, the City Council directed City staff to examine ways to reduce the
impacts of trash collection services in Fort Collins, including street wear, air quality,
neighborhood aesthetics, noise, and other neighborhood impacts, and to identify ways to improve
diversion rates for recyclable and compostable materials; and
-2-
WHEREAS, based on a study conducted by a contracted third party, having numerous
heavy trash vehicles on City streets impedes the attainment of these goals and accelerates the
deterioration of City streets, causing additional street maintenance costs of more than $600,000
per year; and
WHEREAS, based on a study conducted by a contracted third party, having numerous
trash vehicles on City streets impedes the attainment of greenhouse gas emission reduction goals
by emitting an additional 1,200 metric tons of CO2e per year; and
WHEREAS, at least four residential trash haulers currently provide service within the
community, resulting in at least four trash trucks and four recycling trucks using residential
streets to provide residential collection services each week, causing increased street wear, air
pollution, noise, potential safety concerns, and other neighborhood impacts; and
WHEREAS, analysis of open market residential trash bills in Fort Collins indicates that
residents currently pay 50% - 100% different prices for the same service, even from the same
company in the same area of town and a contracted system would provide predictable uniform
rates across the community; and
WHEREAS, additional yard trimmings collection is a key step to achieving climate and
waste reduction goals and a contracted system allows for the opportunity to expand yard
trimmings collection for a more affordable price than open market collection; and
WHEREAS, at its April 12, 2022, Work Session, the City Council reviewed the goals and
priorities for implementation of a contracted waste system and expressed interest in continued
pursuit of feasibility and analysis for implementation of this service across the community; and
WHEREAS, based on further discussion by the City Council at its July 12, 2022, Work
Session, staff has prepared this Resolution to reflect the service elements and the structure of a
residential waste program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to proceed with the next steps toward
implementation of a system for City waste services, including trash and recycling collection
services, for residential customers, excluding industrial, commercial or multifamily residences of
eight or more units (“Residential Waste Services”) in the manner described and recommended by
City staff.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and
findings contained in the recitals set forth above.
Section 2. That the Council hereby directs the City Manager to prepare a program
description for a program to require use of and/or impose a fee for Residential Waste Services
-3-
provided by the City through one contractor within its boundaries (the “Residential Waste
Program”), designed to meet the requirements of Colorado statute, including the following
elements:
(a) Trash collection, including volume-based pricing (based on size of cart,
also known as Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT));
(b) Recycling collection, bundled with trash collection service for no
additional charge;
(c) Yard trimmings collection, either bundled with trash collection service at
no additional charge or as an optional service for a fixed price;
(d) Bulky item collection, with either a-la-carte pricing or two pickups per
year bundled with trash collection service;
(e) An exemption during the term of an existing contract for homeowners’
associations with existing contracts in place for trash and recycling
services, provided such contracts comply with the City’s Pay-As-You-
Throw requirements and all other applicable requirements;
(f) Carts provided and maintained by contracted hauler, which shall remain at
households and become City property at the end of the Residential Waste
Services contract;
(g) Carts funded by a monthly fee to be collected by contracted hauler;
(h) An “opt-out” fee for any resident declining Residential Waste Service,
equivalent to the smallest trash cart service cost;
(i) An administrative fee to fund the City’s role in managing the contract for
Residential Waste Services;
(j) Contracted hauler to provide customer service, alley service, valet service
for disabled residents, and billing for Residential Waste Services;
(k) A set price for dumpster service that multi-family and commercial
customers can choose to use; and
(l) Require contracted hauler to dispose of all waste and recycling collected at
the Larimer County Landfill owned and operated by Larimer County
(“flow control”).
Section 3. That the City Council hereby directs the City Manager and City Attorney
to:
(a) Proceed to develop a Residential Waste Program that is generally
consistent with the elements set forth in this Resolution and finalize and issue a
request for proposals (RFP) for Residential Waste Services that is generally
consistent with the Residential Waste Program elements described herein;
(b) Publish notice of the City’s intent to provide Residential Waste Services
within the boundaries of Fort Collins and charge a fee for such Services, in
accordance with applicable Colorado statute, and meet any other applicable
statutory requirements consistent with the purposes of this Resolution;
-4-
(c) Prepare, issue and review all proposals submitted in response to a Request
for Proposals (RFP) for a Residential Waste Services Program as des cribed in this
Resolution, with such additional terms and conditions or modifications as the City
Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be consistent with
this Resolution and necessary or appropriate to protect the interests of the City or
advance the objectives of the City Council;
(d) If a satisfactory contract for services can be negotiated, develop Municipal
Code changes necessary to enact a Residential Waste Services Program and fee to
be imposed on residential properties within the City, and present those proposed
changes and the proposed contract for City Council consideration or, if no
proposal is sufficient or satisfactory, report that outcome to the City Council, no
later than April 15, 2023.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this
19th day of July, A.D. 2022.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk