HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 09/23/2008 - TRASH SERVICES STUDY UPDATE AND RECOMMENDATIONS DATE: September 23, 2008 WORK SESSION ITEM
STAFF: Darin Atteberry FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Ann Turnquist
Susie Gordon
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Trash Services Study Update and Recommendations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since January, staff has been conducting the Trash Services Study. Throughout the summer, the
Project's focus has been on community feedback. The purpose of this work session will be to review
the feedback and to review five alternative actions for Council's consideration. Staff would like
Council's direction on which, if any, options it wishes to pursue. The alternatives include:
1. City-wide Contract for Service or Districted Trash Service (includes PAYT and Recycling
Enhancements.)
2. Additional License Requirements without Districting.
3. Implementation of Recycling Strategies.
4. Additional License Requirements and Implementation of Recycling Strategies without
Districted Trash Service.
5. Null Alternative/No Legislative Changes.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Based on Council's feedback from the last work session,staff believes that Council's highest
priorities for addressing solid waste issues are to increase overall recycling rates and improve
the effectiveness of the City's licensing and hauling requirements. Are these Council's
highest priorities?
2. Given Council's highest priorities, which of the options outlined below will best meet
Council's goals?
3. Should staff pursue one or more options and eliminate other alternatives from further
consideration?
BACKGROUND
On July 8, City Council, staff and the City's trash consultant R3 Consulting met for a work session
to provide an update on the progress of the Trash Services Study. R3 Consulting Group has
completed its Trash Services Study report, including an analysis of Fort Collins' current open
September 23, 2008 Page 2
competitive trash system and a large number of alternative solutions which address the problem
statement offered by the City. The problem statement that staff and the consultant have been
addressing includes:
"In what ways can the City reduce the impacts of trash collection services in Fort
Collins, addressing issues of the cost of street wear, air quality, neighborhood
aesthetics, noise, and other neighborhood impacts? Are there ways that the City
might also improve diversion rates for recyclables?"
Council's feedback regarding the Study at the July work session included the following:
• Council directed staff to ensure that the project thoroughly addresses diversion issues, in
addition to the collection system issues.
• An overarching concern of Council was to ensure that all policy options need to be
considered as a cost/benefit analysis. Is the net improvement of any action (regulatory,
education,data collection, etc.)great enough to offset the cost to the city,the hauler and the
customers?
• In several cases,Council asked for additional data regarding the current trash hauling system.
Data needs included the number of residential customers served through HOA contracts,
definitive data regarding actual weights of materials sent to the landfill, detailed current
diversion rates, and the value of materials that could be diverted in the future.
• An issue that the consultant emphasized, and Council supported, was the concept that any
action toward increasing diversion must target both incentives to customers to reduce land
filled materials(i.e.,through Pay-as-you-throw(PAYT)ordinance)and incentives to haulers
to maximize diversion. Council discussed the concept that haulers could benefit if the City
ensures a level playing field where all haulers are implementing the PAYT effectively and
incentives are created for performance.
• Council noted that residential waste is only part of the issue because the commercial
customers account for more than 50%of the community's waste stream. Council also took
note that state law limits much of the regulation of commercial waste collection.
• Council generally agreed that regulations regarding trash truck appearance should not be
considered.
Staff Recommendation
Staff proposes that Council consider implementing Option 4 which would address a number of the
issues identified through the Study and leave in place the existing system of open competition in
trash hauling. By implementing additional requirements on trash hauler licenses and implementing
several strategies for increasing recycling,staff believes that the City can make significant progress
on reaching the City's 50% diversion goal. This Option would also not be as disruptive to the
community and would not have as great a potential impact on local trash hauling businesses. Staff
also believes that by adding licensing requirements for detailed hauler data, the City will be in a
better position to make data driven decisions about the trash hauling system in the future.
The attached memorandum outlines five alternatives for Council's consideration, ranging from a
City-wide Contract for Service to the Null Alternative—No Legislative Changes. (Attachment 1)
September 23, 2008 Page 3
Options for Council Consideration
• Option 1: City-wide Contract for Service or Districted Trash Service (includes PAYT
and Recycling Enhancements)
• Option 2: Additional License Requirements without Districting
• Option 3: Implementation of Recycling Strategies
• Option4: Additional License Requirements andlmplementationofRecyclingStrategies
without Districted Trash Service
• Option 5: Null Alternative/No Legislative Changes
Since July, staff has conducted an outreach process with the community to gather feedback on the
findings of the study and the general options presented at the July work session. Attachment 2 is a
collection of the feedback provided by a large number of residents.
Staff utilized a wide variety of methods for providing information to the community and gathering
feedback. Approximately 306 people provided comments via an online comment form on the City's
web site,with 85 generally in favor of a districted model, 162 generally opposed to the concept and
59 expressing other comments such as support for recycling programs,increased Pay-as-you-Throw
strategies, more HOA agreements, or to relate their experiences with other trash systems. A
complete compilation of these on-line comments is included in Attachment 2.
Community outreach included the following:
• City News featured article (August Utility Bill)
• Studio 14 Community Program (Channel 14)
• FCgov.com web site and comment form
• Natural Resources Advisory Board
• Air Quality Advisory Board
• Transportation Board
• Chamber Local Legislative Affairs Committee
• Property Management Companies letter
• Neighborhood Night Out flyer
• Recyclone Times Article
• Coloradoan City Green article
• Coloradoan In the City article
• Community meeting
• League of Women Voters Crosscurrents program
In gathering feedback and discussing trash issues with the community, it is clear that the issue is
conflict-ridden. Residents have strong opposing views of both the issue and the solutions offered.
While many residents believe that the City either has a responsibility to intervene in the trash
collection system to eliminate perceived inefficiency or develop new recycling programs,an equally
September 23, 2008 Page 4
large number of residents strongly oppose government intervention in the market for trash hauling
services.
Staff looks forward to discussing both the Study and the alternatives presented. Staff is seeking
direction from Council on policy priorities and which altemative(s)to continue pursuing.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memorandum, Trash Services Staff Recommendation, September 18, 2008.
2. Community Outreach and Feedback.
3. Trash Service Study copy
4. Work Session Follow-up Memorandum, September 6, 2008
5. Natural Resources Board recommendation.
6. Powerpoint presentation.
City Manager's Office
City of City Hall
Fort Collins For LaPorte Ave.
• PO Box 580 Fort Collins,CO 80522
970.221.605
970.224.6107-fax
fcgov.com
Attachment 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Ann Tumquist, Policy and Project Manager{//I
Susie Gordon, Senior Environmental Planner
THRU: Darin Atteber y, City ManageiQ
Diane Jones, Deputy City Manag
John Stokes,Natural Resources rector
RE: Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
• DATE: September 18, 2008
Original Problem Statement:
"In what ways can the City reduce the impacts of trash collection services in Fort Collins,
addressing issues of the cost of street wear, air quality, neighborhood aesthetics,noise, and other
neighborhood impacts? Are there ways that the City might also improve diversion rates for
recyclables?"
Options for Council Consideration:
Option 1: City-wide Contract for Service or Districted Trash Service (includes PAYT and
Recycling Enhancements)
Option 2: Additional requirements without Districting
Option 3: Implementation of Recycling Strategies
Option 4: Additional requirements and Implementation of Recycling Strategies without
Districted Trash Service
Option 5: Null Alternative .
Staff Recommendation:
Staff proposes that Council consider implementing Option 4 which would address a number of
• the issues identified through the Study, and leave in place the existing system of open
competition in trash hauling. Staff believes that this option would achieve many of Council's
Page 1 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
goals. By implementing additional requirements on trash hauler licenses and implementing
several strategies for increasing recycling, staff believes that the City can make significant
progress on reaching the City's 50% diversion goal. These options would also not be as
disruptive to the community and would not have as great a potential impact on local trash
hauling businesses. Staff also believes that by adding licensing requirements for detailed hauler
data, the City will be in a better position to make data driven decisions about the trash hauling
system in the future.
In developing the staff recommendation, staff considered both the potential benefits of each
alternative and the costs to both the City and the community. For example, a districted trash
model could save the City $170,000 or more a year in street maintenance, but would likely cost a
$75,000-150,000 (one-time)in administrative and legal costs to develop and implement the
program, and on-going administration costs, auditing and oversight of the haulers ($25,000 -
$50,000 annually) These are costs that may be recovered through fees on customer bills or
through increased licensing fees for haulers. General Fund financing through a 2010-11 BFO
offer could be another funding source.
Though a City-wide Contract for Service or a Districted Trash Service model would likely yield
the greatest results in addressing Council's problem statement, staff believes that other
alternatives address Council's highest priorities with the least disruption to the community and
impact on local trash hauling businesses. The recommendation to pursue greater licensing
requirements would allow the City to concentrate its efforts on ensuring that overweight trucks
are not damaging City streets, enforcing and strengthening the Pay-as-you-Throw(PAYT)
ordinance, and gathering data from haulers that will provide a basis for future discussions about
the trash hauling system. Creating recycling performance standards for haulers is another
important tool for increasing diversion. By implementing recycling strategies from the 2006
Draft Strategic Plan For 50%Solid Waste Diversion, the City can increase diversion in volumes
that will help the City achieve both its 50% diversion goal and its green house gas reduction
goals outlined in the Fort Collins Climate Action Plan.
Regardless of the alternative which is ultimately selected, additional enforcement of existing
requirements and enhancements to the recycling programs will require additional financial
resources to be effective. In working with the consultant, R3 Consulting, staff has begun to look
at alternative sources of revenue to fund solid waste programs. Some alternatives for funding
could include an increase to the haulers licensing fees either as a flat annual fee or as a dollars-
per-account formula, or a City licensing fee placed directly on customer bills. The City can also
consider General Fund resources for programs during the next budget cycle, 2010-2011.
Depending on the options pursued, staff will need to further develop these funding scenarios.
Page 2 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Option 1: City-wide Contract for Service or Districted Trash Service (includes PAYT and
Recycling Enhancements)
Goals Achieved
Cost of street wear
Air quality
Neighborhood aesthetics
Noise
Other neighborhood impacts
Diversion rates for recyclables
Develop a City-wide Contract for Trash Services or develop two or more trash districts for the
community. The City would offer private trash haulers the opportunity to competitively bid on
providing trash and recycling services either to the entire community or districts within the
community. Haulers would be required to meet a number of standards for service level,
compliance with local requirements and customer service. The contract(s) would be awarded for
• the right to provide exclusive trash service either to the entire City or district(s) based on price
and qualification. The City could determine which accounts would be included in the contract
(all residential customers or all customers not currently within a HOA with a trash service
contract)
In exchange for the exclusive contract for service, haulers would be required to meet a set of
conditions that the City would provide. Conditions could include setting minimum diversion
rates for recyclables, methods for ensuring compliance with vehicle weigh limits, and/or other
conditions that achieve City defined goals.
A portion of the efficiency savings from a districted trash system would likely accrue to the
residential customers, since many are likely to find that their monthly trash rates will decrease
when the haulers have more consolidated routes. For example, in Lafayette, individual
customers who contracted for trash service outside of an HOA agreement typically paid $15-18
per month for their basic service. Under the districted model,customer rates are now $13 per
month, and include curbside recycling services which were not previously provided in the
community. If, as the haulers have asserted, 50% of residences are currently served under an
HOA consolidated service agreement, the remaining 50%of households in Fort Collins would
likely see their monthly charges decrease. This could total $3-5 per month,times the remaining
20,000 residential customers, for a community savings of$720,000—$1,200,000 per year.
Actual savings could only be calculated when bids are received and reviewed.
The analysis of the costs and benefits of a city-wide contract for service or a districted system
• has been stymied by the unwillingness of the trash haulers to provide more data than is currently
required for their license. Without detailed information about routes and HOA/neighborhood
Page 3 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
contracts,the City is unable to conduct a detailed cost/benefit analysis of this option. City Staff
and the consultant have both asked for this type of data from the haulers, but they are not
required to provide this information to the City. The haulers consider this data to be proprietary
business information.
Option 1: City-wide Contract or Districting
Financial Benefits: Costs:
• Savings to City for street maintenance • City implementation costs= $75,000—
= $170,000+ $150,000
• Potential savings to residents = lower • Ongoing City administrative costs=
monthly rates with increased efficiency $25,000 - $50,000 annually; not
of system (based on experience of other including City billing costs, if required
communities)
Achieves: Shortcomings
■ Reduced Truck Traffic Fear of cost increases causes concern for
=> $170,000+ savings in street some residents. Actual cost of service
maintenance (could be more under revised system would be unknown
because we don't know how many until bids are solicited (though bids need
trash vehicles are over legal weight not be accepted if offers represent
limits) significant cost increase)
=> 136 tons+ in reduced CO2
emissions
=> Less fuel consumed by haulers
■ Increased neighborhood aesthetics with Customers lose choice of haulers which
fewer days of trash cans on streets, is an objection by many residents who
more uniform containers and less noise commented on the issue
• Increased safety with fewer trucks in Bigger government and more
neighborhoods governmental requirements a negative
for some
■ More readily available tools for If implement multiple districts:
increased diversion—could require => Different prices in each district possible
successful bidder(s)to: if there is more than one contract
Achieve minimum diversion rates awarded
Provide 65 gallon single stream => City billing might be required to ensure
containers for recyclables which has the same price for all residents resulting
led to increased volumes in other in higher administrative costs. These are
communities costs that may be recovered through fees
Offer yard waste at additional on customer bills or through increased
charge with a set formula approved licensing fees for haulers.
by the City
Build in requirement for audit/data
verification by independent auditor
approved by City
Page 4 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
• Reduced overall cost with greater • Administrative costs for administrative
system efficiency due to economies of staff, program oversight, auditing,
scale possible billing
Other communities pay less after
contract for service established
Some in HOAs already enjoy these
rates—others could benefit too
Increased operational efficiency for
haulers
Competition preserved when
bidding on contract
■ Greater leverage to guarantee no ■ If require large single stream recycling
overweight vehicles if include containers, requires added cost for
contractual requirement for random customers to pay either through City
—weighingof trash trucks charge or hauler fee.
• One or more haulers may not be awarded
a district, depending on the outcome of
competitive bidding. This could
si nificantly impact a local business.
• Option 2: Additional requirements without Districting
Goals Achieved
Cost of street wear(through monitoring
weights/overloading)
o Air quality
o Neighborhood aesthetics
o Noise
o Other neighborhood impacts
4 Diversion rates for recyclables
Some of the goals of the original problem statement could be achieved with additional
requirements for permitted trash haulers through requirements of their annual license.
Additional requirements could include the following:
1. Require additional data to be reported on an annual basis, including:
— Number of customers by volume service (35, 65, 95 gallon)
— Detailed diversion data for recyclables
• — Calculated average diversion rate per residential customers
— Calculated percentage of materials collected
— HOA contract statistics and service area detail
Page 5 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
— Rate data
2. Format for customer education regarding recycling overseen or provided by the
City and distributed by hauler including:
a. Information regarding pay as you throw pricing structure
b. Current recycling instructions
3. Require staff training for haulers and customer service representatives regarding
Pay as you Throw pricing structure
4. Verify tons per yard data
5. Overloaded truck monitoring or auditing
Option 2: Additional requirements without Districting
Financial Benefits: Costs:
• Potential street maintenance savings to City • Monitoring overweight vehicles through
if overloaded trash vehicles limited portable scales or landfill scales =$150,000
• Savings to customers through effective use capital; could be cost to haulers for more
of PAYT pricing landfill trips if not currently meeting legal
load limits
• City administrative costs for enforcement,
auditing and hauler education and
monitoring = Cost range to be determined
Achieves: Shortcomings:
■ Provides data upon which to make future Does not address impact of trucks on
decisions re: trash system requirements, if streets or neighborhoods
desired goals are not met.
■ Could generate City revenue from license Does not address air quality
fees to use in administering programs
• Preserves customer choice Increases government requirements
■ Preserves business interests for local Increased administrative costs and cost of
haulers vehicle weight monitoring to City
Page 6 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Option 3: Implementation of Recycling Strategies
Goals Achieved
o Cost of street wear
Air quality(through improved diversion
rates and reduced community CO2)
o Neighborhood aesthetics
o Noise
o Other neighborhood impacts
Diversion rates for recyclables
Some of the goals of the original problem statement could be achieved by implementing
various strategies from the draft 2006 Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Diversion.
Some key items that could be implemented include:
1. Haulers must offer 65-gallon or 95-gallon, single-stream recycling containers to all
residential customers (City owned or hauler provided) Cost covered by additional
monthly fee on trash bill
2. Haulers must offer curbside organics recycling program (yard and food waste)
3. Allow haulers to provide bi-weekly recycling service which would alternate with
organic waste collection
4. Enhanced Pay-as-You-Throw Ordinance and Enforcement
■ Increase enforcement and auditing of compliance by haulers
■ Implement enforcement mechanism for failure to inform and failure to ensure
compliance in HOA contracts
• Reporting and auditing including HOA contracts
5. Develop minimum diversion standards for haulers (e.g. 10 pounds per residential
account per month)
6. Increased hauler licensing fee(flat fee or$1 per account) to use for:
■ promotion of recycling programs
■ rebates to haulers based on performance
7. Prohibit disposal of corrugated cardboard from landfill disposal—residential and
commercial
8. Begin to develop system for capturing Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste
from the waste stream. No facility for recycling C & D waste currently exists in
Latimer County, but by setting the goal of creating a system, the City may spur others
to develop such an option. The City could also consider funding its development as
part of an upcoming budgeting process.
•
Page 7 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Option 3: Implementation of Recycling Strategies
Financial Benefits: Costs:
• Reduced hauler tipping fees as recycling • Single stream containers = $ 40 - $65 each,
increases cost could be covered either through major
• Reduced trash expenses for customers who City initiative to provide, or could be added
successful reduce trash in favor of to monthly bills
additional recycling • Yard Waste=$ 11 per month for customers
who choose service
• Enhanced enforcement administrative costs
= $25,000 - $50,000 annually
• Increased hauler licensing fee approx $1
per account to be used for recycling
programs, containers, or hauler incentives;
likely to be passed on to customers
Achieves Shortcomings
• Increased diversion through education, • Does not address impacts of multiple trash
large single stream containers and organics trucks in neighborhoods including air
recycling uali ,noise, street wear and aesthetics
• Creates revenue which could be used for ■ Increased governmental requirements
recycling promotion and hauler incentives
to increase diversion rates
• Reduced CO2 emissions through improved ■ 65/95 gallon recycling containers would be
diversion rates, achieving goals of Climate costly if City provides or purchases them
Action Plan for resale (recoverable over time through
monthly charge)
■ Preserves customer choice • Increased City administrative costs
■ Preserves business interests for local ■ Some customers will not want or use a
haulers larger recycling container. Some do not
have adequate storage space for such a
container.
• Alternate week recycling would reduce
some truck traffic in neighborhoods and
reduce vehicle miles traveled for recycling
• Improved aesthetics with larger recycling
containers that are less susceptible to
spilling and wind blown recyclables
• Creates momentum for the development of
a future C&D recycling facility
■ Opportunity to increase commercial
recycling through prohibiting corrugated
cardboard in the waste stream
Page 8 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Option 4: Additional requirements and Implementation of Recycling Strategies without
Districted Trash Service
Goals Achieved
Cost of street wear(through monitoring
weights/overloading)
Air quality(through improved diversion rates and
reduced community CO2)
o Neighborhood aesthetics
o Noise
o Other neighborhood impacts
4 Diversion rates for recyclables
Staff recommends implementation of both options 2 and 3. Staff believes that this option
• would address a significant portion of the Council's goals, with the least expense to the City
and disruption to the community. It also preserves local business interests.
Option 4: Additional requirements and Implementation of Recycling Strategies without
Districted Trash Service
Financial Benefits: Costs:
• Reduced hauler tipping fees at landfills as • Monitoring overweight vehicles through
recycling increases portable scales or landfill scales= $150,000
• Potential for reduced trash expenses for capital
customers who successfully reduce trash in • City administrative costs for enforcement,
favor of additional recycling auditing and hauler education and
• Potential street maintenance savings to City monitoring $25,000 - $50,000
if overloaded trash vehicles limited • Single stream containers = $ 40- $65 each,
• Savings to customers through effective use cost could be covered either through major
of PAYT pricing City initiative to provide, or could be added
to monthly bills
• Yard Waste =$ 11 per month for customers
who choose service
• Increased hauler licensing fee approx $ 1
• per account to be used for recycling
programs, containers, or hauler incentives
Page 9 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Achieves Shortcomings
■ Increased diversion through education, ■ Does not address impacts of multiple trash
large single stream containers and organics trucks in neighborhoods including air
recycling ualit , noise, street wear and aesthetics
■ Creates revenue which could be used for • Increased governmental requirements
recycling promotion and hauler incentives
to increase diversion rates
■ Improved CO2 emissions through ■ Increased administrative costs and cost of
improved diversion rates, achieving goals vehicle weight monitoring to City
of Climate Action Plan
• Preserves customer choice • 65/95 gallon recycling containers would be
costly if City provides or purchases them
for resale (recoverable over time through
monthly charge)
■ Preserves business interests for local • Increases government requirements
haulers
■ Alternate week recycling would reduce • Does not address air quality
some truck traffic in neighborhoods and
reduce vehicle miles traveled for recycling
■ Improved aesthetics with larger recycling ■ Some customers will not want or use a
containers that are less susceptible to larger recycling container. Some do not
spilling and wind blown recyclables have adequate storage space for such a
container.
■ Provides data upon which to make future
decisions re: trash system requirements, if
desired goals are not met.
■ Could generate City revenue from license
fees to use in administering programs
• Preserves customer choice
■ Preserves business interests for local
haulers
■ Opportunity to increase commercial
recycling through prohibiting corrugated
cardboard in the waste stream
Page 10 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Option 5: Null Alternative—No Legislative Changes
Goals Achieved
Cost of street wear(through monitoring
weights/overloading)
o Air quality
o Neighborhood aesthetics
o Noise
o Other neighborhood impacts
o Diversion rates for recyclables
Implement no major changes to the trash system. Minor changes which could be
implemented either within existing staff resources or through future budget offers could
include:
• Increase distribution of a HOA/neighborhood kit to provide tools and advice for
contracting for consolidated neighborhood service
• Legislative lobbying for state changes to methods available to regulate commercial
trash haulers within Fort Collins
• Overloaded truck monitoring—Provide additional funding to Police Services to
monitor trash trucks to ensure they are not overloaded, or work with Larimer County
and the City of Loveland to purchase and install truck scales at the Larimer County
Landfill. ($150,000 one-time for scales)
Option 5: Null Alternative—No Legislative Changes
Financial Benefits: Costs:
• Incidental cost for distributing information
• Possible savings in street maintenance about how to consolidate service
costs if overweight vehicles eliminated. • Landfill scales = $150,000 one-time+
ongoing operational costs
• Overloaded vehicle monitoring= $25,000
per 2008-09 budget offer for truck
enforcement
Achieves Shortcomings
■ May increase voluntary trash services ■ Does not address impacts of multiple trash
consolidation by neighborhoods trucks in neighborhoods including air
quality, noise, street wear and aesthetics
• May help create opportunities to regulate ■ Increased governmental requirements
commercial trash hauling in the future
• ■ May reduce street damage if trash trucks • Increased administrative costs and cost of
are found to be running overweight vehicle weight monitoring to City
Page 11 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
■ Does not address air quality
• Requires additional administrative and
operational work by Latimer County if
scales are installed
Page 12 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Financial Costs and Benefits Summary
Trash Services Study Alternatives
Option 1: Districting Option 2: Additional Option 3: Option 4: Additional Option 5: Null
with increased requirements without Implementation of requirements and Alternative/No
Requirements/Recycli Districting Recycling Strategies Implementation of Legislative Changes
ng emphasis Recycling Strategies
without Districted
Trash Service
$ Costs to City $75,000 - $100,000 $150,000 one-time $25,000 - $50,000 $150,000 one-time $150,000 one-time
one-time scales for landfill; ongoing scales for landfill; scales for landfill, if
implementation; $25,000 ongoing administration $25,000 - $50,000 desired;
$25,000 - $50,000 administration ongoing $25,000 ongoing
ongoing administration; administration to
administration increase enforcement
$ Costs to Depends on bids; N/A $40- $65 cost for $40- $65 cost for N/A
Customers other communities see single stream single stream
reduced rates container; approx. container; approx.
$I 1/mo. Yard waste $11/mo. Yard waste
service option; service option;
increased license fee increased license fee
$ Costs to One or more haulers Increased $40- $65 cost for Increased Increased cost if
Haulers may not receive administrative costs to single stream administrative costs to overweight found—
contract, eliminating collect, provide and container; increased collect, provide and more landfill trips
their residential audit data license fees audit data; $40- $65
hauling business cost for single stream
within City limits container; increased
license fees
Page 13 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Financial Costs and Benefits Summary
Trash Services Study Alternatives
Continued
Option 1: Districting Option 2: Additional Option 3: Option 4: Additional Option 5: Null
with increased requirements without Implementation of requirements and Altemative/No
Requirements/Recycli Districting Recycling Strategies Implementation of Legislative Changes
ng emphasis Recycling Strategies
without Districted
Trash Service
$ Benefits to $170,000= street Savings in street Savings in street Savings in street
City maintenance savings maintenance if maintenance if maintenance if
overweight trucks overweight trucks overweight trucks
eliminated eliminated eliminated
$ Benefits to Depends on bids; Savings to customers Savings to customers Savings to customers N/A
Customers other communities see with improved use of with improved use of with improved use of
reduced rates PAYT pricing PAYT pricing and PAYT pricing and
increased recycling increased recycling
i
$ Benefits to Some haulers gain N/A Reduced cost for Reduced cost for N/A
Haulers market share, if tipping fees at landfill tipping fees at landfill
successful bidder if increase recycling if increase recycling
Page 14 Trash Services Study Alternatives and Recommendation
Attachment 2
Community Outreach and Feedback
1. Board and Commission Feedback
o Air Quality Advisory Board Feedback
o Natual Resouces Advisory Board
o Transportation Board
2. Letters:
o Bruce Philbrick, Superintendent, Solid Waste Division, City of Loveland
o Paul Bulkley
o Mary Lou Peckham
o Carl Cicero, Clarendon Homeowners Association
3. On-line Comments
• o Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
o Comments in Opposition to Trash Districts
o Other Comments re: Trash Districting
o RAM Waste Comments
4. City News: August 2008—Your Thoughts on Trash
•
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 16, 2008
TO: Mayor Hutchinson and City Council Members
FROM: Air Quality Advisory Board
SUBJECT: AOAB RECOMMENDATION REGARDING TRASH HAULING
The management of solid waste in Fort Collins intersects with air quality concerns in a
multitude of ways including diesel truck emissions, noise and traffic congestion, and
greenhouse gas emissions. The latter issue is particularly relevant as the solid waste
diversion goal constitutes the largest single component of the city's climate task force's
recommended efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A few of the relevant issues
are discussed below, followed by Board recommendations to the City Council adopted at
our 15 September meeting.
Concerns with Current Residential Trash Hauling
• Excess Emissions, Fuel Consumption and Noise and Odor Generation
Trash vehicles are heavy duty diesel trucks that average approximately 2.8 mpg.
Trash trucks are large emitters of nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds
(VOC), and particulate material including soot particles. As precursors to ozone,
nitrogen oxides and VOC are a particular concern for the Front Range ozone
noncompliance issue. Heavy truck emission and their impacts on air quality have
been a recent focal point of EPA attention and stricter regulation. Noise and odor
issues related to these heavy vehicles also impact neighborhoods.
• Traffic Congestion and Street Maintenance Costs
With the current system of 3 residential and 11 commercial haulers, multiple
trucks travel the same routes. According to a consultant's study, trash trucks are
the heaviest regular users of neighborhood streets, and have the street wear
equivalence of 1200 passenger vehicles. Under a trash districting model, the
estimated savings in costs avoided for road maintenance was $170,000 annually.
• Waste Reduction and Diversion
Under a trash utility with similar customer costs, Loveland has achieved over
50%recycling in the residential communities. By comparison,the overall city
waste diversion rate in Fort Collins is—27%with residential rates estimated to be
even lower on average. Clearly Fort Collins can do better on this issue.
• Climate Goals
One of the most important consequences of solid waste generation is the impact
on greenhouse gas emissions. The city's Climate Task Force (CTF) developed a
comprehensive climate program that includes a city-wide waste diversion goal of
50%. When achieved, this will constitute 226,000 tons of CO2 equivalent
• reductions, with approximately a quarter of this from residential waste diversion.
This diversion goal is the largest component of the CTF team's recommendation
and is a key component of the CTF overall strategy. The task force was assured
by the consultants and the City that this waste diversion goal can me met.
AOAB Recommendations on Trash Hauling
We recommend that residential waste management services in Fort Collins:
(1) Offer greater incentives to haulers and residents for waste minimization,
(2) Improve accounting of impacts by the haulers on city operations, and
(3)Be put out for bid on a city district basis.
A districted approach to residential waste management in Fort Collins offers the best
chance to address the goals of air quality improvements, reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, and minimize waste and redundant uses of city infrastructure.
In addition, we recommend that the City adopt a program of multi-family and
commercial waste reduction and recycling that parallels the current program for
residential wastes. Multi-family and commercial wastes are a significant part of the
community's waste stream, and their reduction is necessary to achieve waste-diversion
and climate-protection goals. Board members have learned that such a program is
• permissible within state statutes, and we refer the Council to the attached memo for more
information.
Specific Recommendations on the Biddiniz Process
o Allow bidding for all districts at one time for a reasonably limited number of districts.
The districts should be geographically based or follow City Council districts.
o Have an incentive-based compensation for the winner(s) of the bid contracts for
reducing waste generation. Such incentives could be extended to commercial haulers
if statutes permit this.
o Contractor(s) bids must include the following statistics:
■ Number of vehicles, model, age, and MPG of fleet vehicles
■ Historical and estimated future (during contract performance period)vehicle
miles traveled (VMT)
• Diesel emission requirements to be met or exceeded on time or ahead of
schedule
• A listing of environmental `innovations' beyond those required should be
included with the bid
This information would be used in the bid scoring process.
o Citizen input from of each district should be considered in developing the bid scoring
method,to assure the award is not made on a lowest-cost bid process. This may help
to alleviate issues of citizen hauler choice.
•
o Develop a pay-as-you-throw pricing structure for residential (and multi-family and
commercial) customers. The price structure should reward both the carriers and
throwers for maximizing waste reduction.
o Institute electronic accounting of waste volume to enhance pay-as-you-throw pricing.
o Waste minimization and recycling should be made as convenient as possible with
single-stream curbside services for single residential customers and multiple drop-off
sites for the entire community.
o Larger containers for recycling and a pickup schedule that minimizes vehicle trips
should be encouraged.
o Yard waste pickup and neighborhood yard waste cleanups with use of composting
services would add additional benefit.
o Provide education and develop incentives to promote reductions in construction and
deconstruction waste.
• MEMORANDUM
Date: 8 September 2008
To: Air Quality Advisory Board
From: Brian Woodruff, Environmental Planner
Subject: State law regarding regulation of commercial trash haulers
Board members had requested a brief explanation of the state law that limits local
government regulation of commercial trash haulers. I prepared this response after
consulting with Senior Environmental Planner Susie Gordon and Deputy City Attorney
Carrie Daggett. The statutory provisions that relate to this issue are in Colorado Revised
Statutes Section 30-15-401.
The statute is silent regarding the regulation of commercial trash haulers, except that it
prohibits rate regulation by local governments [more on this below]. The City already
regulates commercial haulers in the licensing provisions in Chapter 15 of the City Code,
and could also impose additional regulations if it chose to do so. Examples include
requiring that recycling service be offered along with waste disposal service [bundled] or
requiring that commercial trash service be provided on a pay-as-you-throw basis, as the
City now requires for residential waste services.
• The statute does limit local governments that provide their own trash collection services.
Subsection 7.5 of CRS 30-15-401 describes the process that local governments must use
to collect new mandatory fees for trash hauling services. It allows local governments to
start a new system for government-provided trash hauling services and to collect a fee
from citizens for the service, but requires a competitive process so that private haulers
can compete with the government to provide the services.
How this relates to commercial haulers is that subsection 7 of the statute prohibits a local
government from imposing a mandatory fee for government-provided trash hauling
services to commercial or multi-family customers. So,while the City could offer
services to any kind of customer in Fort Collins, it could not require that commercial or
multi-family use those services over the services of a private hauler.
Please let me know if you need further information on this topic.
•
NRAB Minutes and Comments will be provided to Council in Tuesday's "Read Before"
folder.
The NRAB met and discussed the Trash Services Study on Wednesday, September 17.
Do menfl
City of,.-Fort Collins MEMORANDUM
FROM THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BAORD
Date: July 29, 2008
To: Mayor and Council Members
From: Alan Apt on behalf of the Natural Resources Advisory Board
Subject: Trash Services Study recommendations
The Natural Resources Board considered Solid Waste Management issues at our last meeting. We
passed two resolutions: one concerning residential solid waste, and the other commercial solid
waste.
The Natural Resources Board asks that Council implement Trash Districting.
The board feels that this is the most effective way to:
• Improve air quality
• • Reduce damage to city streets, that is costing at least $350,000 per year, and
• Reduce neighborhood noise pollution.
This resolution passed -5-0.
Other concerns the Natural Resources Board feels staff and council should consider are:
• Providing mandatory yard waste recycling
• Providing diversion/recycling incentives and disincentives for trash haulers so that our
50% diversion goal can be met
• Implementing a true pay as you throw system that better rewards recycling and penalizes
waste.
The Natural Resources Board also asks that council aggressively pursue commercial waste
diversion because commercial waste is actually the majority of the community's waste stream.
Commercial recycling options are crucial to achieving 50%diversion. Research has demonstrated
that commercial recycling can greatly reduce the cost of trash disposal for businesses. The
Climate Wise program has also demonstrated this savings.
In addition we ask that council ask staff to look at potential incentives and disincentives for the
commercial sector including: 1)prohibiting the disposal of cardboard, 2)requiring the provision
• of bundled commercial recycling, 3)providing incentives to haulers who divert significant
amounts of trash by enhancing recycling. We feel, since there is 98%community support for
additional recycling opportunities, it is very important to provide this opportunity for citizens in
their workplace. The potential savings on carbon emissions is enormous as the Climate Task
Force Report has mentioned. Addressing the commercial waste stream is an important climate
goal. This resolution also passed 5-0.
Thank You in advance for your consideration.
Alan Apt
Chair of the Natural Resources Board
cc: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
John Armstrong, Staff Liason
Public Works
• Streets/Stormwater Maintenance, Solid Waste Management
105 West Fifth Street • Loveland, CO 80537
(970) 962-2529 • Fax (970) 962-2907 • TDD (970) 962-2620
City of Loveland www.cityofloveland.org
RECEIVED
September 15,2008
5f P l 6 20UB
City Manager's Office
Ann Turnquist, Policy and Projects Manager
City Manager's Office
City of Fort Collins
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580
RE: Solid Waste Services Study Recommendations
Dear Ann:
With the public comment period with respect to the solid waste management services
study coming to a close, I am submitting some recommendations for your consideration.
• Having spent the past 20 years working in the solid waste and recycling industry, I have
watched with interest, and taken part in,the community discussion about ways to make
Fort Collins' recycling program more effective since I moved to Fort Collins in 1992.
And while I now live in Loveland, I still have an interest in seeing Fort Collins
implement measures that achieve a higher level of waste stream diversion in ways that
are effective, sustainable, fiscally sound and politically palatable.
While I do believe that the best solution to improve the residential waste diversion rate is
by giving the City more control over specifying services, managing rate structures and
assuming responsibility for education and promotion, I question whether there is enough
political support at the moment to implement a contractual system for districted services.
However, I do believe some considerable strides could be made through ordinance
changes and other measures that require the waste haulers to provide the rate structures
and services that would encourage more waste diversion and recycling.
Recommendation #1: Amend Volume-Based Rate Requirement in City Code
• Require the waste haulers to charge true volume-based "pay-as-you-throw" rates
for refuse collection. The rates the haulers currently charge Fort Collins residents
are not really volume-based nor do they encourage waste reduction and recycling
to the extent that they can. This can be accomplished by:
1. Eliminating the monthly base rate that haulers are currently allowed to
• charge. There is no need for this fee, as it was really intended to help
haulers offset costs with bag-based collection in the event a household did
OV Printed on
fer Recycled Paper
not place anything at the curb on a given week. If a hauler collects bags,
an analysis of the number of households using bag service and the number
of bags, on average, that are collected weekly, can help the hauler
determine what the bag price alone needs to be to cover all costs.
2. Require haulers to charge rates that increase 100% for a comparable
increase in volume collected. For example, if the 32-gallon rate is $8.00
per month, then the 64-gallon rate cannot be less than $16.00 per month
and the 96-gallon rate no less than $24.00. The cost for recycling should
continue to be bundled into the rate and haulers should not be allowed to
charge fuel or other surcharges that decrease the effectiveness of volume-
based rates.
3. Require haulers to post their entire rate schedule on every quarterly bill (or
monthly bill, depending on how they bill), so their customers can be
regularly presented with all service options. It will also be easier for the
City to ensure that compliance is being attained with respect to customer
notification.
Recommendation #2: Amend Recycling Requirement in City Code
• Require that recyclables be collected weekly, with the provision that if a hauler
provides their customers with a wheeled cart for single stream collection (all
materials mixed together in the cart),then allow every other week collection as a
cost-saving measure. Recycling containers must be provided for no extra charge
(monthly or quarterly) and no refundable deposit, as these charges discourage
participation.
• The City should take an active role in the education of residents about the
recycling services available, to include what can be accepted, materials sorting
and preparation requirements, collection schedule (critical with every other week
service), collection containers, no cost to recycle, etc. My observation is that the
haulers have done a marginal job in this area in the past.
Recommendation #3: Require Organic Debris Collection in City Code
• Require haulers to provide curbside collection of organic debris weekly during the
growing season months of April to December. As for rate setting, the fee they
charge for this service cannot exceed 50%of the cost for a comparably-sized
refuse container. For example, if 64-gallon trash cart service costs $16.00 per
month, then the cost for 64-gallon organic debris collection cannot exceed $8.00
per month. The haulers may have to roll some of the cost of organic debris
collection into their refuse collection rates,but this is no different from the
recycling/trash collection bundling of costs that is currently required in City Code.
As with trash rates, the rates for this new service should be displayed on all bills,
and the City should take the lead in promoting it.
• Having a local composting facility or transfer site that can accept organic debris
will be critical to the success of this effort. I encourage the City to work with the
private sector to develop such a facility. There is no lack of firms along the Front
Range that are capable of accepting and effectively composting and marketing
these discards.
• • Develop a drop-off center to receive organic debris for free from the public and
have the City underwrite the cost. The City of Loveland operates such a site and
pays a contractor approximately $4.25 per cubic yard to grind and haul to a
composting facility all residentially-generated yard debris. The program diverted
14,500 tons of organics from landfill disposal in 2007.
Recommendation #4: Increase Drop-off Opportunities for Other Items
• Aside from the traditional recyclables, there are numerous other items that can be
collected and recycled that are not easily collected at the curb. An expanded
drop-off center makes the most sense for tires, appliances, scrap metal, TVs,
computers, large plastic items, wire and metal fencing, and many others.
Loveland has effectively developed a site that accepts these materials. The City
can explore contracting with a private firm to provide such a site.
Recommendation #5: Increase Hauler Licensing Fees
• Since there is a cost to the City to increase education and promotion of these new
efforts and providing new drop off opportunities, the City should consider raising
the fees it currently charges the haulers. If that cannot raise enough money, the
City should look at a minimal environmental services fee that can be charged to
every household. Loveland currently charges such a fee.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. I think all of these
• recommendations are achievable and acceptable to most stakeholders in this process, and
can all be implemented in a short time frame. Perhaps results can be evaluated over a
three year period and further changes can be made at that time if the City is not satisfied
with the results. But it is clear to me that all these changes taken together would boost
the Fort Collins residential waste stream diversion rate considerably.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 962-2609.
Sincerely,
�_ -
Bruce Philbrick, Superintendent
Solid Waste Division
•
gg RECEIVED
AUG 0 6 1006
City of Fort Collins City Manager's Ofttce Paul Bulkley
P.O.Box 580 1508 W.Elizabeth St. #118
Fort Collins.Co.80522 Fort Collins Co 80521
(970) 493.9661
Attention Ann Turnquist Policy and Project Manager August 5`", 2008
Dear Ms Turnquist:
Re: Resolving the Trash Problem.
Obvious solutions include a considerable reduction ofgarbage generated, the disgusting
behaviour of citizens, and the lack of cily enforcement demanding reasonable civilized
compliance to trash generation and collection.
Reduction of Garbage:
(1)Enforce all households to separate all recyclable materials for collection.
(2)Enforce Sliding Scale for garbage generation of Households: (a)Penalise high garbage
generation through high collection fees. (b)Reward low generation with low collection fees.
(3)Penalise all households who leave garbage and containers on street fronts before and after
. day of collection
Trash Districts:
(1)Reduce unnecessary garbage collection tra,ffic by awarding contracts to two only haulage
companies per speck parts of the town This arrangement will still ensure competitive rates.
Meaningful Enforcable Regulations on Garbage Haulers:
(1) Load limits and overloading. i
(2)Emission and Noise Standards.
(3) Collection and disposal of recyclable materials from customers.
Business Generated Garbage:
(1)Penalise all Fast Food Outlets for street litter(their packaging materials).
(2)Penalise with heavy penalties all individuals trashing the streets with litter.
Sincerer
e-Pa�Bulkfey�
•
y-F .-fie' tit el
,,�, y .r'i+ �y�'�� k 1MM 'r`*rm �� 's~< x - yrc4,,st r�{•"'r,3';`� pa
a ���°{�i r ,x�ro� if Tura. ,s. 'aaa^f �y 'Y`�'xm.7'1�.ff+�#" �`?beA � r f✓px
'h,
inn
r 5 S r I' n r � rr �y sau+K zn
'
a h .'�
Iie: trucks ou the, streets. f"" you took off the
recycle trucks you would reduce trucks'.by"1/2 to l/3.
And increase private traffic to the landfill.
So if recycling is important, you can't win 'em all.
Keep the competition. I like Gallegos programs
very rmah—I use their yard recycle (and my neighbors
use my bin) and I put out bottles, etc. as;do the
neighbors. ` We need competition. We don't trust`
governemtn regulation t000 far. And in fact we are
getting a lot more of Ft. C. regulations/rules in our
lives than we like.
think carefully when bright ideas are offered! !
I! JPL
• To: Fort Collins City Council Members Date: August 26, 2008
From: Clarendon Hills Board of Directors
C/4,
Subject: Proposed districting of residential trash collection Mana Els��'
t
C*lce
City Council Members,
The Clarendon Hills Board of Directors is against the proposed districting of residential trash
collection. Our association of 320 homes has operated under a contract with a trash collection
company for the past 4 years. We would like continue receiving both the low prices and
specific services that we've been able to obtain through a competitive bidding process and
negotiations. We would also like to continue keeping the competitive price for the trash
services within our annual dues structure.
Our current contract enables us to have trash containers and recycle bins picked up between the
hours of 9:00 am and 3:00 pm which keeps the large trucks out of our area while our kids are
walking to and from local schools. This safety factor will be lost if the proposed districting of
residential trash collection is approved. Our contract also enables us to identify our pickup day,
which we expect would also be lost.
• We fear the districting of residential trash collection will eventually force out the competition.
Once the competition is eliminated prices will begin to escalate and we will be stuck with a
minimal service level, with no option to choose another trash company.
We request that you reject the proposed districting of residential trash collection and allow
homeowners and homeowner associations to select their own trash company in on open and
competitive market.
Sincerely, 4 /a
Carl Cicero
President, Clarendon Hills Homeowners' Association
(970)225-9442
cicero@peakpeak.com
cc:
Doug Hutchinson
• Wade Troxell
On-Line Community Feedback
Trash Services Study
June— September 2008
In favor of Trash Districting
Email: fred(axforse.org
Name: fred kirsch
Address: 509 S. Bryan Ave#I1
Go with a districted system
Email: rtaranow("rdcomcast.net
Name: Richard Taranow
Address: 2731 Granada Hills
Having run a large fleet maintenance company in 1 know the weight of full trash trucks per wheel to be the highest
on the road.
By reducing the damage caused to residential streets by reducing having 3-4 times the traffic of heavy trash trucks
reduced to one would most likely pay for all repairs and repaving projects in our neighborhoods.A trash truck once
a week puts more wear and tear on streets than all cars and light delivery trucks for a full year.I beg you to compare
paving and maintenance cost to a city who has switched(Loveland?)
This does not even take into account the safety of pedestrians,children,and pets.
From a particulate pollution standard stop and go heavy trucks pollute more than any other vehicle on the road.
Please step up and don't fold to the pressure of a few companies and do what is right for your citizens. Thank You
Email paul.averv(ii att.net
Name: Paul Avery
Address: 1007 Deer Creek Lane,Ft Collins, 80526
The districting proposal is a sensible idea but we bad to change our trash hauler because the previous one was so bad
(rude, inefficient,dirty,unreliable and often tacked on incorrect and unjustifiable charges). If we have to have one
designated service,there would need to be much tighter control- like a 3 strikes rule for the bad one.)
Email: susan.fereusonCii..comcast.net
Name: Sue Ferguson
Address: 1)21 Indian Summer Ct
In this age of global warming& outrageous gas prices it's ridiculous to have 3/6 different trucks going up and down
our small street.
It's noisy,hard on the street& it means we have garbage at the curb almost every day.
PLEASE go to a more reasonable system
Email: stenbi omaiLy.gmail.com
Name: Stephanie Hall
Address: 525 E Plum St,Fort Collins
1 support the idea of districts along with improvements to make the garbage trucks more efficient to reduce their
impact on the community. It is wasteful on many levels to have three companies in the same neighborhood on
different days of the week. I have lived in rural communities and Seattle and Austin and have never known that
waste management could be so disruptive and inefficient.
Page 1- I Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Email: cherylynbaker(a;ynhoo.com
Name: Cherylyn Baker
Address: 3808 NCR 13
Even though we are outside the city limits, we have a Fort Collins address so l feel that 1 can comment on this issue.
1 believe the city should be divided into sections,and have a section contracted out to only one trash provider. The
heavy trucks are noisy and detrimental to the streets and having only one company in one section on one day of the
week would help with traffic congestion,pollution(both noise and air)and road conditions. I would also like to see
the police force take a more active stance in ticketing speeding trash truck drivers.
Email: m_cmaI3(acomcast.net
Name: Maxine Mark
Address: 1309 Parkwood Drive
We are very happy with our RAM trash haulers,but would also love to see some lessening of trash hauler traffic. It
would make sense to organize haulers to divide the city into their"areas" should they agree. I like it that RAM has
offered us the Green Bag possibility,which we use always now over the winter because we have so little trash. I
would hope that continues along with recycling.
Thanks,MM
Email: mezzo r viawest.net
Name: Janet King
Address: 2200 Gemstone Court
I am originally from the midwest and have lived in many places before Ft. Collins. This is the first place 1 have
• EVER encountered a competitive,private trash system.As the report shows,this system is a perfect example of why
competition does NOT always result in the best, most efficient and most cost-effective service. It really makes
sense to me to have this as a city-contracted service,perhaps even paid through the water/sewer fees(this is also the
"norm" to me).
Maybe start with the districted approach,but the goal should be to eventually move towards a unified city-
contracted approach. In this case, the.city contract would result in economies of scale(especially important with
current fuel prices),reduce noise,pollution,street damage,duplication,etc. Especially important is the ability to
improve and expand recycling services through city control. Almost everywhere 1 have visited or lived temporarily
in the past five years has vastly superior recycling services. We are having to throw away tons of plastics that
should be collectable according to my experiences in these other locations. Thanks for taking action on this
important matter!
Email:joe2629(tf comcast.net
Name: Joe Labbate
Address: 1408 Fleetwood Ct. 80521
Please go with the city wide district system. I don't think the system we have now is very effective.That report
outlined many benefits of the city wide system and I agree with them.
Thank you,
Joe
Email: lawsonell a n(aLya hoo.com
Name: Ellen Lawson
Address: 519 E.Plum Street
I believe redistricting trash is essential if Fort Collins is to improve air quality, lessen the burden of taxation for
street repairs for its citizens, lessen noise,improve street aesthetics(not helped by multiple days of trash containers
everywhere) and truly live up to its reputation as a good steward of the environment.
• Trash haulers need some incentive to improve recycling for the sake of all of us and a trash redistricting system
would allow some incentives to be built in.
Page 1- 2 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Quieter trucks are essential.
Improvement of routes is essential. Currently I live on comer of an alley and Plum and each company send a truck
up one side of Plum,down the other, then a figure eight through the Iwo alleys making four passes by my house.
Multiply this by second trips for recyclables. Multiply that by number of trash companies in neighborhood. (I know
there are at least two in mine) This means 16 stop and starts near my house PER WEEK.Multiply that by 52'IF!
I figured it out from the study and that is the equivalent of 18,000 cars on streets and alley near me a week.
Belching out diesel fuel into the air making it difficult for me to breathe in the summer when the windows are open.
Noisy as well.This is NOT the Fort Collins presented to the media which makes it No.2 in the U.S.
The current system is insane!!! Free competition is better than command or traditional economies but even Adam
Smith in Wealth of Nations in 1776 said the best system is when the consumer not the producer is King/Queen.
I do not feel a Queen.In a free market you have choices but where is my choice NOT to have fouled air, noise,
ugliness, and pay higher taxes for roads????
The market system does not meet this need, only government in a democratic society can do so.
I hope. if redistricting passes, that local haulers will be given a ten percent preference over out of town or out of
state haulers in recognition of their longstanding service to the town.
Email: l ou i(d frii.c om
Name: Lout terMeer
Address: 5108 E.Hwy 14,Ft Collins, CO 80524
1 want to support an organized approach to trash pick up. I think this would save our roads,our air quality,and even
possibly some money. If organized fairly all trash pick up services should be agreeable.
Email:mike moodv(ci;hotmail.com
Name: Allard Mike Moody
Address: 1413 Brentwood Drive, 80521
One option not considered is to use the same trash hauling system in use in Loveland Colorado--a very efficient and
cost effective model: one driver on one truck,collects trash and recycle items for residential customers.
On Brentwood Drive,Waste Management is the noisiest and uses the biggest trucks.I've observed them making
multiple visits during the week
My family has lived in towns where the city collected the trash once a week, so only one trash truck came by per
week, saving on wear and tare on the street.
This is the most efficient way to collect trash and recyclables.
Email:billsimian(alrotmail.com
Name:Bill Foley
Address: 1233 Maple St.Fort Collins 80521
Despite the limited choice in trash haulers, I'm still 100%for creating trash districts.The number of trucks running
the neighborhood is unnecessary. Learning that it's also impacting the lifespan of my street is yet another reason for
me to support districting.
Kay Lindgren
1513Independence Rd.
484-4432
Page 1-3 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
• Have an arrangement with Ram and get better rate because almost everyone has them. I wonder how this will be
affected by the new arrangement if they decide to do districts and have them bid on them. We might end up with
different trash collector. 1 think it's a good idea to have just one hauler.
Email: ienecrossaromcast.net
Name: Jeni Cross
Address: 1128 LaPorte Ave.
1 like the proposal for a districted trash service.However. I want to encourage the council to consider ways that
changing systems will have the smallest impact on our LOCAL businesses. If we make a change,the fiscal well-
being of our locally owned and operated businesses is just as important as the other concerns(road wear and tear, air
quality).
If you make the change.no doubt,residents will be grumpy for several months about changes in pick-up days and
loss of choice.One is a short term frustration for a long-term solution.But the other, the issues of choice,is just a
compromise that has to be made. Is individual choice more important than the long-term well-being of the
community?I don't personally think so.
But. again I want to emphasize that the fiscal well-being of our local businesses must be factored into any plans for
changing the current system. We don't have any obligation to multi-national corporations because they return little
to the community.Our local businesses are vital to our well-being.
Email s dahmanckhotmad.com
Name:Steve Dahl
Address: 1320 Fairview Dr
• Regarding trash hauling,the time has come to move away from free choice and create trash districts.
The benefits to our neighborhoods,the city and the environment of the world override the choice option.
Recycling should be mandatory! Our participation is woeful compared to Loveland.
Email: emunsey9(amswcom
Name: Ernestine Munsey
Address: 1531 W. Swallow Rd., 433
Create Trash Districts please. Districts will be much more efficient, will save wear and tear on the streets,less
gasoline will be used by trucks which will result in better air quality,noise levels will be reduced, and it will be
more profitable for the trash companies. Great idea.
Thank you,
Ernestine Mousey
Email: morrisjerrv55(�ahoo.com
Name: Jerry Morris
Address: 3302 Coneftower Dr.,Ft. Collins,CO 80521
We believe that creating trash districts is a good idea.
Email:powdrhnd67(dvahoo.com
Name: Ed Muller
Address: W. Vine
I'd support the option of having same haulers for sections of the city.
Email: warbrilkii,comcast.net
Name: Warren Brill
Address: 2812 Seccomb Street
• Why doesn't the city do trash and recycling like Loveland?If that's not possible,just divide up the city and contract
with 3 or 4 companies to do the sectors.
Page l- 4 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Jerry Collin 493-2643 Phone message
I'm more in favor of getting a system where we only have one truck going down our streets to help with the wear
and tear on the streets. When I moved here, we only had one truck in our neighborhood and that seemed to work
better.
Email: cwldaddvo ni comcast.net
Name:Chuck Lacerte
Address: 660 Justice Drive, Fort Collins
I believe there should be only one trash pickup service(company)per neighborhood,because there would be less
pollution,less noise and less impact to the streets with fewer trucks serving each area.Figuring the costs and rates
would be the hardest problem to solve.as well as defining boundaries.
Email:BrianJHarris(a conic ast.net
Name:Brian Harris
Address: 2242 Primrose Dr.
1 am definitely for a city plan for trash collection.
My street is asphalt covered, and gets trashed every year by the multiple trucks coming each week. The street has a
tight circle at the end and the large trucks have to do a three point turn to get out. That is my main point against the
private service. My other issue is pollution,both air and noise.
Email: ssestein131Ca;frii.com
Name: Susan Epstein
Address: 3915 Rock Creek Drive,Unit A
Trash-hauling by district is long overdue. Let's do id
Email: dlkeuleugeomcast.net
Name:David Kepler
Address: 1423 Red Oak Ct
1 think trash districts are definitely the way to go. Our neighborhood has coordinated trash hauler selection to
minimize traffic and negotiate better rates for the last 18 years. This approach makes sense for the whole city.
I also support the efforts to drive more recycling. While most people play their part in recycling 1 still see some
garbage cans in the neighborhood overflowing with recyclable materials. It would be good to do more to allow for
and encourage recycling of organic materials.
Email:L dyrdrricontcast.net
Name: Judy Rodriguez
Address: 5027 Northern Lights B,Ft Collins
I would like to see us go back to a single-source hauler as we had in the late 70s. In my last neighborhood,we had a
different hauler and recycle truck come through the neighbor 3 different days of each week. 3 days a week of heavy
trucks on the street and someone's trash bins standing at curbs.
Email: mmnestCccimsn.com
Name: Patricia L.Mensack
Address:4114 Westbrooke Dr.
After trying to read the whole study,which became very tedious to say the least, I have to say most of the facts all
point to the extreme need to downsize the amount of trucks using our private,residential streets. We've lived in Fort
Collins on Westbrooke for almost 5 years and have had to put up with our small subdivision having 3 different trash
companies using our street 3 times per week. Then,there are the recycling trucks coming at later times the same day
so there are trash cans,recycling bins,and a whole lot of loose papers,plastic bags,etc. that always seem to be
Page l- 5 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
blowing around since we live in an extremely windy area. Some neighbors believe they are saving a few bucks per
week by using their hauler& that company only picks up at their house. Owning a house in Fort Collins shouldn't
require that as a homeowner you have to put up with that kind of noise,street damage.Carbon Dioxide pollution.
from 3 different companies every week. Why do we as citizens have to be subjected to this when other cities who
aren't even on the "Best Places" list seem to be able to select a better system? Last summer, we continually had to
notify our hauler that they were leaking oil all over the road,and when you have 3 companies with very poorly
maintained vehicles, it's obvious a change is needed.There are many children in our neighborhood adding to the
concerns with so many large&noisy trucks darting in and out as they pick up trash. We are seriously considering
moving to another town as we see decisions affecting our enjoyment of living in Fort Collins diminishing. It's
wonderful to have so many great parks,bike trails, open spaces,a great downtown, and access to great recreation,
but if the street where you live is so constantly noisy then it's no longer is desirable to live in that town. Anyone
who reads the local newspapers or watches the Denver news channels already knows that the ozone levels here in
town are beyond the EPA's limits of quality of air. So, why can't the people making decisions for Fort Collins come
up with a solution as soon as possible? Do the right thing!
Email: rmn14(acomcast.net
Name: mary gail davis
Address: 1731 ridgewood road -
Absolutely need to"district" trash hauling for Fort Collins.
It certainly will save our streets. It is outrageous that every week day I experience a different trash truck traveling
over my street to pick up as few as I neighbor's trash. And,then a separate recycling trunk comes by as well.What
would be more reasonable that to have companies bid and cooperate to haul an entire neighborhood on one
designated weekday. Less pollution,less traffic,less danger to children playing,less noise,and possibly less cost
since this would be more economical for trash companies to service a specific area of city rather than having I or 2
customers on a street or miles apart.
• Miranda Dwyer,phone message
I'm responding to a flyer we got at neighborhood Night Out entitled"Your Thoughts on Trash"and am excited to
have a chance to give our thoughts. We'd really like a centralized system because having a truck and recycle truck
drive up and down the street nearly every day of the week isn't safe for our children. We live in Oakridge and
would like to have that noise and traffic only one day a week. I appreciate the chance to have a say. Thank you.
Email: ilimlone Lacomcast.net
Name: Jean Long
Address: 3213 Nesbit Ct.
1 am in favor of creating trash districts. I believe the positive impact on reducing global warming by decreasing fuel
consumption and the energy consumed by street repair efforts outweigh the negatives. The improved
safety/aesthetics for neighborhoods is a nicety.
Email: ipedas(afcaov.com
Name: John Pedas
Address: 925 Timber Lane
1 would like to see trash collection districts,basically for the reasons stated in the "pros". Also,I have a concern
with certain collectors in my neighborhood who are notorious for not gelling all of the trash into the truck,or,
picking it up when they don't. 1t would be easy if one collector was making the mess. If I call a collector I don't use
the call, I'm sure falls on deaf ears. I like the idea of having fewer trucks in the neighborhood and I would also like
to see better safety regulations for the trucks, like not driving down the center of the street when there are containers
on both sides across from each other or switching sides of the street but traveling in the same direction to pick up
containers on the same street but not across from each other.
Leo Buccellato 484-8606
• As a long-time environmentalist it doesn't make sense to have three haulers cover the city. It's three times the fuel.
three times the road damage,and three times the use of petrochemicals for the asphalt. Don't be bullied by the trash
Page 1- 6 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
companies. Suggestions should include providing disincentives for the current system—a surcharge for road
damage that the haulers would need to pay? We need districting or the City to take over the system.
Phone message: Marlene Napier,720 Arbor Avenue
Support districting,but wish to ensure that someone researches Waste Management to ensure that they are not
controlled by the mafia. On a street with seven houses all of the haulers serve them.
Email:jtdieswindow(avahoo.com
Name: Julie Schlegel
Address: 5812 Colby Street,FI.C. 80525
1 highly support districting domestic trash collection.I live in an HOA-controlled neighborhood with one hauler,and
it definitely beats my old neighborhood,in which up to three different trucks drove down our dead-end street on any
day. The wear-and-tear on that street was unwarranted,not to mention the excess spent energy and resulting
pollution. I favor districting.Thank you.
Email: I l o vd(rie n er.colostate.edu
Name: Lloyd Walker
Address: 1756 Concord Dr 80526
1 strongly support district trash hauling. The current system makes no sense with regard to street wear,air quality,
noise,energy use,traffic safety in neighborhoods. Districting will effectively address all these issues. The current
system seems a perversion of a competitive system in that profits are privatized and costs related to the items above
are borne unfairly by the community with inadequate oversight. With either system,options for improving
recycling should be pursued. Fort Collins is way behind in the issue of recycling. The current system has
demonstrated its inability to address recycling properly
Email:joanw26 gg.com
Name: Joan Welsh
Address: 316 Del Clair Rd
I have not read the study,but for YEARS I have wondered why we have 3 and 4 trucks barreling down our streets
every day!!
I strongly favor that there be ONE company servicing each neighborhood,so all the trash on the block is out the
same night, and all the recycling is out the same night.Do it any way you want,but what we have now is stupid and
dangerous,bad for the streets and environment.
Joan Welsh
Email: nneterse(i.hotmail.com
Name:Naomi Hoyer
Address: 611 LaPorte Ave
I am absolutely supportive of giving particular trash companies contracts for particular areas. I have recently moved
back to Fort Collins from an area that has trash service set up like that, and it is so much nicer not to have dozens of
trash trucks driving seemingly haphazardly through the streets. Their size and noise are extremely disruptive.
1 also think that Fort Collins does a very poor job of emphasizing the importance of recycling. The size of the
recycling containers provided by the trash services in contrast to the trash containers shows how little emphasis is
put on recycling.
Email: adu65(aaol.com
Name: Alan Uman
Address: 1201 Live Oak CT.
I came from a city(Fountain Valley,CA)that bid out and contracted trash collection for the entire city.The system
worked fine. We had one day of collection and did not have a big trash truck going back and forth followed an hour
or two later by another big truck going back and forth collecting recyclables THREE days a week by THREE
different companies!!!! All racing to every three of four homes they each service.
How can anyone see that this is a complete waste of time,money, fuel,not to mention the safety,noise. emissions,
and impact on the streets. EVERY impact is multiplied by THREE!!!!
Page 1- 7 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
• The city has talked about this for years. It's time to act and do what is right for the citizens and not the THREE Trash
companies...]banks. Mr. Uman
I don't regard the freedom to choose our trash collection company important. I think the other issues such as the
number of trucks rumbling through neighborhoods and the impact on safety,roads and environment more important.
From an aesthetics view point; it would also be better to have only one day when the trash is lined up along the
street.
One argument against any changes that I have heard in the past from the companies is that some of the trash
haulers would go out of business. Haven't we gone from six to three companies without any changes made by the
city government? Must be some other factor besides districting that was responsible.
Ram Waste claims that districting would result in increased rates,fees and taxes. Do you think that is the case?
I have lived in places where the collection of garbage was a government function and that worked just fine.
Cheryl Wells
9/9
Email: 1verde40Ca aol.com
Name: Laurie Verde
Address: 3100 Red Mountain Drive
1 support the City's proposed districting of Residential trash collection
• Email: beeckentim(acomcast.net
Name: Tim Beecken
Address: 2736 Stagecoach Ct.,Fort Collins,CO 80526
1 think dividing the city into zones,each to be served by only one trash company is the best solution. (The difficulty
will be in determining zones that will provide each company with an equitable source of income.)
Simultaneously, increased recycling through education and regulation and enforcement(if necessary),should be
promoted.
One question: Why is Styrofoam recycling not available today in Fort Collins? This item was recyclable at one
time at a location near K-Mart. if I remember correctly.
Tim Beecken
Email: haleylbas(a�email.com
Name:haley hasler
Address: 3416 canadian pkwy 80524
1 strongly support consolidating trash haulers-to cut down on pollution;noise,danger to small children from more
traffic -
I am willing to use whatever carrier is assigned to my neighborhood,and would be willing to pay more if necessary.
Email: ei c2uCuhotmailvom
Name: Erik Carter
Address: 521 N. Grant Ave. Ft.Collins
I am a big supporter of what 1 grew up with and that was the city and/or county providing the service of trash
collection.
Reasons:
Page 1- 8 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
l. It is a not for profit service
a. Employee's are paid better and have better benefits
b. The service is better( owners not demanding more for less)
c.Citizen issues will be addressed
2.The best way to minimize traffic w/o districting
a.Problem with districting is what if I don't get good service or a competitive price?
b.Everyone would have to agree for change
c.This could cause neighborhood strife
3.Spring clean up option
a. The former cities I lived in that provided trash collection also did a once a year spring clean up. People
were able to put out non hazardous materials at the curb for free disposal which helped keep neighborhoods
cleaned up examples: water heaters, furniture,mattresses,etc...
I have used both Gallegos and Waste Management. Unhappy with service from both and they don't care!
Email: sheerobin ii- mail.com
Name: Shelby robinson
Address: 2944 Dean Dr.Ft.Collins
I have lived in Ft.Collins for 27 years&have always been appalled that we don't have single trash haulers in each
neighborhood. It is far past time to do this. We need to cut down on pollution,big truck traffic, & wear&tear on
our streets.
Email: coloradoculpsCdfrii.com
Name: Stuart Culp
Address: 4901 Hinsdale Dr.
I am strongly in favor of districting. However,our neighborhood has already achieved a single-hauler system and
would hope that this provider would be retained in any future reconfiguration.
Email: nwt99g.aol.com
Name:Jack Newton
Address: 2053 Huntington Cir
Having the trash haulers compete for specific districts sounds good,however I have concerns. If this does save
$350,000 annually, will that lower my taxes'? Is the city going to ensure a competitive price? 1 don't want to spend
more money because of where 1 live.
1 have a feeling neither one of these things would happen.
I really would like to see less trash trucks on the streets in the city neighborhoods. It's ridiculous to have multiple
trash collection companies go through the same neighborhood every week. I feel like I'm dodging trash trucks a lot.
The current system increases wear and tear on the pavement,increases pollution,and seems to be inefficient. It
would make more sense to have one company one day a week in each neighborhood. Different companies can bid
on each neighborhood. Maybe the HOA's can decide on which company they want rather than individual
homeowners/property owners deciding on individual companies.The other thought 1 have is that multiple unit
dwellings should have access to recycling bins and have it be picked up by the trash collectors. I live in a triplex in
a courtyard with numerous other triplex/quad buildings and we don't have recycling bins. I was told recycling bins
are only for homes on the street and not multiple unit buildings. Any thoughts on this? Feel free to contact me and
also forward this to city council members and others who make the decision about trash.
Thanks,
Gdda Mark
phone377-2085
Page 1-9 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Email: AliDrifter(dgmail.com
Name: Alicja Miodonski
Address: 1957 Promenade Way,Fort Collins CO 80526
Out of the three options presented, 1 st one makes most sense- although it would be even better if the City would
take over traslu'recycling service -this way all of Fort Collins residents would have the same options available,and
each neighborhood would have the garbage trucks coming through just once a week. I realize it's a big undertaking,
but I believe it's the best way to achieve all of the objectives:once a week hauling at each neighborhood,same rates
for all residents, same options for all residents, same "green" programs for all residents. For example,we now have
the"green bag option" offered by Ram Waste System,where we pay only a small quarterly fee and purchase bags.
This way we know that if we don't dispose of our trash every week,the bags will last us longer, and this way we
automatically recycle and compost more items,so we don't have a lot of trash. I think programs like that should be
promoted by the City.
Please keep us posted.
Alicja
Email: crvstalive7(dhotmail.com
Name: Crystal Askew,MD
Address: 2245 Trestle Road, 80525
1 strongly support the creation of trash districts. I completely understand the benefits of free enterprise,however, as
a community that has valued its environment and during a time of rising fuel costs, 1 think it is imperative to stop the
• waste of fuel that multiple haulers are using and to improve air quality by decreasing the number of trucks on each
street. I also believe that it is important to care for our roads and to reduce the amount of wear and tear created by
unnecessary travel by multiple haulers. Thank you for your consideration.
Creating trash districts makes alot of sense and meets the most objectives. 1 am a devoted recycler, and I don't want
my costs to go up because other people won't recycle unless they get incentives. Perhaps smaller trash containers
will force such people to recycle.
Margaret Herrfeldt
Email: dsio&Iamar.colostate.edu
Name: Joyce Sjogren
Address: 1866 Indian Hills Cir.,Ft Collins, CO 80525
1 think haulers should be awarded exclusive contracts for certain parts of town for all the reasons you state in your
brochure,esp. air quality and noise and,also,wear on their trucks and use of more gasoline and oil in this day of
high gas prices. I believe the haulers,once used to it,would really like the system with all its advantages.
Email: mpfaelzer(a hotmail.com
Name: Morgan Pfaelzer
Address: 200 E Laurel St, #17.Ft Collins 80524
Fort Collins needs trash districts. Regulation on haulers would help.And of course, the world needs increased
recycling! The cost of repairing the streets,along with the constant noise and air pollution caused by multiple trash
company trucks down the same block/alley,the same morning, time after time,makes it imperative that Fort Collins
deal with this issue.
• Email: coloradodean(nmsn.com
Name: Amy Dean
Address: 1618 Redberry Ct
Page 1- 10 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
I agree w/districting - the postcard sent to me by RAM did not give me the option of being pro. I like the idea of
having fewer haulers on the streets. Our neighborhood has 3 haulers driving through on 3 different days- 2 trucks/
hauler(trash and recycle)— 6 tmcks,week....-
Since I moved here in 1992. 1 have always wondered why such a progressive town can be so backwards in its trash
services. How can the city just sit back and let this ridiculous fiasco continue. I have 3 or 4 trash trucks lumbering
down my street every week just to pick up trash from a few homes. These trucks waste fuel,add noise, and are
damaging our streets as well.
The city needs to step in and either provide their own city service(like Loveland does)or create trash districts like
what was mentioned in the "City News"pamphlet. This would save the city money(street repairs,etc)and save the
trash companies money on fuel and vehicle upkeep(less mileage).
This is a no-brainer.
Ron Michaels
RON MICHAELS WEDDINGS
y
(970)225-3900 (800)555-6580
Email: iackiedouv,(acomcast.net
Name: Doug Martine
Address: 1507 Rolf Ct.
I support the concept of districting of providers as long as the services provided and rates charged are regulated and
the same for all providers.
Email: dowiatts(nicomcast.net
Name: Sally Dowiatt
Address: 3008 Eagle Dr.
Although trash districts are a difficult choice with many drawbacks,1 am in favor of this choice.1 would want to be
certain that all of the trash hauling companies are able to keep theirjobs at equitable costs. I don't think this is an
impossible endeavor. I also like the focus on increasing recycling and creating incentives to increase recycling. I
don't think that these two issues are exclusive of each other. For example, if a trash hauling company increases its
recycling,perhaps it gets priority in bidding on a new neighborhood district. But perhaps,that is too much to deal
with at once.
Email: icline(a�iclineconsultina.com
Name: Julie Cline
Address: 1010 Smith Street
Thank you for looking into the options on trash hauling. I strongly prefer the option of creating trash districts since
it is extremely inefficient to have multiple providers servicing the same area. Please count this message as a vote for
the trash district option.
Email: ejviens acomcast.net
Name: Ellen Viens
Address: 2801 Balmoral Dr.Ft. Collins,Co 80525
I highly recommend that the city create trash districts for the following reasons: 1)This would reduce the number of
trucks that drive up and down the street each week. The trucks have often damaged the trees that are in the Strachan
median. The noise and gas pollution would be reduced. 2)Streets throughout the city are being damaged by these
huge trucks. 3)Common sense would tell us that if one truck could do the garbage pickup for the whole street why
not reduce traffic, noise.pollution.etc. SAVE the ENVIRONMENT.
Page 1- 11 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Customer choice might be a significant item if one were buying a new car;but selecting a trash hauler is not a real
big deal. If we say we are trying to recycle and protect the environment, we need to give up whining about small
things like who will pickup my trash.
Thank you for considering this issue.
Ellen
Email: I by.staufferLa tenail.com
Name: toby
Address: 2138 Clipper Way
I think that trash districts is a good idea.that would be the most noticeable change to roads and noise. I think it would
be good to allow the trash companies to re-bid for a district every few years, so they remain competitive and have a
chance to get a district if they did not get one.
Email: cowboycork aaol.com
Name: Corky Bradley
Address: 745 Knollwood Circle
I am in favor of implementing a districting system. This could be by lottery or bidding.
I am also infuriated that my trash hauler included a postage-paid post card in my last bill,with only two options to
check(neither of them for districting). If they keep this up, I'll be switching companies! (Looks like they are running
scared.)
• This town needs a fresh,environmentally/safety/street-friendly new system!
Please implement a districting system.
Email: andersom a frii_com
Name: mark anderson
Address: 704 mathews
I would vote for trash districts
Email: mmbliss(agmail.com
Name:Diane White
Address: 831 Bonita Ave 80526
I support the concept of trash districts. It has always seemed absurd to have multiple trucks driving the same routes
throughout the city but on different days.
With trash districts the trash haulers will become much more efficient in the area of fuel costs due to their clients all
being in one locale.
Our streets will be spared the current excessive wear and tear on our roads due to the multiple trash trucks covering
the same streets on different days.
Our residential areas will be spared the extra noise,air pollution, and danger involved whenever large trucks drive
through the neighborhoods.
The neighborhoods will only have trash containers out once a week which will help keep the neighborhoods cleaner
by reducing the opportunity for animals to get into trash or for wind to blow trash and/or containers around.
If the city designates a trash hauler for each neighborhood,the city will have to ensure the quality of service
• provided since consumers won't have a choice. However, in 22 years of living in the same neighborhood with the
same trash hauler for as long as I can remember.-I've never had a complaint about my trash service and can't see that
Page 1- 12 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
this is going to be a huge issue. As long as fees and range of services are all the same for all trash districts I think
this is the wav to go....and the sooner the better.
Email: albinana(dhotmaifcom
Name: Irma Albinana
Address:3213 Cockney St,Ft Collins 80526
1 watched the program and I am 100%behind districting. 1 use ram waste,and I don't see savings by sticking with
them or any other of their competitors. They still slap surge charges,or increase the rates when they want.
I also want to said. that it was very annoying to see Troxel express his discontent for the city's trash report. 1 found
his performance a great disservice to the district he represents. And, obviously,he doesn't know or hear the people
he represents. 1 had entailed him and he does not reply. The City of Ft. Collins needs to break the mold and starts to
count on the will of the people that placed them on the good positions they are on. 1 mean the elected officials we
help get elected.
Irma Albinana
Email: bnancel(a comcast.net
Name: Barry Nance
Address: 311 Wayne St.
Yes;I am all for having one trash hauling service per district.Living in old towne and having I day out of the week
where 1 trash service picks up will keep pollution,noise and wear and tear down.I live next to an alley and there are
at least 4 different services going through there during the week.
Email: tnigoodCtrtworoina.cont
Name: Mary Goodrich
Address: 2625 Newgate Court,Fort Collins 80525
While I believe in free enterprise, I strongly believe that assigning districts for trash haulers would be an
improvement on the current system. Not only would this cut down on street wear and tear,but it would certainly
improve Fort Collins aesthetically. On our short cul-de-sac, trash and recycling are picked up by three different
companies. I would much prefer seeing containers sitting out by curbside on just one day, with fewer trucks
rumbling by.
Email: gmiller(n-frii.con
Name: Greg Miller
Address: 2637 Red Mountain Ct.
Please create trash districts!
Every weekday for every year that I have lived in Fort Collins.I have thought to myself what a waste to have
another trash truck rumbling down the street. Every day on every street in Fort Collins it seems that a trash truck is
disrupting the flow and quiet of life on our city streets and in our neighborhoods.
It is time to change. It is time for peace..
Email: susan.fereuson(dcomcastnet
Name: Sue Ferguson
Address: 1 121 Indian Summer Ct
I strongly support the districting option for trash hauling. There are currently THREE companies coming each week
into our cul de sac street. This is an issue our HOA has been unable to deal with and only the city can introduce
some sanity into this situation. I'm willing to give up a little personal choice for some peace&quiet!
Page 1- 13 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Email: Ibraun a inter fold.com
Name: Leo Braun
Address: Fort Collins
I think it would be best to have trash districts. I live in an apanment complex and there are 2 sets of trucks that come
through here picking up trash causing traffic problems. I always thought it would be best to have just 1 truck come
through and get it over with. If there is a concern about certain haulers being banned just set up the same number of
districts as there are haulers and draw who gets which district and then rotate them every so often. I would think it
would benefit haulers because then they could concentrate on a certain area and not have to run all over the city
wasting gas and maybe they wouldn't need as many trucks cutting there costs.
Email: pain nordwall(dansn.com
Name: Paul Nordwall
Address: 2819 Zendt Drive
Over ten years we have tried to get two neighborhoods we've lived in to all use one trash hauler without complete
success,so we enjoy trash trucks several days a week going through our otherwise Quiet Quail Hollow. Please
establish districts so only one service impacts our peace on one day a week. Thanks--all will benefit, including the
companies 1 bet...
My two cents is to create trash districts and focus on increasing recycling.1 don't care so much about customer
choice and,frankly,fear that increasing regulations on haulers just requires more effort to reinforce such changes.
Thanks for soliciting community feedback!
Kirsten Sampera
Email: msiromb0 mutil.com
Name: Mari Johnson
Address: 1916 Sequoia Street
I support districting as a way to reduce emissions as well as wear and tear on our streets. In addition,I think it's
equally important to focus on increasing recycling. I don't believe these options should be mutually exclusive.
Email: Keith5 9(6q corn
Name: Carol Hopkins
Address: 2501 Pinecone Circle
I have no objection to opening trash hauling to bids-BUT-it must open to local companies only-no Denver or other
community service. We need to keep family and locally owned businesses here and in business
Thank You
Email: camposmfus(uaol.com
Name: Ruth Campos
Address: 4104 Sumter Square
I like the idea of a trash district. I live in Golden Meadows,and we have trash trucks coming thru here about 3 days
a week. Noise,pollution,and safety are my key concerns. They go thru here pretty fast sometimes. 1 don't care
who I have. I just hope there isn't much of an increase in rates, as what 1 pay now seems prohibitive!!
Email: itinaram(ddamar.colostate.edu
Name:Peggy Ingram
Address: 1313 Lory St. Fort Collins,CO 80524
1 would very much favor having districts for the trash haulers. Nearly every weekday we have a trash truck on our
street and I am concerned for the condition the streets will be in after a few more years of this. The street in front of
• our house was reconditioned 4 years ago and is in good shape at the moment.but that will change rapidly if the
heavy truck traffic continues. I am sure that the city would come up with a payment amount for service that would
be acceptable for both the haulers and those living in the neighborhood. Peggy Ingram
Page 1- 14 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Email: wlcveck aansn.com
Name: William M LeVeck
Address: 351 Brim Court
Create Trash Districts.
Email: dianecampbellOfirii.com
Name: Diane Campbell
Address: 1601 Preston Trail
I am concerned about three things,
1. Increase people's focus on recycling, and yes, incensing those that don't seem to have any other motivation to do
it otherwise. -
2. Escalating numbers of trucks on our streets,resulting in wear and tear.
3.The attitude of the trash companies that THEY deserve trash business. The hard thing here is they may depend on
the way the city puts together the'trash business opportunities, and yet, like any other business in our city,it should
be competitive and somewhat subject to their ability to also please the customers and have good enough business
practices to stay in business.This is not a social service,and,they should be held accountable to both uphold what
the city needs,and have a cost competive business. I truly like the idea of seeing districts, and yet we need to also
have them please the customers,perhaps customer satisfaction goals that they would have to meet to be renewed.
Perhaps start by having annual contracts awarded,after a performance review,just like in other business
procurement contract performance review.Your procurement teams,or any APICS group locally could provide
some criteria.This can be done with several areas of criteria, such as price,performance,environmental impact,
customer service,etc.
I have been a long time citizen of Ft.Collins and want to see us continue to do things well.
Thanks for the option to provide input.
Regards.
Diane Campbell
Email:d.lobree(acomcast.net
Name:David Lobree
Address: 2844 Chase Dr,FC 80525
1 am in strong favor of creating trash districts. As far as I am concerned,all city trash haulers provide the same level
of service.Trash pick up in trash pick! How can one hauler really be much better that the other?I think trying to
increase regulations on haulers is more complex, difficult,and costly to both the haulers and the customers,
especially in the short term. Maybe some changes can be made in the long term,but this could be done in
conjunction with districting.As for increasing recycling,this needs to be done anyhow and can be promoted in
conjunction with districting,as well.Bottom line: let's implement trash districts. It will have the greatest impact on
the important issues of the community's air quality,safety, and noise pollution, and,at the same time,minimize the
impact on city streets.
Email: charradm(mcomcast.net
Name: Charlie Radman
Address: 1661 Kirkwood Drive
I am all for creating trash districts to help reduce the number of trucks in a residential area. However for this to
occur all trash haulers would need to have the same rates otherwise it wouldn't be fair to be stuck with a hauler that
is more expensive then my neighbor a few streets away.
I am also for any incentives,programs,or even regulations that increase recycling. Including increased prices to
those who don't recycle or even penalties/fines like other communities do.
Best Regards,
Charlie Radman
charradm(a comcast.net
Page 1- 15 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
Email: rshanuon�a fru.com_
Name: Rich shannon
Address: 2906 Siherwood Drive,Fort collins,80525
I support trash districts as long as there are safe guards against a monopoly, with one company winning the bid on
all districts.
Email: BarbUT(ilrotmail.com
Name:Barbara Liebler
Address: 710 Mather s St.FC 80524
Trash districts are the best choice to solve our trash collection problems. They would reduce noise and street
maintenance costs. Haulers will drive fewer miles with a more compact area of service.
Email: deekucI6ia,hounail.com
Name: Dolores Kueffler
Address: 1621 E Pitkin St.
I like the idea of districting even though it lowers choice. It makes so much more sense in terms-of fuel,noise and
traffic on the street. I have lived in other cities where this was the case and it worked well.
In exchange for this security, demand that all the companies chosen include yard debris recycling.
Email: mishellebaun acomcast.net
Name: Mishelle Baun
• Address: 1730 Glenwood Drive, 80526
In this day of diminishing budgets for street maintenance,I hope that the trash districts are a way to minimize the
impact heavy garbage and recycling trucks have on our deteriorating neighborhood streets.
Anonymous citizen:
I cannot believe any enlightened council, as opposed to super political council,with an eye to the future of Fort
Collins could not approve redistricting. And 3 haulers is not the market system which would be pure competition:
It is an oligopoly and out to be highly regulated by City government.
Anonymous citizen:
District. Too many trucks on the road.
•
Page I- 16 Comments in Favor of Trash Districting
On-Line Community Feedback
Trash Services Study
June— September 2008
Opposed to Trash Districting:
Email: lorilon58 potmail.com
Name: Lori Campbell
Address: 4502 Zahn CI, 80526
Please do whatever you can to preserve our choice of collectors. We've lived here I 1 years and have used BE] and
Waste Mgmt,which were both terrible.Many missed pickups, sloppy service,random times of day and even well
into the evenings.Threw our bins down afterward,causing holes&cracking. We now use RAM and they are
wonderful. Precise schedule,never have missed a pickup,reliable,and they do not throw the recycling bins,but
place them neatly where they were originally set out.If we are forced to revert to anyone other than RAM.we will
be very upset.Bidding for neighborhoods is not a good idea, as the lowest bidder of course will win,and lowest
price does not mean best quality service.Thanks.
Email: marvsmntv703(atq.com
Name: Mary Smith
Address: 703 Sherry Drive
We will have increased rates,loss of freedom to not have the trash company of choice. Forced to pay for services
we may not want. Loss of freedom to support local business which I choose to suport.
Loss of freedom which is being taken away from the people. I do so get tired of the goverment taking away things
which we are forces to take and not being able to have a choice or a say in anything.
Email:i.swanstrom(a'.:comcast.net
Name: Jim Swanstrom
Address: 400 Cormorant court
Setting standards for cleaning of the trucks,operational standards like painting and running clean engines would be
great. Setting up districts is unnecessary. This already happens naturally. My whole block is already one company
because they the trash haulers are able to offer better rates but at the same time they must provide good service to
keep the area. Under city controlled districts I the purchaser of the service have no choice but to use the city
selected provider. Service will suffer.
The 190,000 in saving the report calls out is really nothing when compared to the city budget.
Email: frontrangers(ajuno.com
Name: Gabriel Lowe
Address: 4202 Cedargate Drive
I am unable to read the study;my computer won't bring it up. But I am viscerally opposed to the city government's
usurping my right to select which trash service or any other business I choose to patronize.
I have read the arguments in favor of the city's dictating to us which trash service we can use and 1 find them
superficial and misleading.
You want something to really concentrate on? Try studying(this city government loves expensive"studies"):
1.The bums who defecate and urinate in the doorways of Old Town businesses(i.e.find a way to gel rid of them)
2.The abominable driving habits of drivers(set up a training course to teach the use of turn lanes,turn signals,the
proper use of the passing lane,etc.)
3.The numerous potholes and breaks in pavement in main thoroughfares all over town
4. City government's habit of antagonizing developers,the latest being Jay Stoner and before him the
McWhinneys(i.e.try attracting instead of repelling).
When you've accomplished all that,then get an outside independent auditor to check the books and come up with
ways to save money and lower taxes.
And leave the citizens alone to choose their own trash service!
Page 2-1 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: ght, uctt(n-earthlink net
Name: Gary Huen
Address: 3191 Twin Heron Ct.
Why do you continue to waste taxpayer dollars studying issues that don't need to be studied because of complaints
from a few whiners? The current rash removal system works well overall. Our trash removal provider(Gallegos)
does a wonderful job. The City needs to stay out of the trash removal business!!
Email: snowyco(acomcast.net
Name: Steven Fry
Address: 1509 Fuqua Drive,Ft. Collins
What is the important and real goal(s)here? Is it the cost effective reduction of unnecessary high bulk recyclable
landfill waste? Or is this just another attempt at unnecessary social engineering by Kelly Olsen et al? I believe that
we should focus our efforts on getting the biggest returns for our money and efforts versus spending lots of$$$ to
buy a"study" that supports a vocal minority's agenda to force through unnecessary"reforms' of trash pick-up and
hauling.
They have clearly misused the goal of improving recycling efforts and reducing unnecessary landfill waste to further
their own agendas,the same agendas that the FoCo voters have rejected in past votes.
Example:It sure appears that our wise City Council members completely ignore the contributions made by FoCo
homeowners that use Hageman's,home composting,mulching,etc,when they evaluate whether FoCo is making
progress on meeting the 50%by 2010 goal. By ignoring(deleting?)the already significant reductions from
composting and re-use by Hageman et al,the City has artificially skewed the%recycling numbers to
• inappropriately to support their alternate agenda to over-regulate our well-functioning private trash hauling services.
Is the goal to reduce the amount of unnecessary waste going into the landfill,or is it an arbitrary%reduction made
to yet another sacred cow(artificially created standard)? If there are concerns about trash companies not meeting
existing laws and regulations,then ENFORCE the regulations vs. creating a whole new set of regulations and a new
complicated program. We do not want or need new programs,new bureaucracies,and more City Govt.bloating via
new programs and unnecessary over-regulation of a single group of a small number of small companies.
Out in the real world, FoCo folks annually"recycle" 100's of tons of yard waste that used to go into the landfill. The
City's so-called experts have ignored the existing improvements achieved by recycling and composting of yard
waste,so they could report artificially low(7%and 27%)reductions,in an effort to falsely(or ignorantly?)justify
pushing their veiled utopian social agendas.
Even though this recycling occurs at home or at Hageman's, it dramatically reduces a major source of unnecessary
landfill use. Past studies at Larimer Co.landfill clearly showed that landfill life could be best extended by reducing
the amount of construction debris and yard waste.
Let's focus our efforts on things that give the biggest return for our$$$: cut back landfill burying of yard waste and
construction materials.
Should FoCo and Latimer County residents continue to subsidize disposal of 100's of tons old roofing materials and
usable(combustible) construction materials? Should we continue to cook the"recycling"numbers by ignoring
already substantial current reductions in unnecessary landfill use? Should we continue to artificially limit the
recycling measurement metrics to include only"feel-good"consumer-sensitive items like plastic soda bottles etc?
Past and current FoCo Govt.policies in these areas conveniently show artificially low rates of recycling that
"coincidentally" support their agenda to over-control and over-regulate a relatively minor industry. This industry
may be a thorn in the side of a vocal but influential few,but this industry currently causes few significant problems.
• e.g. The R3 report says that would save "+/-$170,000 annually".
Page 2-2 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Notice the "+/-"= a wide confidence interval that shows an equal likelihood of NO SAVINGS. The study
conveniently does not address the added costs of writing, approving. implementing, and enforcing all of the NEW
proposed Rules and Regulations. If you count all of the actual costs. this looks like a major money-losing
proposition. Further,these proposals really don't address the real problems.
Email k_wink5(cilcomcast.net
Name: Kathy Winkler
Address:2409 Sheffield Circle West
We would prefer to continue with Gallegos -- we switched from Waste Management because the service went
downhill,and when I called, the office personnel was in Iowa somewhere. I don't want to do business with a
company that is not local. Waste Management practically owns California. We would haul our own trash if Waste
Management becomes our trash hauler.
Email: siefkene(amsn.com
Name: Emil Siefken
Address: 1413 Constitution Ave. Fort Collins.CO. 80521
Just leave it as it is.Quit messing around, and fouling up private industry. We need less Government,not more.Why
are we always bringing in consultants? If we are paying City employees an average of$60,000.00 a year they
should be qualified to work out the study,if not maybe we need to look at,why we have them.
Email: Goodellmc(i>netscane.com
Name:Martha Goodell
Address: 1612 Whedbee 80525
If beefing up recycling is the issue, it would seem that the city should educate the public about that.My trash hauler.
years ago was one of the national franchises.They screwed up with me. I have since used Gallegos,I am delighted
with them, and I would be furious if the city told me I had to use someone else.Gallegos regularly sends out info
about recycling--if we aren't doing enuf of it,it certainly isn't for lack of their trying.
Email: CDragooI77(ivaol.com
Name: Beverly Dragoo
Address: 1312 Calabasas Ct.
My husband and 1 are VERY much against the trash districting plan. GSI has been so very good for the past 31
Years for us. We need to have the choice to pick our businesses and NOT the FC City Council/FC govt. Once again
the government wants to decide life for us and that is not acceptable at all in any form.
Email: kods(oattnet
Name: Kathy O'Donnell Steinmetz
Address:4936 Smallwood Court,Ft.Collins,CO 80528
1 strongly wish to keep the system as it is.I do business with Gallegos for a reason....excellent service and
reasonable price and I am opposed to the city telling me who I have to do business with because they are going to
control what hauler gets what"district".The sanitation truck traffic in my subdivision is not an issue for the streets.
The study says they are the heaviest trucks on the streets,but I challenge you to multiply the weight of the delivery
trucks that are in my subdivision by 5-8 and come up with the total amt. of weight per week they contribute to our
streets coming by 5-6 days a week,sometimes more than once a day. Also,if we are going to be so concerned about
travel on our streets, is city council going to tell me I can only shop at Safeway for groceries because it is closest to
my home and I am adding to street traffic if I go to other stores further from home?Why is this city council so intent
on taking the choices out of"The Choice City" or did that moniker go out the window with the new logo and the
new image they are trying to create in this no growth/decr.new business city?
Page 2-3 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: rwbl316sib debris(acomcast.net
Name: Susan Browning
Address: 1316 Hepplewhite Ct,FC 80526
Our HOA recognized virtually all of the items contained in your 136 page study 18 years ago and elected to hire one
trash contractor for all residents. We periodically go out for bids to make sure that we're getting the best value for
our money and change trash contractors accordingly.We didn't go to the government and demand that they 5x the
obvious: we determined the best solution and implemented it.
Having the City mandate contractors, or take over the service itself, can only increase costs-any way that you look
at it, you'd be creating a monopoly-and monopolies increase costs.In our case. this newly created monopoly
restricts our ability to'shop around'for the best deal for us as there would be no incentive for trash haulers to
compete.
You guys need to focus on what's really important instead of inventing dragons to slay: continuing to stunt growth
and(surprisel)continuing to complain about a drop in sales tax revenue.,
Email: dltrz afrii.corn
Name: Dave Herzfeld
Address: 3008 Blue Leaf Ct
Once again,council is spending time and resources on an issue brought forward by a vocal minority. What's next,
districting for delivery trucks? Please quit wasting so much time and money on trash studies.newsracks,Christmas
lights,etc. and start addressing issues such as Transportation,Jobs, and Economic growth.
Email: mlmccall(aoutdrs.net
Name: Melvin
Address: McCall
I can't believe the city is even considering this issue.First of all if all the trash trucks in Fort Collins were to
suddenly go away,no one would even notice the street maintenance issue. And second of all,If a monopoly is
created,the prices will go up and the quality of service will go down.This happens every time a choice is taken
away from the people. The only power I and all the citizen's have is the power to fire a company if their not doing
the job.We've all seen what happens when government gets involved in something that should be left to private
enterprise. lust drop the whole issue PLEASE
Email: rmlbatch(aaol.com
Name: Rae M. Batch
Address: 1700 Glenwood Drive
I would prefer that City Govt not become directly involved in creation of Trash Districts by awarding contracts for
specific parts of town. However,there are currently three haulers on our short street;(times two for recycle trucks).
Six is too many. 1 do wonder to what extent trash companies have done their own marketing program, analyzing
current coverage in an area,and then going about the business of recruiting additional business by offering to lower
prices with exclusivity in that area.
I suspect it to be little,if at all.Perhaps this might be a Council suggestion,and a "way out".
Email Anon
Name: Anonymous
Address: xxxx Pleasant Valley Ct
1)do NOT include my name in any summaries.etc.
2)do NOT set up trash zone,so companies have monopolies. Competition should NOT be eliminated.
Email: Steve(ciGlassPhotogranhy.con
• Name: Steve Glass
Address: 3020 W.Prospect
I want to be able to pick my trash collector,and 1 want it kept privatized, I don't want any city involvement.
Page 2-4 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email:cjddhehn/aaol.com
Name: Donna Helm
Address: 2425 Cedarwood Dr.
Please leave the trash service alone. The city can not do as good a job as private industry.
Email:pugvi acie(.avahoo.com
Name: Marti Stokes
Address: 720 Ponderosa Drive.Ft.Collins. CO 80521
1 am absolutely opposed to creating trash districts!
I don't want to be told what trash company 1 have to use. Over the years,I've seen what happens when companies
consolidate or buy out other companies, whether it be banks, or insurance companies,or whatever. You always hear
that the consumer will benefit,but in my 56 years,I've NEVER seen that the consumer benefits.
When Waste Management took over BFI,the service drastically diminished,so much so that 1 finally switched to
Gallegos Sanitation. Waste Management is a huge company, and as such,people are a number,not a person. 1 want
to be a person! Gallegos gives me that.
I do favor increased recycling,even if costs might be passed onto me as a consumer, if the recycling ultimately
benefits the community.
Thank you for listening.
Marti Stokes
Email: rchoward863(a-amail.com
Name: Ruth Howard
Address: 600 Ponderosa Drive
My husband,Lyonal (Bud)feels very strongly that we need to leave the current system as is. 1, also,believe that.
However,some regulation might be good....esp. would like the trash companies to plan a bit better. We see Waste
Management as many as 3 trips a day by our house! That is a bit overkill,I would say!
Thanks for the opportunity to give input!
Email: ivisales&Vaol.com
Name: lames and Belinda Kemaghan
Address: 6118 Normandy Ct.
Like everything the city does this will increase our costs. We have private business to handle trash pick up and the
city would have to invest our money to buy equipment and facilities. This is yet another example of government
trying to run every aspect of our lives. The business already handling our waste collection are doing a fine job and
we are able to receive good pricing because of competition.
Email:ewdeckercpa((0iii.com
Name:Vicki Hale
Address: Fort Collins.CO
I want no change to the current system and government should stay out of private business.
Email:phoffman(afrii.com
Name:Pat Hoffman
Address: 1901 Longworih Road,Fort Collins,CO 80526
1 think it is TOTALLY WRONG for the City goverment to mess with my right to higher a trash hauler! It is NOT
the business of the City to interfere with private enterprise. I do business with a trash service that has been locally
owned in our City for many years. The money they make stays in our community! They are flexible and work with
Page 2-5 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
• our changing schedule.I will continue with them no matter what you do. Districts were tried many years ago& it
cost the haulers a lot of money when the State made them stop. Let's let customer have a choice. Leave this issue
alone!'!!
You can't control everything.I know it is not news,but this is Fort Collins.not Boulder!
Email:atm.mcsavktcolostate.edu
Name: Ann McSay
Address: 6422 Kyle Ave
1. 1 believe that the trash should not be done by districts. Free enterprise and competition is very important to our
way of life.
2. 1 do think that the current trash haulers need to look at their routes etc. I see one company in my neighborhood
several times in one day with what appears to be the same truck.
3. 1 do think the city of Fort Collins should communicate with Loveland regarding yard waste to recycle--my
understanding is that if you live in Loveland one is welcome to take tree branches etc to a central location to be
recycled without charge. They may charge for the resulting mulch.
4.Also,I feel that the trash haulers should investigate trash stamps vs flat rate fees. I have the right to put out 3
trash bags per week but 1 seldom have more than I but 1 pay the same fee as if I had 3 bags/week. Yes I do recycle
with my trash hauler as well as other ways.
Email: bistonerl0Cgaol.cont
Name:Beverly Jean Stoner
• Address: 502 Wayne Street
I get that it would be nice to have trash trucks in the neighborhood only one day a week,but I feel that would be just
one more choice taken away.
Name:Kathy Arns
Address: 813 Marshall Street FC
Feedback on trash regulations:
We are disturbed to hear that the city is considering taking control of Ft. Collins trash pickups. This would create a
monopoly, which is illegal. It would also eliminate competition, which now keeps rates down.
Most neighborhoods, including ours,take yearly bids from many trash hauling companies and contract with the best
alternative to meet our neighborhood needs.
Ft. Collins is not a socialist city-state. Please do NOT take over the trash pickups. Neighborhoods with any
complaints should be encouraged to do the responsible thing and meet with their neighbors to find the best option
for their neighborhood.
Thanks!
Kathy Arns
Email: dsave(a;fcgov.com
Name:Dean Saye
Address:3920 Lynda Lane
Just another way for the City to control/eliminate healthy competition for my business. I don't see how the City
• thinks it has any right to try this. Whats next,districtized restaurants? Should cut down on miles driven... God,I'm
glad 1 live in the County!
Page 2-6 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Robert Storm—Phone Call
Prefers to leave trash collection in the open market.
Email: e.espedalo,gmail.com
Name: Eric Especial
Address: 1945 Mainsail Drive
On Trash Districts:
Exclusive trash districts may perserve price competition but customer service will probably deteriate between award
periods. A hybred model of awarding 2 minimun or 3 maximum trash haulers a section of the city would preserve
the customer service levels. If the haulers overall customer service is poor,customers have the choice to switch and
not be stuck with bad service.
On Increased Regulation on Haulers:
The city and state current regulation for emission.weight and noise are sufficient. Goverment and businesses don't
need exception regulations to enforce and obey-just for trash trucks. Let's treat all business the same when ever
possible.
Focus on Increasing Recycling:
Tell consumer to fill the recycling box to the top before placing them on the street for pick-up. I fill mine about
every 3 weeks. If my usage is average, this could save 35 truck stop per trash stop per year and save big bucks.
Email: kutzrfLethotmail.com
Name: Richard F.Kurz
Address: 2002 Battlecreek Drive,Apt. 12101,Fort Collins,CO 80528-6266
I'm against all 3 options offered by the consultant's trash study listed in the August 2008 City News. The worst
option is creating trash districts. Next worst is increasing regulations. The best option(not listed in City News)
would be to do nothing.
Thanks for listening.
Email jrncleod(anetzero.com
Name:Terry McLeod
Address: 2627 County Fair Lane
Leave trash collection as it is. We never see multiple trash trucks in our neighborhood.
Consider trash districts where multiple trash haulers are have become a problem for the local population.
Email: ddixon(afrii.com
Name:Debbie Dixon
Address: 205 S. Whitcomb
I think emphasizing recycling&giving incentives to trash haulers&customers for recycling is the long-term best
option. There would be fewer trucks with trash districting,but I feel it doesn't guarantee they won't be speeding in
the neighborhoods because they have to cover a more concentrated area. Also,it interferes with business
competition-who is to ensure that the quality of service is maintained if a particular company has a monopoly on a
neighborhood?Keep the City out of the business of monitoring trash companies!!! There would be more
administrative costs without the competition factor.
Martha Goodell,484-8796 Phone message
I would be very upset if I couldn't continue to use Gallegos as my trash hauler. They've done a wonderful job for
many years. It would also be upsetting to think of the City infringing on private business. I don't understand the
problem with an extra truck going down the street once a week.
Email: ciddhehn/aaofcom
Name:Donna Hehn
Address: 2425 Cedarwood Dr.
Please leave the trash service alone. The city can not do as good a job as private industry.
Page 2-7 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: carled24i:comcast.net
Name: Carl Edwards
Address: 2209 Sweetwater Creek Dr,Fort Collins, CO 80528
After reading the proposals for changing the way our trash haulers operate in Fort Collins it appears to me this is a
lose/lose situation for the Trash Haulers, City of Fort Collins, and the residents that use those services.
No matter which option is chosen the residents will bear the burden of higher costs,the haulers will no longer have
the free market forces to keep their costs down and services high and the City of Fort Collins will have higher
administrative costs at a time when tax revenue isn't keeping up with the services required.
Several subdivisions are already accepting bids from haulers to service their neighborhoods for a year at which time
the bidding process starts anew. 1 don't see why other neighborhoods couldn't do the same by creating a
neighborbood zone which would accept bids from all of the haulers. The City wouldn't be involved,it would just be
a local area that would accept the bids and agree to use the winning hauler for a year.That would reduce vehicle
miles traveled and even make the neighborhood more coherent and promote safety.
A little elbow grease at the local level would help keep trash hauling costs down and allow the City to expend
energy on helping to increase our tax base.
Thanks. Carl
Email:abmac(afrii.com
Name: Anne Macdonald
Address: 4125 Sunstone Dr.
1 don't think the city should be divided into districts for trash. 1)1 like the freedom to choose according to cost, time,
recycling options. 2)1 don't like being dictated to by the City.
• the issue of trash haulers overlapping on streets is so minute compared to the cost of watering lawns, the miniscule
recycling efforts in the city,the waste within the city budget,the building of a$30 million amphitheater--I'd toss this
one aside and concentrate on real problems. How about underpasses on the Power bike trail?
Phone call: Lewan Strop: The system should stay as it is.
Phone Call: Evelyn Stole, 1336 Greengables—Want neighborhoods to continue to organize themselves.
Email:cgreskv Fi,vahoo.com
Name: Carol Gresky
Address:2351 Ridgecrest Road
We are in favor of as much recycling as possible and all local trash collectors seem to be cooperating.We are also in
favor of as little government interference as possible and wish to choose our own hauler as well allow business to
operate on a competitive basis.We are opposed to districting of residential trash collection. Government does not
need to run every little aspect of citizens'lives.
Email: craiosnowden(i ffrii.com
Name: Craig Snowden
Address: 1801 Jamison Ct
I would like to continue to be able to choose from any of the trash haulers available. 1 do not want the city to
determine which hauler will service my area.
Email: s s carroll amsn.com
Name: Steve
Address: Carroll
• Absolutely no districting-government should not be in the business of trash hauling. Open market competition
delivers the best priced products.
Page 2-8 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Possibly increased fees for load weights.truck emission and noise standards to encourage companies to invest in
new equipment.
More products should be available to be picked up for recycling by the trash haulers.
Email: bruce.rodean(r gmail com
Name: Bruce Rodean ,
Address: 3195 Worthington Avenue
This is just about the dumbest move the city can make. Just leave well enough alone. I like my trash hauler,the
service they provide,and the price 1 pay.If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That sums this situation up in spades.
Email: sIOyeterson(r�msn.com
Name: Steve/Pam Peterson
Address: 3308 Grand Canyon Ct
I am opposed to the City's proposed districting of Residential trash collection and I want to continue to be able to
choose my own trash hauler. Independant haulers provide a more competitive service and quality of service.
Pam Peterson
Email: geanfisher(aemail.com
Name: Gear Fisher
Address: 608 Gilgalad Way
Our city does not need yet another government managed program.Keep trash service part of the free-market
economy and don't encumber our city with yet another"program". To encourage all the points of the study,the city
can provide economic stimulus(rebates)to home owners that recycle,rebates to trash haulers that maintain clean
trucks and encourage contract pick-ups by neighborhood.We can accomplish these outcomes with intelligent
incentives rather than more government.
Email: lit tl efl vinan gel(a�msn.com
Name: Jennifer Bargmann
Address:4503 Starflower Drive,Unit D
Our country is founded on the belief in democracy,capitalism,and the free market. So,with this in mind it is
important to let the market work this way by not creating trash districts. We do not live in a socialist society and it
is unfair to increase city costs just because one wants to limit the competition in the market and reduce the noise
trash trucks may or may not make. I have also watched children who's eyes light up when they watch the trash truck
work and by limiting the number of days trash pick up is allowed will make some children very sad. If people want
to have one company assigned to their neighborhood for trash pick up maybe they should consider moving to a
community which has a homeowner's association in charge of regulations. We can also only put so much control
into our government agencies before we cross the line from a democracy to a dictatorship. It is also unfair to place
extra costs on consumers tax wise who,such as I already do,pay a homeowner's association to take care of trash
pickup. In a sense I would end up paying more since I would have to pay more taxes to offset the city costs and pay
my homeowners to provide the service. This would be very unfair and it would seem to me the city would then have
to regulate the costs residents pay to homeowners associations. It would be more effective to encourage and create
community or neighborhood unity and encourage neighborhoods who want trash pick up all on the same day to
coordinate those efforts on their own.
Email: mibeck007&ho1maiLcom
Name: Johann Beck
Address: 369 Brim Ct
I am opposed to the City's proposed districting of residential trash collection. I want to be able to choose my own
hauler. This proposal will result in increased rates, fees, or taxes and a decrease in customer service because there
will be a lack of competition. This is economics 101. This proposal will also hurt local haulers and show favor to
larger"foreign"haulers. I don't believe the City government needs to implement this kind of control. We are
wasting taxpayer dollars on this issue. Please don't let it continue. Let's put our money into things that really matter.
Page 2-9 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: kkmo l207'a comcast.net
Name: Kathy Petersen
Address:3100 Anchor Way#1 Fort Collins CO 80525
Stop wasting money on these ridiculous studies. I am VERY OPPOSED to the City's proposed districting of
residemaial trash collections. Let the citizens decide who they want to haul their trash. People who complain about
too many trash trucks going up and down their street and the noise they are creating have nothing better to do with
their time.They should exsen their energy and time in doing some volunteer work for the community. Thank you.
Email: xiaopnta606(amsn.corn
Name: xiaoping yuan
Address: 1375 golden currant et.,ft collins
Ram waste systems has served me with excellent services. 1 hope 1 can continue to use this company. 1 want to be
able to choose my own hauler. 1 support local company than the franchised big companies.
Email: cmacniven2(deomcast.net
Name: Cliff MacNiven
Address: 2503 Owens Av 4202,Fort Collins
1 want the City to maintain the competitive market-driven system of residential trash collection. I am opposed to the
City's proposed districting of residential trash collection. I want to be able to choose my own hauler.I want the
freedom to support our local businesses whenever possible.
Email: r2d2quinn(g:aol.com
Name: Diane
Address: 3225 Pepperwood,Fort Collins
• We live in a neighborhood with an FICA and get a good "group"rate with our trash collector. We support freedom
of choice in waste collection.
Email: amanda2733 msn.com
Name: Amanda Temple
Address: 3202 Reedgrass CT
I do not want to lose my freedom of choice. I believe that it is my choice to decide what trash company I would
like. Why would we stop supporting local businesses at this time in our economy? 1 currently have my trash
through RAM Waste Systems, and enjoy there customer service and trash services. I get to pick and choose which
services 1 would like instead of someone telling me what I can or can't have. 1 have had RAM Waste service for
over 12 years now and have never had problems with them. I feel that if the city were to decide who we can or can't
have we will not receive the same kind of wonderful service we do now.
I DO NOT support having my freedom of choice taken away!
Thank you,
Amanda Temple
Email:paemjngpa.aol.com
Name: Patricia Parisi
Address: 3100 Worthington Ave
1 vote NO to districting
1 want to be able to choose my own trash company
Email: hvboyer2(Ltmsn.com
Name: Harold Boyer
• Address: 6120 Claire Court
1 oppose the City getting involved. Keeping the business of trash hauling competitive is more important in the long
run.
Page 2-10 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: astockman(dnrodigv.nct
Name: James A. Mueller
Address: 1330 Twin Oak Court Ft.Collins, CO 80525-6202
Twin Oak Court is a"dogbone" street(entrance in the center with cul-de-sacs on both end). There is no through
traffic.The street has only 17 houses and is it's own homeowner's association.Our HOA contracts directly with the
hauler and in the 13 years 1 have lived on this street we have never seen any reason to switch.Ram Waste(our
hauler) does an excellent job and is competitive. I certainly would not want to cede any control over who our hauler
is to the City of Ft. Collins.
What is this fixation the City seems to have with spending taxpayers money on things like studying Christmas tree
lights, logo redesign and now trash redistricting?
We on Twin Oak Court like what we have now. It ain't broke._stop trying to break it. Butt Out!
Jim Mueller
Email:rsmith(f frircom
Name: Russ Smith
Address: PO Box 270744 Fort Collins, CO 80527
Having used two or three different trash haulers in the thirty years that I've lived in Fort Collins,I suggest that you
let the competitive forces decide who will haul trash for local consumers. I have finally found a company(RAM)
who actually reacts to my requests, is always easy to communicate with and has reasonable rates.I don't want to
change haulers and am quite happy with my current supplier.Why are we using tax dollars to complete this study
when we already have competitive forces making the determination as to who we consumers will use?
Thanks for listening,
Russ Smith
Phone Call: Mary Tuck 223-4605
Homeowner's associations should handle this issue. Gallegos has provided wonderful service. City Council should
stay out of this issue.
Email eshuba(uhourail.com
Name:Elisabeth Shuba
Address: 5434 Fossil Ct N
Comments:
I am opposed to the City's proposed districting of Residential trash collection and I want to be able to choose my
own hauler.
Email: fredcmartin(2cs.com
Name: fired martin
Address: 2842 claremont
We are against districting and lack of choice.
Email: stacie8656(cthotmail.com
Name: Stacie
Address: 3018 Indigo Circle North
I do not believe there needs to be any change and I certainly am completely against trash districts. Our HOA
requires a certain hauler in our neighborhood so we only have trash trucks once a week. HOAs and neighborhoods
should use this same approach to reduce the street wear and noise if they feel it is a concern. We use Gallegos
which I believe is way ahead in recycling so they are great and 1 would not want to be"forced" to change haulers. I
Page 2-11 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
. • also feel it is important to keep up the eompetiveness between trash haulers. If we go to trash districts we could be
charged unreasonable rates and we would have no personal decision to change.
Email: ersandilands(amsn.coin
Name: Edward Sandilands
Address: 5000 Boardwalk Dr. Unit 30
Have your Neighborhoods organization work with various communities to assist them to band together and
negotiate group waste service contracts. Work with HOA's to do the same thing. Spending money on another study
is foolish.Have the Neighborhoods organization spend what you would on a study to actually help.
Email: bisonbutt(rthotmail.com
Name: James Clausen
Address: 2214 Brightwater Dr.
I am opposed to the restriction of free choice. Trash companies pay taxes like other businesses,and should not be
restricted in their services.If a detrimental effect on the streets is assessed, then maybe their taxes should be
increased to cover the wear_ Limiting legitimate business is not the answer.
Email: pesheridan(iiuno.com
Name: Phil Sheridan
Address: 1718 Corkwood Ct.
I am very concerned with the plan to go to a districting system for residential trash collection. I agree that there are
issues with too many tracks and street damage. To help address this issue within our neighborhood,I led the effort
of my home owners association to go to one trash collection service. I was on the HOA board at the time and we did
a study of various trash collection companies,costs,days of service,etc. We selected one company and
. recommended to our members to switch their service. Over 95%did. We now have same day trash service
throughout our neighborhood provided by one company. We also had our cost of trash service significantly reduced
by getting HOA rates with the company. We have had this service for many years and are quite happy. This
basically accomplished what the city is trying to do,but we did it without any city intervention and we were able to
choose the best company based on performance and prices. If the city goes to forced trash districts we will lose the
ability to choose our trash company,we will see increased rates due to lack of competition,we will have to pay
additional fees or taxes to have govt. regulation, the level of service will suffer because of reduced competition(we
have no long term contract with our current provider and could change the entire HOA if we so desired),and we
would lose personalized or special services. I still believe in a free market economy and feel competition drives the
best prices and service. Trash districting will do away with the freedom of choice and benefits. After all, aren't we
the Choice City?
Email: stliepee(,i'fi-ii.com
Name: Steve Liepe
Address: 616 Hinsdale Cl,Fort Collins,CO 80526
Comments:
Please DO NOT change our trash service. The free market is doing a good enough job consolidating services.
Email:edcolver(iiicomcast.net
Name: Chester D.Colyer
Address: 507 Cortez Ct
I am against any districting of the trash service.1 am afraid if implemented it will take away my freedom of choose.
I believe taking away competition will raise the rates and will have to pay for services I do not want.
Email: cdcolyer(acomeast.net
Name: Chester D. Colyer
Address: 507 Cortez Ct
Page 2-12 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
I am against any districting of the trash service. 1 am afraid if implemented it will take away my freedom of choose.
I believe taking away competition will raise the rates and will have to pay for services I do not want.
Email: lore143(a:earthlink.net
Name: Laurie Evans
Address: 3209 Snowbrush Place
1 contacted Kelly Olsen when 1 first heard of this story. 1 thought then, and still think,that the research was waste of
our tax money. I want a choice on my carrier.
Email: tammvswansonI I(ayahoo.com
Name: Tammy Swanson
Address: 7102 Avondale Road
1 am 100%against trash districts and increased regulations. I support incentives. Gallegos Sanitation is my trash
hauler and they also offer recycling including yard waste recycling. The City would do taxpayers a bigger favor by
publishing a comparative of the various trash haulers offerings and let competition,consumer choice and the free
market prevail. I'm very tired of watching my taxpayer money be used to increase regulations or perform ridiculous
studies. The City should be encouraging businesses by reducing regulation in order to grow our economy.
Email: nurnab ttol.com
Name:Pamela Ballantine
Address: 1061 Tierra Lane Unit A
I would like to continue to have the freedom to choose my own trash hauling service. 1 am opposed to the City's
proposed districting of residential trash collection. Please make note of my opinion in this matter. Thank you.
Email:dfiedler65 a vaboo.com
Name: Maria Fiedler
Address: 2018 Mackenzie Court
I want to be able to choose my own hauler. Keep trash collection competitive.
Email: ticdavmom(a,aol.com
Name: Karen Kullhem
Address: 4406 Pipit Court
We have a right to pick our own trash haulers.
Email crai elg rlke(comcast.net
Name: Craig Ehlke
Address: 3325 Oregon Trail
I like my trash service the way it is. I want the freedom to choose which service and services I use and I want the
market place to determine the price.
Craig Ehlke
Email: mikeC orohoam.com
Name: Mike Schwab
Address: 2902 Rigden Parkway
Our company ProHOAm manages around 30 community associations consisting of around 2500 customers in Fort
Collins.We have some HOAs that are on group contracts and have one hauler selected by a bid process.In some
cases the bill is paid by the HOA in others the individual still pays the bill.We love the way it works for the
communities that have that option. We end up getting very good prices for the residents or HOA,depending on how
the contract is structured,with the benefits of fewer trucks in the neighborhood and only one day a week for trash
pick up.
With the above you would think I would be supportive of trash districts.however I'm not. 1 am in strong opposition
to the proposal for the following reasons:
Page 2-13 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
1. I fear one company with deep pockets would drive out the local haulers. One company has the ability to
artificially set rates at a loss for a long enough period of time to drive out the competition. Please look at other
communities where this has been an issue.
2. Right now the HOAs are able to negotiate very good rates and service. Is their any possibility that rather
Than the city tackling this issue they could pass an ordinance that gives existing HOAs the authority to name a
preferred provider for the association. They way it is now,unless the associations have the language in the
covenants that allow them to name a single hauler, it is almost impossible to get the 67%of the residents to vote to
amend the covenants to allow for a single hauler. In one HOA we manage they tried to amend their covenants to
allow them to name a single hauler,despite 75%of the residents using the same company.the effort was defeated. It
is next to impossible to get 67%of a neighborhood to agree. The election we tried was through the mail with self
addressed pre-paid postage ballots and still 40 of the 115 residents did not return their ballot.
3. We use all three trash companies in various associations and when they have to compete the bids have been
extremely competitive and close and the HOA will then choose the carrier based on quality of service which often is
not the low bidder.There is a large difference in quality of service between the carriers and the HOA boards we
work with like the idea of being able to choose a local option.
4. If a company provides poor service their needs to be a means in which to replace that company with one
that is more responsive. What mechanisms would be in place to protect customers from poor service if trash
districting is implemented?
5. We were able to save many of HOA's a considerable amount of money because we negotiated out gas
surcharges that can substantially change the cost of a contract. Some companies will set a very low initial rate and
then nickel and dime you with surcharges.
Thank you for allowing me to express my concern about trash districting. We do not speak for our homeowners on
this issue.I just wanted to express my opinion based upon working with the different trash companies and the HOAs
• that have trash service.
Email: dshochbergCa.yahoo.com
Name:Donna Schwall
Address: 5420 Northern Lights Drive,FC
Please keep the current competitive market system in place. I want to continue to be able to choose my hauler. I am
against the City's proposed districting of residential trash collection.
Thank you.
Email: anne_iordan(c4earthlink.net
Name: Anne Jordan
Address: 1018 Pica Run
1 am strongly opposed to the trash district idea.The city should not be spending money it doesn't have meddling in
who collects my trash,compostables&recycling.
The Focus on Increased Recycling seems like the best plan,as it encourages recycling(and,I presume, composting),
and doesn't damage private industry and doesn't add increased costs to the city.
Email: dmss(&earthlink.net
Name:Gloria Standring
Address: 424 E Stuart St
I would like to still be able to choose my own trash service. I've used the same one for years. All my immediate
neighbors use the same one. I bet most neighborhoods are similar in their use of trash haulers.
Email: cramsev37(iimsn.com
• Name: Craig Ramsey
Address: 709 Gilgalad Way,Fort Collins CO 80526
Page 2-14 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
I do not want to district waste handling. I want a competitive system so I can choose my waster hauler.
Email: LRC1179(daim.com
Name: Andrew Crane
Address: 3039 Regatta Lane,Unit 2
We are opposed to the city of Fort Collins taking control of residential trash collection and imposing trash
districting. We want to keep the current competitive market system and value the freedom to choose our trash
hauler.
Email: Vireilclear(acomcast.net
Name: Jean Clear
Address: 3213 Moore Ln
PLEASE reconsider Fort Collins city council's involvement with the trash haulers businesses! Allowing business to
interact with their own clients to establish a base of satisfied customers is essential. Government interference
disengages individuals from controlling their lives...residents prefer to select who we do business with. Our
relationships with the businesses have histories as long as 40 to 50 years.
Email: psacco 213(n,msn.com
Name: Phyllis Sacco
Address: 3130 Silverwood Dr.
I am opposed to the City's proposed districting of Residential trash collection and further 1 want to be able to choose
my own hauler_
The City should be more concerned with the damage the snowplows did on Centennial and the really awful job it
did trying to fix the gouged out holes.
Email: elenniii fortcollinsheatina.com
Name: Glenn Frank
Address: 2620 Canby Way
City Council,and to whomever it may concern,
Please do not spend any more of the taxpayers money trying to figure out how to compete with or control local
business!
Thais right the government has no right to do this. If it is in the yellow pages and there is competition, free
enterprise will figure out how to do business the most efficient way possible. Dent worry about it!
Stay out of it! Focus on the things that the city is responsible for(those things NOT found in the yellow pages)Fire,
Police, Streets,Parks, Schools,planning,etc. Dent get sidetracked.
Glenn Frank
General Manager
Fort Collins Heating and Air Conditioning,Inc.
"Big enough to serve... Small enough to care."
Phone 970-484-4552
Email: le sea saway(imarthl ink.net
Name: Lester Gasaway
Address: 4349 Winterstone drive, 80525
1 want to be able to choose my trash hauler as I believe this keeps the pricing lower by competition in the business.
It also lets me pick the day of the week for trash pickup by choosing the hauler as each picks up on a different day in
my neighborhood.
Page 2-15 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email:kem onzales(a comeasi.net
Name: Kenneth Gonzales
Address: 1023 Ashford Court
Several years ago our HOA selected RAM Waste Systems as the single trash collector for my neighborhood.This
decision reduced my trash collection fees from around$240 per year to$190 and improved the service.RAM
collects the trash on Monday and we no longer see trash trucks every weekday.1 feel that Clarendon Hills currently
has the best setup 1 have seen in my 25 years in Fort Collins and would hate to see it changed.Our HOA reviews
RAMS performance on an annual basis and we consider other trash haulers- so far RAM has kept our contract.The
City Council should be careful and not eliminate the competitive market which I believe ensures high quality,
customer focused service.
Email:dmhodgkimsn.com
Name:David Hodge
Address: 827 Ashford lane,Fort Collins
* We are very please with Ram Waste Systems.
* we want Clarendon Hills to be able to choose their own trash hauler.
* We do not want to be forced to pay services we do not want or need.
* We want to have personalized and/or special services
*We do not want any changes to our present service by an effective Ram Waste System.
Email: mtmaiorCergmaifcom
Name: Marty&Terri Major
Address: 2721 Port Place Drive
Please cease this waste of time and money,do not change the current method of trash management in our city.
• We wish to be able to choose our own trash service and not have the city interfere in any way. The city cannot
manage it's own budget,let alone trash service.
Email:bevoann(c-ecomcast.net
Name:Beverly Scarborough
Address: 2145 Brightwater Drive
I want to be able to select any trash hauler that I choose. Our HOA has a contract with Ram and they service our
entire neighborhood. We want the ability to continue service with a company of our choice based on price and
service. There is already too much government control and expense to taxpayers.
Email: iib(dfrii.com
Name: Jim Brewer
Address: 742 Rochelle Circle,Fort Collins
Hi, I read some of the executive summary from the recent trash study. Part of the recommendation is to implement
a trash districting system.
I am opposed to such a system as it eliminates competition and expands the role of the city government where it
doesn't need to go. Our subdivision(Clarendon Hills)voluntarily elected to have a single collection service. That
solved the multiple service/traffic problem and minimized wear&tear on our local streets without eliminating our
ability to choose alternative carriers on a periodic basis.
Please do not implement a districting system for trash removal.
Thanks for your attention,
Jim Brewer
•
Page 2-16 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: tmpiib(u comcasi.net
Name: James Brookhouser
Address: 754 Rochelle Circle-Fort Collins
Leave the trash contracts to individuals or HOAs and stop putting government into our lives where it is not wanted.
If someone feels that their particular neighborhood has too many trash trucks driving thm it,then let them approach
their own HOA (or set one up) to address the issue in their own neighborhood.
As for me,I've never seen an issue with the number(or pollution levels)of garbage trucks in my neighborhoods and
think it foolish the government is spending so much time on this.
A free market economy will weed out those trash haulers that are not safe and efficient—we do not need yet another
government program/law to take the place of what we, the people should be doing for ourselves.
Email: dr2poppy L&corricasLnet
Name: Gerald Poppy,DVM
Address: 1419 Last Oak Court
I feel that the city is over reaching in wanting to control more of the services such as trash pickup. Open
competition has been the best way to provide service at the least cost. I don't feel there is too much traffic or wear
and tear on our street or streets. An example of waste of tax payer money is having this report written. We don't
need government spending more money on trying to control others than the amount they save in new programs.
Email:bmilegkJamar.colostate.edu
Name: Bill Miles
Address: 638 Stonington Lane 80525
Call a meeting of all the now functioning trash collector big cahunas in Fort Collins. Stand back as an observer
ONLY and let them work out their own amicable arrangements to minimize double driving the same streets. We
don't need more government intervention into free enterprise!
Email: mmknitter(4,aoLcom
Name: Mayra M.Martinez
Address: 5402 Copernicus Drive Fort Collins CO 89528
1 just recently recieved a notice regardiing the city's proposed districting of Residential trash collection. Ram Waste
Management has done an excellent job and is providing a great service. Therefore I AM OPPOSED to the City's
proposed districting of residential trash collection. I want Ram Waste Management Inc. to be the company that
takes care of the service.
Email:teddi 1036 rilmsn.com
Name: Margaret Stanbarger
Address: 3465 Lochwood Drive,Fort Collins 80525
1 am opposed to the City's proposed districting of Residential trash collection.1 think we should be able to choose
our own hauler.
Email: irideouttt.aol.com
Name: Jamie Rideoutt
Address: 2214 Owens Avenue tt102
Comments:
I am opposed the City's proposed districting of residential trash collection.
Page 2-17 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: nfbi-Ca au.net
Name: Sandy Schiffems
Address: 7325 Silver Moon Lane,Fort Collins. CO 80525
1 would like to keep the current competitive market system and the freedom to choose my own hauler.
I oppose the districting of residential trash collection!
City government should not be involved in my decision.
Email: mas9( hs.ore
Name:Mark Schiffems
Address:7325 Sihermoon Lane
1 want to keep the current competitive market system along with the rights to choose my own trash hauler. There
should always be a choice.
Email kmash0075a'aol.con]
Name: Michele Kaveny
Address: 8502 Bruns Drive
More government regulation is ridiculous for trash hauling. It will only freeze whatever leveraging ability
customers currently have. We need the flexibility of choosing what company we want to support. DO NOT
CHANGE THE CURRENT MODEL. !I Spend your money on more worthwhile endeavors like more'greening'of
the environment.
Email:cai65I Ldhotmail.com
• Name: Celeste Jordan
Address: 3337 Dudley Way 80526
I oppose the implementation of a trash districting system. I want to keep my freedom of choice with regards to my
trash collection hauler: I have found it necessary to change companies in the past and want to keep the ability to do
that again if need be. -
Email: wardo awordo.com
Name: Ward Snyder
Address: 216 Rick Dr.
I think limiting competition is the worst way to approach any business matter. It still chaps my hide that Fort
Collins doesn't allow competition in the cable market and we now get poor service,high prices, and don't have
other options. Let learn from this mistake and not limit a consumer's choice of where they want to do business.
Email: tbirdo campvargas.com
Name: Terri Vargas
Address: 3103 Wheatgrass
1 would like to be able to choose our trash service. I like the company we have&prefer not to change it to that
which the city deems appropriate.Furthermore,having a choice allows for competitive rates&customers can
receive only the services they desire.
Email: emark28&, ,mail.com
Name: Mark Ellsworth
Address: 550 Shadbury Ct
I do not support a districting system for our trash. It is free market and market forces that should role trash
collection.The increased cost to the city,and the lack of market forces will unite to cause the trash services to
actually be reduced in quality in the mid and long term. More frequent,and better information given out to residents
• will improve recycling. Better communieanon to residents on individual blocks could lead to these blocks of people
making better deals for trash services without the city needing to be involved.
Page 2-18 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email:notcss 1(acardilink.net
Name: Peter Notess
Address: 1736 Trailwood Dr.
I am opposed to the City's proposed districting of residential trash collection. I want to be able to choose my own
hauler. Open competition is a good thing and eliminating it is more likely to INCREASE rather than decrease
collection costs. I believe the city can increase diversion rates by making additional requirements for the haulers to
meet.
Email:idp72(acomcast.net
Name:David&Judith Tawney
Address: 900 Arbor Ave. #4
Dear Sir,Madam: We are very pleased with our trash service and would appreciate it if no changes were to be made.
With the economy as it is we can not afford it and 1 am worried people will be dumping their trash in the streets.
Thank you
Email: unelebrad3 it,uno.com
Name: Brad Shaffer
Address: 625 Blue Mesa Ave
I feel that the trash hauling in Ft.Collins should remain a competitive business rather than districts.My personal
experience with one of the big trash haulers that work in our area(and that most likely would have the funds to be
able to win in a competitive bidding process)was poor service. In the past year I switched from a nationwide
company that had lousy service to a local provider that is much better. With the larger company it may seem that
they can be more efficient but I would argue that a smaller company has to be more efficient to make ends meet and
they will look for the most economical way to operate. I was on a bag program with the big company as my actual
trash is very small after I recycle all that I can and because of the inefficiency in their company they had to send
people out to my house on 3 different occasions to deliver bags when their normal trash hauler didn't do it. It may
not be another trash truck going up and down the road but it's still another vehicle that didn't need to be if they had
gotten it right on the first stop. I've not had this problem with bag delivery with the local company. Should I be told
that I would have to use the larger company again,I would seriously consider saving up several bags of trash and
loading them in my own vehicle and going to the landfill myself to avoid the hassle of dealing with these larger
companies.Now to the issue of local economics,if I spend my money with a local company,the odds are much
higher that this money will be reinvested into our local economy.Keeping the downtown shopping district vibrant
.and strong is a vital part of Ft. Collins. If my money is sent to a different state to pay my bill,none of that will be
reinvested into the local economy. I would much rather see the city working with trash companies to plan out the
most efficient routes possible to get to all of their customers.There are several other options besides districts for
trash haulers. For instance 1 live in a cul-de-sac and out of the 6 houses here, 5 of us use the same trash hauler.
That's pretty good efficiency already just by free enterprise but perhaps we could all set our trash in one localized
place in the cul-de-sac so that one truck can come,and in one stop,pick up the trash for the majority and then one
truck for recyclables and our street would be almost done.This would cut down on take offs and stops which are the
biggest contributor to air pollution from motor vehicles.This same thing could be impacted with better timing of the
stoplights throughout town which would also help with traffic congestion.One stop on a street would cut down the
amount of time that a truck is idling while the riders are getting on and off the truck gathering trash,loading the
truck,replacing bins/cans,etc.As for recycling, as I understand it.it is something that all of the haulers offer but it is
really supported by the city and is the same across the different haulers. If this is the case,there could be a fleet of
city trucks that are well maintained and possibly fueled by alternate fuel and districts for recyclables.This would
eliminate the need for a recyclable truck from several different companies to go through the neighborhoods on
several different days to get these things; cutting down on traffic considerably.These are just a few suggestions but
it seems that there are several options to be able to accomplish getting the trash moved and helping out the
environment while still keeping the quality of service and the added benefit of stimulating the local economy when
the local trash haulers are used.My fear with districts is that eventually the little guys would be put in such a tight
position that they could no longer compete and we would all be stuck with the lousy service of the big guys.
Respectfully,
Brad Shaffer
Page 2-19 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email:silblufox(aaol.com_
Name: Robert Burger
Address: 1830 Lakeshore Cir.
Doesn't the City Council have better things to spend money on_ We have a very good system of garbage pickup
using independent companies. Are we going to go socialistic and put companies out of business or not give citizens
a choice. We spend more money on studying the studies than we do on the solutions. Let us use who we chose.
Email: oliver meisel'(avahoo.com
Name:Oliver Meisel
Address: 347 Turman Dr
Keep the trash hauling system competitive,by all means. If possible make it even more competitive. Don't assign a
specific area io just one hauler. That would create monopolies. Thanks!
Email-brucemceill cucomcast.net
Name:Bruce McGill
Address: 2301 Tanglewood Drive
When I first moved to Fort Collins, a "districted" system was in effect.That was a terrible system.
I was disappointed that a city-run system was not one of the options included. 1 know that there are cities who own
and operate their trash hauling system.
That system would cover all of the recommendations without a huge oversight expenditure. If the trash haulers can
make a profit,the city should be able to,at least,break even.
• The city will have a huge bureaucracy to try to manage compliance.The trash haulers will spend a fortune evading
the regulations. And I'll pay for both.
Either have a competitive process or a governmental one.Bastardizations never work.
Email: ekephart aiuno.com
Name:Gary Kephart
Address: 5503 rabbit creek rd fort Collins co 80528
1 am opposed to the city's proposed districting of residential trash service. In a free market I should be able to choose
my own trash service.
Email: wfrauch(a-nisn.com
Name: Bill
Address: 1368 Golden Current Court
1 do not support districting for trash haulers.
My deciding factor is that 1 do not want to be forced to one hauler for my neighborhood. If I am dissatisfied with
their level of service,what choices do I have, living in"Choice City"?
Email: ann.zollman(diuno.com
Name: Ann Zollman
Address: 6001 Huntington Hills Ct
Please keep the current competitive market system along with the freedom to choose my own hauler. Please focus
on economic development and being more business friendly.
Email: ikpepper("Ootmail.com
Name: John Leib
• Address: 738 Ashford Lane,Fort Collins,CO
I prefer the current means of handling the disposal of trash in my neighborhood.I believe competition is healthy and
1 am opposed to the city government assuming control of my trash collection.
Page 2-20 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: ierrvl3wy r, .com
Name: Gerald L. Dolph
Address: 3036 Dunbar Ave..Unit tl13 Fort Collins,CO 80526
Government should guide and govern, not get into business they have no expertise.
Why don't you task the waste haulers to come up with a plan to reduce the duplication of coverage in areas of the
city.Require them to reduce the number of trucks they have within various areas of the city themselves.Given the
motivation of the alternative,government running their business. you can bet they will come up with some savings
that we can all see.
Email: randr68(dmsn.com
Name: Ruth Andrick
Address: 3500 Carlton Avenue
I am opposed to the city's proposed districting of residential trash collection. I much prefer having the choice of
companies. This allows for a competitive market;which helps to keep costs under control.
Will you PLEASE stop spending my extremely hard earned dollars on out-of-state consultant firms to address issues
that any one of 10,000 individuals right here in Ft Collins would be better suited to study.....if a study is even
necessary. Stop trying to"Boulderize"Fort Collins'
Email:rolfesobo a rnsn.com
Name: Rolfe Sobolik
Address: 2550 Custer Drive,C12
I'm opposed to the proposed districting of residential trash collection.It would eliminate competition resulting in a
decline in customer service and an increase in rates.
Also,I don't see the proposed change being of any benefit to street maintenance or the environment.
The proposed change would most likely be a net negative to the community.
The current competitive system is good.Keep it.
Email:etnm92125(ctaoLco_m
Name: Emma Miller
Address: 5206 Iris Cf. 80525
1 am opposed to the City's proposed districting of Residential trash collection. I want to be able to choose my own
hauler
Email: mblessing(awahoo.com
Name: Michael Blessing
Address: 713 Parliament Ct,Fort Collins,CO 80525
Currently,we have excellent trash and recycling service in this town due to free market competition. We have the
freedom to choose whom we wish to do business with.
Please don't mess this up by getting involved. We would definitely lose freedom and probably get poorer service at
higher prices.
Just mind your own business and stay out of meddling with the trash.
Email: alitzau(dcomcast.net
Name: AI Litzau
Address: 1131 Dural Place.Fort Collins,CO 80525
1 urge the Council to reject the proposal to impose districting on the trash collection business in Fort Collins.
Page 2-21 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
• Rarely,if ever,has government proved successful or competent in efforts to impose artificial restraints on free
markets.
The proposed districting will have the effects of:
-increased rates for trash collection
-higher costs for city government
-inevitable decrease in levels of customer service
Please reject the proposal!
Email:rmshaff(iwdemad.com
Name: Ron Shaffer
Address: 2341 Westview Rd.
I do not support the recommendations of the study(i.e. establishing a district system, or awarding a single contract).
It's pretty evident, even though it wasn't explicitly discussed,that the costs of establishing and administering these
types of systems would far outweigh any savings the City might realize. If the City can't figure out how to collect
trash better and cheaper, it should stay out of the trash collection business. Thank you.
Email: chuckwashingionace("ilmsn.com
Name: Chuck Washington
Address: 1125 Deercroft Court Ft. Collins, 80625
Do not implement the District Trash system. It would require FC gov administration and any more gov
administration is not desirable. There are other ways to reduce the wear and tear on the streets and regulate the trash
haulers to comply with more modem standards on safety,noise,pollution,etc. Use the study to pick the best ideas
• to implement but don't go to a District system!
Email:jimkelly374I(8i aol.com
Name: Jim Kelly
Address: 2813 Zendt Dr.
Leave the system alone!!! You have already wasted many$$ and much time to accomodate a group of whiners.
My neighborhood(Quail Hollow)is not impacted by multiple haulers. The roads deteriorate due to many reasons,
the'finding'that trash mucks are a major contributor is a fabrication. The quality of life in my neighborhood will not
increase if we screw around with the current open competition system for haulers. I could list many things that
might improve the quality of life but this is not one of them. Leave the system alone. Quit wasting time and money.
And don't create a city staff to administer districts for trash hauling. Get busy reducing or abandoning the tiered
water rates if you want to make the city a better place.
Email: nathan.hrouda(;gmail.cmn
Name:Nathan Hrouda
Address: 503 S Whitcomb St
I think that districting the trash services would be an awful idea,because the issue at hand is whether the
government will control it or put it in the hands of local businesses. I don't believe that the solution to every
problem is to regulate it through the government. You will take away the capitalistic trash business here,losing
competition,jobs,and the whole way that America works the best. Don't think that just saying,"We'll do it" makes
it better...it usually makes it worse and more bureaucratic,which no one I know likes. I don't want to be in a country
where I don't get a choice on simple services like trash because some people complain about noise. Please don't
start regulating everything...that is not a pleasant country to live in.
•
Page 2-22 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: clukiramalass.com
Name: Clu Tamlm
Address: 1303 Reeves Dr.
We are not interested in the city being in control of the local trash service. We would like to maintain as much of a
free market economy as possible. Competition promotes good service and a healthy economy.
Email: wileer618(ccwebiv.net
Name: Wil Stutheit
Address: 618 Warren Landing
We are not in favor of standarizing the trash collection in Ft.Collins. Over the past 17 years,our HOA has been
able to negotiate with local companies for the best rates and have kept the number of trucks in our area to a
minimum.
Email: queensbrat2222Giq.com
Name:Patricia B.Kingsbury
Address: 1730 Hastings Dr Fort Collins CO 80526-2222
1 feel we should keep the current competitive system and 1 wish to continue being able to choose my own trash
hauler. 1 think there is enough,nay too much, government interference in our everyday life. If I am not happy with
whom ever you choose for me,I would have no choice.And after all,freedom of choice is one of our rights. I also -
believe in supporting our local businesses whenever possible.we have way too many Walmarts and Starbucks stores
in this town pushing out our"mom and pop' places. 1 also do not want to pay for services I may not need or want
and everyone knows, rates would increase in order to pay for someone to sit around and think up new ways of taxing
and billing us. I also feel that competition keeps service at a higher level...why should a company go out of their
way to do a good job, etc if they going to get the same pay whether they do a good job or not. PLEASE leave
things alone and stop trying to regulate everthing...it is working great just the way it is. Chances are the people that
are complaining about the current system are the same people that buy a house near an airport and then complain
about the airplane noise!!! I find it incredible that you continue to spend time and money on issues like this when,
as far as I can see, this particular issue of the current trash system is working just fine and needs NO changes.
Patricia B Kingsbury
Email: leonardlisa(ri hotmail.com
Name: Lisa Leonard -
Address: 1821 Golden Willow Ct.
I want to retain the right to choose who I hire to collect my trash. 1 like the current competitive market system.
Don't waste government time or money on studying something as insignificant as regulating refuse collection.
Email: csi ri tii.com
Name:Denise Cameron
Address: 1728 Bedford Circle
Fort Collins should keep the companies hauling trash in an open market. This is America and we are capitalists and
thus thrive in a free enterprise environment. Please allow residents to have the competition between haulers,even if
it means additional regulation. Although,personally,I do not think more regulation is needed.
Email:kenanderson(a_frii.com
Name: ken anderson
Address:2814 fleet drive
another nannyville study! are you going to limit fed ex trucks,ups trucks,milk trucks and the ice cream man too?
remember when they did divide up the city and billing and the federal trade commission decided they were price
fixing and made them compete against each other in all areas? this is totally rediculous!
Ken
Page 2-23 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: don3v5idaol.com
Name: Don Dieckman
Address: 1715 Bluegme Ct.
Goverment already intrudes into business a excessive amount.Let free enterprise prevail. 1 was not happy with my
previous trash service provider.I switched(as is currently MY choice)and I am very satisfied now.Money would
be better spent on improving roads, storm water drainage and a multitude of other problem instead of another study
to fix a problem we don't have.
Email:nathan(dpeirce.homeunix.net
Name:Nathan Peirce
Address: 3700 Rochdale Drive
I don't see a problem with having multiple trucks driving through my neighborhood. Even with two or three haulers,
I rarely see them. I don't think the city should be wasting its time worrying about the comparatively small impact of
a few extra trucks when considering that we have thousands of other private and commercial vehicles roaming our
streets. It's a drop in the bucket. Please don't worry about it.
I like the idea of competition and consumer choice. 1 do not like the idea of exclusive contracts. I can see how
maybe ten haulers doesn't make sense,so maybe the permitting process can keep it to about 3 haulers per area.
Thanks
Nathan Peirce
Email: donnatumbu1173Ckginail.com
Name: Donna Turnbull
• Address: 2606 Shadow Mountain Dr
1 feel trash should be kept as a private sector item with freedom to choose your trash company. Yes there is more
traffic with multiple companies coming through the neighborhoods but thats ok at least there is competition so that
service is kept affordable. If we need to improve recycling just educate the public more on recycling and provide us
with the tools to do so rather than waste the money on outside reasearchers trying to tell the residents of fort collins
what's best for us.
Email: mda iump(dhotmail.com
Name: Margaret Shaw
Address: 1272 Solstice Lane, 80525
I am against the city's proposed trash districting. I believe that we have better service and more competitive rates by
being able to choose our own trash service.
Email: bpgrubbCc�frii.com
Name: Heather Gmbh
Address: 3761 Bromley Drive
I am happy with the current trash collection system. The ability to choose our service keeps rates reasonable and
increases options. I grew up with a districted trash collection service and saw the reduced level of service and price
problems first hand. Please do not district our trash service.
Email: cbarCtilonespeak.net
Name: Carol Barnes
Address: 7757 Park Ridge Circle,FtCollins 80528
Please keep the right for us to choose what waste collector we want. Our neighborhood already has only one service
and bids out regularly.
•
Page 2-24 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: JJMelearLdaol.com
Name: Jacquelyn Melear
Address: 631 So. Loomis Ave.
1 am strongly opposed to changing Fort Collins current free market,competititive system of waste collection to one
of centrally-controlled,government-managed, forced districting.
Besides adding another layer of government bureaucracy(which equals more tax dollars required for
administration),this would effectively set up mini-monopolies.
Eliminating one's competition via monopoly has some natural advantages(but not for the consumer)which brings
up the question: how are companies going to be"assigned"? Who decides which ones get which districts(if any)
and how is that going to be done in an equitable manner? And who decides what is equitable? (Harmon. No reason
to suppose there would ever be any shenanigans or kicking-back going on down the line since everyone in the world
is honest.)
I do not want to be forced to use an"assigned"trash hauler with absolutely no alternative when it is dictated to me
what I will be charged. Ch wait,now we'll need more government intervention with price controls! Another layer
of bureaucracy with yet another bureaurcrat who will decide what is equitable. Like most things that government
gets its hands into,this will turn into another program that feeds the growth of ever bigger government with the
private citizen-taxpayer-consumer on the losing end paying through the nose for lousy service.
The freedom of choice and competition that the free market provides is the only way to ensure the highest quality
service at the best price. Let's take a much closer look at the unintended but inevitable consquences of more
centralization and keep Fort Collins a "Choice City"!
Jacquelyn Melear
Trash districting is a BAD idea.
It is clear to me that someone in the Fort Collins City Government -has already decided to do this. As some one
who believes in honesty in government,1 say DON'T.
This will mean monopoly. 1 believe in free enterprise. Monopoly is not cheap,it will cost more. More in dollars
paid for the service,and more in the cost of government.
A freind of mine lives in Denver. Twice now the trash trucks have driven into,and knocked over his fence. In a
free enterpirse trash service,He would be able to lire the collector. Denver has done nothing. This costs not only
the fence replacement,but also set the precedent for trashing the rights of the citizen.
As a"public/private partnering" ( a dirty doublespeak phrase) this will create a culture of corruption in goverment.
Who will get the contract? The one with the best connections.
1 reject the argument of pollution and road damage. Most of the gas in go to and from the landfill,in full truck.
While there is some extra gas consumption in the pick up,there is also extra gas consumption is the districting
proposal. Gas of the public employees going to meetings,gas to heat an cool the extra office space the public
employees to"administer" the program. The gas they consume driving to work and back. The extra gas and jet fuel
of politicians on the junkets the service provider has to deliver.
Most of all,the Corporatizing of America. This is a pogrom to destroy free enterprise,and replace it with the
corporate state. It means Gallagos,and Ram,will be killed off,and Waste Management,or perhaps Haliburion,will
have the hard earned money of the citizen sent through them,for the cost of doing the service,and perhaps other,
unrelated agenda items.
To support trash districting is to attack freedom in America,plane and simple.
Page 2-25 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email: MDShearon(a aol.com
Name: Charles-Melear
Address: 631 S.Loomis Av.
I oppose any restrictions on the free market and free competition of public trash service in Fort Collins.
I am satisfied with the current process and don't find the noice factor as a real problem. As for wear and tear on the
roads, this doesn't appear as a valid reason to suppress the free market and have more governmental bureaucracy
rule.
Charles Melear
District 6
Email: rich(awillreninc.com
Name: Richard Will
Address: 3203 Burning Bush Ct..Fort Collins, CO 80521
The Trash Study is another example of this city council's"anti business attitude" that has supported the growth of
Loveland;Windsor.Wellington,and now Timnath. The exodus of tax dollars from Fort Collins resulting from over
regulation and the retarded thinking of the council now has them looking for new ways to generate income through
new fees. The sad part is that the council undoubtedly spent thousands of our tax dollars for a study to support their
scheme for more government control of our lives.
I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO CITY DISTRICTING OF RESIDENTIAL TRASH COLLECTION. The
current system works well, is priced competitively,does not disrupt my neighborhood,and provides dependable
service. I DO NOT WANT IT CHANGED.
• We need less government,not more. And we need a new city council that has the best interest of the economic
health of Fort Collins as a priority.
Email Lindsette(caccomcast.net
Name: Lindsay Morgan
Address: 2101 Essex Court,Fort Collins, CO, 80526
Open competition and freedom of choice is what has made America work. It has kept prices down,quality up and
people happy.The idea that my city government could put me at the mercy of"one" garbage company;like it or not,
does not fit into the picture of what is best for the people who live in this"Choice City"! The collection of garbage
works just fine the way it is and so did the City Logo! Can't our city officials turn their attention and our money to
much more pressing problems than this?They should be ashamed!
Email Absolute,10(dcomcascnet
Name: Richard D. Schmer
Address: 1707 Glenwood Drive
Dear Sirs,
Please put me down as extremely opposed to the changes City Council is trying to make in the way my Trash is
picked up and hauled. Our neighborhood association has a"By Choice" agreement to use Ram as our recommended
Hauler. I do not want to change to the unknown. Who do you think you aremaking these choices for me?
Ram Waste Systems, Inc has hauled our Trash for several years. Their prices are competitive and their service is
excellent.I refuse to have a Third Party, You,the City Council tell me who I should have haul my refuse. I want
Choice to choose the best price and service not have you make what will inevitability cause a drop in service and an
increase in price.
Why,with the limited budget you say you have are you spending our Tax Dollars on this? Spend your own money
• instead of mine on this waste of time and dollars.
Show me where our current system is broken,not what you feel is good for me.Feel????
Page 2-26 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Sincerely_
Richard D. Schmer
Email: davebrown(ii hobendraeon.com
Name: Dave Brown
Address: 404 Baylor Street
Seldom-- if ever-- does more government present a viable option to actually private sector activities. Over the 50
years I've been a resident, this trash hauling discussion is not new-- I doubt the facts have changed much, either.
During a period in which the City is already challenged to meet budgets,Council should be particularly cautious in
recommending new"services." As a citizen/taxpayer,all I see out of is less money in my pocket and more
bureaucracy. Allow private enterprise work as it's supposed to. City control is NOT any answer to the issues at
hand--real or perceived.
Email: ers schmidt(dmsn.com
Name: Craig Schmidt
Address: 2725 Pampas Dr.
Keep the current competitive system.
Email: iimkuiken(iuvahoo.com
Name: Jim Kuiken
Address: 4143 Harbor Walk Drive
Don't change it. Competition among trash haulers forces them to be responsive to customer service issues and keeps
prices down.
Marginally reducing the number of trucks on the streets will not be worth the loss of competion.
Email: kstvler avahoo.com
Name:Kathy Tyler
Address: 1039 Hessen Drive Fort Collins.CO 80524
I am not in favor of a District or City Wide trash service.I want to be able to choose my own trash hauler. I think
free competition is the best way to keep our services of the highest caliber and the best price.
Email: davelCt�uchicaeo.edu
Name:David Langenberg
Address: 3807 Dahlia Ct--Fort Collins 80526
I'd prefer we just leave the trash hauling the way it is. By keeping competition for trash services high we all benefit
through lower prices,increased service,and more options for how we want to dispose of our trash.
Before I moved to Fort Collins I lived in a city which was serviced exclusively by one single hauler under contract
by the city. The service was marginal,and the attitude of the hauler towards the single resident was one of
ambivilance. There was no way for a resident who had special needs or desires to customize their service or to
negatively impact the hauler by taking their business elsewhere if the hauler didn't provide adequate service.
Email:peanutbutterO.,msn.com
Name: Kathleen
Address: 2500 college
It seems to me as though the City is trying to ease its way into taking over the city's trash services, similar to what
Loveland and Longmont do. I have a hard time believing that the trash trucks have a significant effect of the
deterioration of our roads. Also,the various trash receptacles and pick up schedules have never even crossed my
mind.In fact I never even noticed until I read about the trash study.Thanks for spending money on another study!
Email: arhn:frii.com
Page 2-27 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Name: Al Habenicht
Address 1608 Shenandoah Circle
Comments:
I am firmly of the opinion that the system as it stands is the one I support. I think that open market competition is
the only way to go. Two or three trash trucks a week is not going to deteriorate the streets to any degree. If the city
wants to reduce traffic on the streets they should check to see how many cars and trucks are around schools in the
morning and evening. They certainly do as much or more damage to streets than a couple of trash trucks.
Email: susan.witter/iicomeast.net
Name: Susan Witter
Address: 4354 Winterstone Drive
I do not agree that the current trash collection policies need to be changed. I am opposed to any of your current
solutions.
I do not think that we need to create trash districts. I am opposed to the government regulation of who collects trash
where. I believe that this is unnecessary and would be a waste of my tax dollars.
I would not be opposed to possibly increasing regulation on the haulers,but not if it will create another unnecessary
government job. If this is the case, then 1 am opposed.
I believe in recycling,however,1 do not believe that this has anything to do with what you have stated was the
"community concern" nor the study that should have been conducted to address this concern. Therefore,I believe
that since it is a separate issue, it should not be addressed as part of this"Solution".
• Email: lians hochheimer(a<yahoo.com
Name: Prof.Dr.Hans D. nochheimer
Address: 2813 Crystal Ct,Fort Collins,CO 80525
1 just cannot believe that the City Council would support such a socialist/fascist initiative.What will be next?
That we can only shop in certain stores or what else.
Stop it and preserve at least a little bit of freedom of choice. Most of us have already enough troubles with HOAs.
Email: rvcrofiLacomcast.net
Name: Roberta Croft
Address: 3012 Indigo Circle North
1.Trash Districts-Our neighborhood has already agreed on a hauler to eliminate the kind of problem you are
supposedly addressing. It should be the business of the neighbors and neighborhoods to do this not city government.
We are happy with our trash hauler and do not wish to change because the city government decides who gets which
pan of the city.
2. Increased regulation-This always costs the taxpayer more when government gets involved. Any additional costs
the hauler incurs will be passed directly to the customer.
3. Increased recycling-Our current hauler makes a very good effort to recycle many items already and has recently
increased the number of items it accepts for recycling.
In summary, the free market works best. If the "community members"expressing concern are truly concerned then
they need to work with their neighbors not force more governmental regulation on the rest of us. Cooperation
between neighbors is what can make this city work. Anytime government gets involved in regulating a service it
always cost the taxpayers in money or in poorer service. The current haulers are courteous and work hard because
they know that they are competing with other haulers. Take away the competition and service will suffer. In short,
the city should not be regulating a private industry that is working well. Those who are complaining should work at
the neighborhood level to fix things within their own neighborhood and leave the rest of us alone.
• 1 am on the Executive Board of a home owners association(HOA)and these are my personal thoughts on the Trash
options as listed in the City News(enclosed in my utilities bill):
Page 2-28 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
One: If the City takes over the trash service then the City will be in total control of the fees!
Two: If the City dictates policy to the trash haulers. the haulers costs will go up.
The elimination of competition among the trash haulers and the elimination of people's choice over their provider
concerns me. If this was the case, our HOA would not have been able to change our previous trash hauler to one
That better suited our purposes.
Maybe the licensing and load limits can be regulated,however.even that will probably cost our HOA more for trash
service and recycling. Most of the HOAs only allow one trash hauler on a specific day anyway. It's other areas
without HOA control that seem to be causing this trash hauling consideration.
I think there should be competition among the trash haulers to keep the prices down and there should be people's
choice over their provider.
Thank you in advance for taking these comments to the City Council at the September 23 Work Session.
Respectfully,
Margo R.Allmaras
1640 Kirkwood Dr.
Fort Collins,CO 80525
Email: cliris.richmond(etfpinsurauce.com
Name: Chris Richmond
Address: 918 shore pine ct
At a 26 year resident and business owner in this community, 1 favor the free enterprise system. We have had the
same provider for over 20 years, due to their good service and value.
I strongly object to getting our"city"involved in some way in the trash business. thanks............
Email: 1 ano(rmindspring.c om
Name: robert]ano
Address: 4306 Silverview ct
I eschew the thought of more government control over my life.It's obvious the people promoting this survey are
clearly opposed to free markets and enterprise.You stated on your website "Instead of the open market competition
residents now use,haulers would be awarded exclusive contracts for specific parts of town." Exclusive contracts
indeed. When you take'competition'out of the equation you are absolutely guaranteed higher costs,and too often
poorer service.] was using Waste Management for 4 years and not until the snow storm 2006-2007 when Waste
Mgmt didn't pick up my garbage for 3 full weeks straight did 1 'fire'them.Their attitude was completely arrogant
and condescending. Thanks to free enterprise and the fact I have a CHOICE in whom I use, I was able to hire
Gallegos for$45.00 per qtr vs$59.00 at W.M.which saved me a whopping 25%.BTW,Gallegos did not miss a
single pick up during that same snow storm!No thank you for stripping free enterprise from our current system.
Also this crap about more traffic,and pollution is also BS.If one trash truck is on my street doing everbody's house,
he's out there for 10 minutes"polluting the air'vs my chosen hauler for 2 or 3 minutes tops polluting far less air.
And where does it stop?The"road wear" is so minuscule its not even possible to measure it over the 15 years of a
roads life!Where does it end?Will you be limiting UPS,Fedex and private delivery trucks also to'control'who and
how often, you decide,may drive on my street!!??
Bob Lano
4306 Silverview ct Ft Collins 80526\
Page 2-29 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
Email:deborabbrew_(o.:comcast.net
Name: Deborah Brew
Address: 5215 Country Squire Way,Fort Collins 80528
1 believe in free enterprise.I do not think city government should take away any trash hauler's ability or opportunity
to do business.
1 applaud the increase in curb recycling(presently 1-7)and think that the city should continue to work with local
trash haulers to implement further recycling, if possible.
My trash hauler is Gallegos Sanitation.I could not be happier with their service-both trash and recycling. Please do
not jeapordize GSI by going to trash districts.
Thanks for"listening".
Debby Brew
Email:leanneN 17 a aol.com
Name Jean L- Needham
Address:3915 Yosemite Cl
I do not bevieve we need the Fort Collins government to increase its involvement in trash hauling. I do not see a
problem with our current system. As a resident of Fort Collins if I don't get good trach pick-up service I have to
choice to change haulers. What will the city do? Will it end up costing up more? I also believe there are more
important problems for the City to be addressing other than trash hauling. How about roads? Like the intersection
of Harmony and Shields? How about traffic enforcement? Overall I think the City provides excellent services but
lets not expand where we don't need to be.
Email` Raulsyverson d .com
Name:Paul Syverson
• Address: 2851 Kansas Drive,Unit B
Regulation of trash collection is a HUGE mistake. I have lived in areas with city operated(contracted)trash
collection. You have no clue on the amount of tax dollars that are going to be spent operating a horrible service.
Quality of service will decline(they will no longer be a'neat'operation). Volume of missed pick-ups(which I
supect is currently almost not existant)will grow to hundreds per day. Manpower just to handle the complaint calls
will grow into a substantial city department. The city will enact a policy of'leiting problems sit for a few days'in
hopes the will resolve themselves or the complaintants will give up and quit calling because nothing is done about
the huge problems. I lived in an area that was annexed and the great private service turned into a trash nightmare
almost overnight. Many people will contract for private trash service(even with the city service)because of the
public service is so poor.
You can fool yourself as much as you want to,but public trash service will cost more in administrative costs than
currently paid in total for private service. Most municipal trash services have created in areas where people are
illegally dumping their trash and public service is'free'and reduces improper dumping. I don't think this is much of
a problem in Fort Collins.
My name is Saja Butler and 1 live in East Old Town on Smith St.
1 love my community and love the area in which I live.
I truly don't think that contracts for trash companies to operate in certain areas is a solution to the noise problem in
our area for several reasons:
1. Government shouldn't dictate anyone's business.Aside from taxes due.
2. There is noise everywhere and everyday in heighborhoods in Ft.Collins,from renovating, lawn businesse,
landscaping, city buses, dogs barking,and general life existing on the planet.It's what makes a
• neighborhood.Are we going to contract out who can mow who's lawn or have a dog next?
3. Most of the stuff that is creating noise is life.We are growing as a community and we have to accept that
The more people are created,the more stuff is needed. Anyway,I think that we shouldn't contract out the
Page 2-30 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
trash. If people have a problem with it, tell them to close the window and find something consructive to do.
Yes,It's loud but it's a minute out of the day. We humans truly need to stop seeking innane things to
complain about. I mean, for real. If one truly loves life. they are busy and silliness like this isn't a big
issue. Their life is.
Thank You for your time,
Saja M Butler
Email: newlin(a)flii.com
Name: sandy newlin
Address: 4112 mount vernon court
We do not want the city to choose our trash hauler unless the city chooses to convert trash collection to city
employees,city trucks&paid with property taxes like most municipalities. Otherwise,please let us keep the private
company we choose(&can cancel&choose another if we're not happy with the service!).
What we do need is much larger recycling bins(same size as trash cans). How can we recycle 50%into those little
tubs?
Email: ales.fiala n,�comcast.net
Name: Ales Fiala
Address: 4313 Cape Cod Circle,Fort Collins
'The current free market system works well. Leave it alone.
Email: danofico(ii)comcast.net
Name: Dan Osborn
Address: 1415 Parkwood Dr,Fort Collins CO, 80525
1 am *not* in favor of Creating Trash Districts not Increasing regulation on haulers. The city should focus on
Recycling if anything. Recycling needs to be made as easy, convenient,and cost effective as possible.
Email:r1livatitoashland.com
Name:Bob Hyatt
Address: 2319 Sunray Court
I really like the current service 1 receive and do not want to lose my choice of Trash Hauler.
I don't believe there is too much traffic. We have lived here since 1992 and are raising our children here. I am not
aware of any accidents or near misses as a result of the trash or recycling collection.
Email:jobovd(a,frii.com
Name: Josephine W.Boyd
Address: 1313 Stover Street
Some years back,Fort Collins residents allowed city council to put in a program for trash collection similar to the
one now being proposed. For me and all others whose pick-up day was Monday,that program absolutely and
literally STANK!
Here's why: As you know,most important holidays are over a three-day period--Saturday,Sunday and Monday.
Prior to those historic,city-mandated "trash collection districts;" trash haulers picked up Monday(holiday)
collections on Tuesday--just as they do today. By expending extra effort,all trash was removed in a four-day week
--just as trash collectors do today. However,under that old,city-mandated collection plan,Monday pickup people
were left holding their trash for two whole weeks,but were charged for two pick ups--just as if they'd had weekly
trash pick up! When I complained to the city about being charged for a non-service,staff said call the office of the
"consolidated trash collectors." When I called the latter,I was told it was a city problem. Thus,city fathers had
given constituents a Catch 22 situation in the guise of"saving" streets. Luckily,the system was abandoned after
trash haulers were accused of monopolistic practices.
Page 2-31 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
• At the moment,] have excellent service from my trash hauler. Personnel are efficient and gracious. I'd hate to see
that change into another,city-managed monopoly of inefficiency. Moreover, streets would receive far less wear if
the empty and near-empty.humongous-size buses that pass my house were smaller and made more convenient
stops. Although a city bus stops at a four-way-stop a few feet from my home(Pitkin C Stover), it won't pick me up
unless 1 walk one-fourth mile North to Elizabeth or one-fourth mile south to Prospect. (I've called the city's transit
department to verify that buses won't stop at Pitkin.)
Therefore,not only are my elected representatives and their staff threatening to put me into stinky(two-week-old
trash really stinks)situations. but these same people have put forth a street-destroying,bus system of humongous
buses operating for the benefit of junior-high(Lesher)students; ice skaters(EPIC)and university students while
passing up an 81-year-old woman whose paid city taxes for more than 44 years.
Josephine W.Boyd
Email: bshafero rii.com
Name:Bernard Shafer
Address: 1318 Red Oak Ct.
Re the Trash options:
I am not in favor of creating trash districts giving a monopoly to a single trash hauler. In our neighborhood over the
past 16 years,we have been able to roll back trash rate hikes three times by threatening to go with a competitor who
was charging less. In every case,the current hauler met the competition's rates. In another case,our current hauler's
employees destroyed my private trash can. The firm at first refused to do anything about it saying it was the price of
not using one of their leased containers. I pointed out to him,he had 3 choices: 1)Buy me an equivalent trash can;
2)give me one of their trash containers for free;or 3)cancel my service and I would transfer to a competitor. He
• opted for option 1. Thus based on my experience,I would definitely want to continue the current system. The
proposed competitive bidding process being proposed would ultimately end up in a fewer number of haulers who
could set rates higher as they collectively chose because the barriers to entry for a new hauler would be prohibitively
expensive. The losers would be citizens. As a retiree living on a fixed income,I would not want a system imposed
that would ultimately end in higher overall rates for the long term.
This is a good process for soliciting feedback.
Email:rcmeyerl25(a:msn.com
Name: Charlene
Address: Fort Collins
Why is the city studying trash districting again?This issue has come up time and again and the citizens like the
way are current trash collection system is so leave it alone. My local hauler,Ram,provides excellant service and
takes good care of our entire neighborhood through an agreement with the BOA.Do not take away our freedom of
choice. We don'need more government.
David Lambertson
1424 Winfield Drive
I am firmly opposed to the restriction of competition by using districting. Also as one of the main concerns seems to
be the lack of data,1 believe that it is foolish to pass regulations and restrictions based on our current data. I believe
that freedom of choice and keeping the government's role as small as possible should be the goal. Also,small
companies will be hurt by this. If we follow the money,usually we find why we make decisions if favor of big
business. Let's not pass laws that benefit big business at the expense of small local companies. Also, as to air
quality,there are already more stringent guidelines on new trash trucks,. As the older ones die,then new trucks get
much better efficiency.
Marina Volosov
1424 Winfield Drive
Page 2-32 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
I am totally opposed to the idea of districting for trash haulers. Taking freedoms away from the citizens and
businesses should not be taken lightly. Individual neighborhoods should be encouraged to take the initiative to use
just 1-2 haulers. But it should be their decision. not the bureaucratic intervention.
Page 2-33 Comments in Opposition to Trash Districting
On-Line Community Feedback
Trash Services Study
June— September 2008
Other Feedback
Email: wstudinski@yahoo.com
Name: Wendy Studinski
Address: 6037 Auburn Drive
I saw in the Recyclone Times insert:
"Contact your hauler and ask for a smaller trash bin,or pay by the bag." <<<Only available from Gallegos!
I commend Gallegos for meeting the letter and the spirit of the law! In my *previous home*,I contracted with
Gallegos on a"pay by the bag"basis. It was perfect for my situation and would still be the ideal set up for my
household.
I bought my *current home* in 1999 and have been trying to get"pay by the bag' service in my HOA every since
then.My HOA forces a "trash district' onto all homeowners by"including' trash service in our dues(even though
this is not required in or Covenants).The HOA Board chooses RAM every year on the sole basis of their offering
the lowest price for 96-gallon-per-week service. Everyone is charged dues at the 96-gallon-per-week level and must
make special arrangements for a refund to subscribe to any lower service level.
• 1 hope that whether or not the City adopts trash districts,you will make the low-volume choices compelling, and
make sure that a "pay by the bag' choice is available in all neighborhoods!
Thanks
Wendy Studinski
Email: Lucas.Howell(d email.com
Name: Lucas Howell
Address: 1724 Larch St. tA,Fort Collins, CO
I currently live in an apartment which only provides for trash disposal,no recycling. From what I have heard from
speaking to others who live in apartments is that their apartments do not offer recycling as well. It would be very
nice if apartments did offer,or were required to provide for,recycling along with trash disposal. More locations
throughout town for recycling would be nice as well. Additionally, to be able to recycle more types of plastic along
with plastic bags would be wonderful. Thank you.
Lucas Howell
Email: mmnbrann(rigmail.com
Name: Laura B.Brann
Address:4501 Boardwalk Drive,Ft. Collins,CO
To whom it may concern:
I am a new citizen in Colorado. 1 moved here from Maine on January 1 st. 1 was very active back in Brunswick,
Maine on the recycling program.We had just gone to pay-per-bag trash pick-up and single stream recycling. ] am
73 and have no private transportation. However,I would like to become involved any way I can with recycling here
• in Fort Collins. I will be entering FRCC in January and plan to take at least one course in environmental issues. I
would also enjoy working on any committees concerning recycling that might be available.Thank you for your
time.
Page 3 - l Other Comments re: Trash Study
Laura B.Brann
Email: per onal ri�hourrail.com
Name: PERSONAL
Address: PERSONAL
It would be nice if the trash haulers would put the trash cans and bins on the lawns when they are done. Many times
they are placed on the sidewalks. This makes it difficult to walk on the sidewalks.especially if one is using a walker
or pushing a stroller.
Email: arandell(ahotmail.com
Name: Amy Randell
Address: 128 Pearl St.
I support the Open Competition System with Increased Licensing Requirements option or,possibly. a Districted
Collection System.
While reducing the environmental impacts associated with waste diversion is very important to me, I also feel it is
important to be able to choose my waste hauler and "reward"the company that I feel provides the best recycling and
trash services. If the City were to district waste diversion,I would hope that the criteria for awarding the contract
would place a priority on a company's recycling track record and customer service history.
Maybe the hauler's license could require the provision of bigger recycling bins.That would be great!
Email: hong 2008(ausa.net
Name: Howard Ong
Address: 1104 Newsom St.Foil Collins.CO
At our household,the"pay-as-you-throw" incentive is significant in determining our volume of trash. Because of
the "pay-as-you-throw" incentive, we believe we have achieved a landfill refuse to recycling ratio of approximately
30%landfill to 70%recycle(60%collected recycling+ 10%compost material). Our trash service provider is RAM.
They offer prepaid RAM Green trash bags. We determine our trash removal cost by the frequency of Green trash
bag usage.
If we must change trash removal provider due to this study or to districting,1 URGE the City Council to require that
this level of service be retained and offered by ALL trash collection providers.
Thank you,
Howard Ong
Email: mhintonlmu(avahoo.com
Name: Mark Hinton
Address: 3309 Muskrat Creek Drive
I have a couple of suggestions to improve recycling and reduce landfill use.
Other cities where I've lived give residential customers single-stream recycling bins that are as large as the largest
trash bins. This encourages recycling. In Fort Collins,the trash companies charge customers to buy small recycling
bins. These bins are open,so the wind often blows the materials all over the streets. That is NOT the way to
encourage recycling. I suggest mandating that the trash haulers provide each customer with a large recycling bin
with a lid.
Also,why not expand the yard-waste program to include composting and make it a year-round program?
Customers could fill bins with compostable materials that are collected weekly orbi-weekly. A local company or
the city/county could compost the material and sell it to cover some of the cost.
Thank you for listening.
Page 3 - 2 Other Comments re: Trash Study
Email: r.sons(�i.worldne[.au.net
Name:Bettina and Ray Sons
Address: 4100 Torrington Ct.
Re the trash-hauling decision facing City Council:
This is a topic of considerable importance to elderly residents.such as ourselves. We are in our 80s,depending on
fixed incomes and savings to support us.
We must be wary of any potential increase in our regular bills. A casual glance at the overflowing trash cans set out
in various neighborhoods on pick-up days tells us much more recycling should be done.
We set out a bin laden with all the permitted recyclables every week. We don't have an expensive trash-hauler can,
but use plastic collection bags supplied by the hauler(Gallegos)at less expense. With only two of us in our
household, it takes us weeks to fill one of these voluminous bags and set them out for pickup.Please don't change
the rules and If you change the rules and require our supplier(to supply us with a big can we don't need(at greater
expense to us).
We have little garbage because we don't waste food and much of our leavings go into a compost pile to provide
material for a garden that produces vegetables, fruit and gorgeous flowers.Yard waste that cannot be composted
gets taken to Hageman's Earth Cycle(at our expense)and recycled.
So please do not change the rules governing trash haulers in any way that might increase our costs.We shouldn't
have to pay as much as big families with the overflowing cans.But we surely would be happy to be rewarded by
• lower prices for our cost-effective disposal.
Email:Mor anUSAF[n;comcast.net
Name:Fred Morgan
Address: 2101 Essex Court. 80526
It was somewhat disappointing to read the spread in the Coloradoan which seemed to put undue emphasis on cost
efficiency aspects of trash hauling revamp. A happy solution should not rest in large measure on cost
considerations. Not for bike paths,certainly. And other issues as well.
I would truly hate to be irrevocably tied to my current trash hauler,for obvious reasons. Please concentrate more on
factors other than costs.
Phone message,7-30-08 Resident left message regarding districting option.He noted that there are 5 trucks going
down his street each week. He didn't think that was as big an issue as the hundreds of Rocky Mountain High School
students who drive down Dunbar each day. He believes that is a much bigger problem.
Email: chtirlmari(iivahoo.com
Name: cheryl meeker
Address: 1112 Woodford AV 80521
I recently moved to Ft Collins from Eugene.OR and want to relate changes they implemented in recycling. There is
one main garbage/recycle organization, Sampac. Recently they conducted a study comparing the efficacy of
commingling verses separating recyclables and found that commingling was more cost effective. Another outcome
was that recycling INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY as it was easier for people to do. Everything was placed into a
very large(? 80 gal.)ROLLING container with lid,provided by the company. Only glass had to be separated out.
Again they experienced a great volume increase of recyclables. One thing to consider is that perhaps,with an easy
rolling container,everyone could put their recyclables out to the street and cease all the trucks up and down the
alleys; it would also save time and money for the company. I hope this is helpful.... cheryl
•
Page 3 - 3 Other Comments re: Trash Study
Email: m ru�otmail.com
Name: M. H.
Address: Rudolph
I am all for larger receptacles for recyclable materials,but in the current economy I don't favor the city's interference
in the competitive process that forces haulers to keep prices low and services high. That interference could result in
fewer haulers serving the area and will certainly cost the city (and therefore the taxpayers)dollars for administration
of a program in search of a problem.
D. Grassel
Phone Comment
The City should have a system like in Longmont where the City has the trash service. Everyone is charged on their
utility bill,so everyone has service. That would stop people(especially students)from depositing their trash in other
people's dumpsters. The renters also wouldn't leave messes for their property managers because they would have
an easy way to dispose of trash.
Email ion french(lfws.ov
Name: Jon French
Address: 2013 WeathertopLane
I've only read as much about the study as communicated in the"City News" flyer.However, I would like to voice
my support of the increased recycling initiative as a first step. Although 1 agree that it would not solve the noise and
street wear issues,I think that greater recycling solves many other problems our city and nation are facing.
Furthermore,my experience(anecdotal)is that recycling is a citizen first introduction to a more sustainable lifestyle
and often leads to reduction in trash production and greater composting of biodegradable materials.And these habits
can reduce trash pick up.
BTW: I would like to see more city initiatives aimed at composting. I know you have good programs running at the
Spring Creek Gardens,but they mostly target individual composting. 1 think there is a real need for HOA organized
composting as a way to reduce trash cost.
Email: seiones(atiii.com
Name: Sue-Ellen Jones
Address: 1512 Elm St.
I think that all trash haulers should be offering more recycling so that would definitely be a priority that I support.
I'm not sure"cracking down" on trash haulers would result in any real benefit because it would be difficult to
monitor.I love the idea that one trash hauler would do the work for a neighborhood but there are some trash haulers
that I wouldn't want to be forced to use. That probably doesn't help you very much. In the interest of the
neighborhood and efficient use of fuel,I would support awarding contracts to specific companies. I think that you
would have to set up a process for addressing customer complaints and overseeing the company. Thanks for your
time.
Email: Ilwisetd gmail.com
Name: Lawrence Wiseman
Address: 821 Whedbee Street
I think both increasing regulations on haulers AND increasing recycling incentives is the way to go. Creating trash
districts is too intrusive on citizen choice and is unfair to smaller haulers.
Email: lomkellr ri-comcast.net
Name: Tom Keller
Address: 1118 Spanish Oak C1.
1 think the"more regulation" (keep it much the same) option should prevail. Our trash pickup is fine the way it is.
Page 3 -4 Other Comments re: Trash Study
Email: pkoechlcvjri hotmailcom
Name: Pete
Address: Koechley
Since 1 live in the"Choice" City.I would like to continue to have a"Choice" as to which trash hauler I use.
If the City finds that more regulation is necessary,then 1 am OK with that.
I also support Fort Collins desire to increase and improve recycling.
Email kp oeclllev ahotmail.com
Name: Pete
Address: Koechley
Since 1 live in the "Choice" City, I would like to continue to have a"Choice" as to which trash hauler I use.
If the City finds that more regulation is necessary, then I am OK with that.
1 also support Fort Collins desire to increase and improve recycling.
Phone Call: Ray Healy
In his neighborhood,they got together and agreed on the same hauler. It didn't last too long because neighbors
would move in and out and the haulers wouldn't follow-up to keep the house as a customer. Haulers should follow-
up to maintain the neighborhood service.
• Email: kamarcher a nsn.com
Name: Arlene Archer
Address: 1707 Briargate Court
I think we should leave trash collection as it currently is-customer choice-this is good for the customer and good
for the companies. HOWEVER,I think we should concentrate on the third option to Focus on Increasing Recycling.
I think a compromise between'all company'or'all city'hauling,would be for the City to take over the Recycling
and Yard Waste. 1 would imagine that all haulers like mine use separate trucks for trash and recycling. Having only
city recycling trucks would at least reduce the multiplicy of recycling trucks in neighborhoods. It would also allow
the city to have total control of reaching the objective of 50%diversion. An incentive for customers would be an
automatic charge to wil bills for this service and the amount could decrease if the resident recycles. This'should'
have the trash haulers reduce their fees where trash and recycle are combined since they will no longer need recycle
trucks.employees,etc. Their incentive for this would be competition in picking up more customers than the others
with lower fees and shouldn't result in more than a small increase for customers overall(hopefully that's not too
optimistic). If recycling remains with the haulers.we should force them to'bundle'recycling and yard waste with
trash. I currently have a pet peeve with my hauler-who I really like otherwise- in that I hardly have any trash at all
- I bag every 3 weeks or so- except in the summer where 1 have 2 bags of yard waste every week. I also put out
recycles each week so do require a pickup. I would have to pay extra for the yard waste so I end up putting it out as
trash. Bundling would hopefully eleviate that.
Email: ieav(n:frii.com
Name: brenna olwine
Address:2530 pinecone circle 80525
1 am unsure where I stand on trash districts.and on whether we should go to a I-hauler system.
But I do feel that we need to focus a lot more energy on recycling. Especially the things we see every day that we
don't even think about. Things like plastic wrap,bread bags,plastic packaging. Since we are now allowed to
recycle mail waste,the plastic waste in my house is the greatest amount of trash we create.
Thank you.
•
Page 3 - 5 Other Comments re: Trash Study
Email: paulnuber(n-email.com
Name: Paul Nuber
Address: ]]07 Twinbeny Cl,Fort Collins,CO 80525
Our neighborhood worked together to pick one trash hauler. If other neighborhoods care,they can do the same
thing. The city doesn't need to mandate this.
Email:elly(apacket-masters.com
Name:joe and eleanor
Address: I I5 southside ct.
Ft. collins wastes so much time and money to do these studies. If fort collins keeps wasting money that it does not
need to we as a city will never have a better city. I am starting to think that the city thinks that we live in Russia and
not the United States of America. Please quit wasting the tax payers money and time.
Email: iasroweILultotmail.com
Name: Jason Rowe
Address: 2805 Swing Station Way
In evaluating the results of the trash study it does not seem that an annual savings of$170,000 on road maintenance
is worth the potential of Monopolizing trash hauling in distinct neighborhoods. I do like the idea of requiring Two
axle and Tag axles. I also think that better policing the weight of the vehicles is approriate. I worked for CSU
while in college in the trash and recycling dept. and our trash truck would get nabbed by the police several times a
year for being over weight and belching smog. I think that more stingent policing would be great.
Name:Fred Payne
Address: 342 High Pointe Dr.Fort Collins
I do not like the term"trash district'because it feels"cast in stone'. However.1 do like the concept of different
providers servicing different parts of town which minimizes time,equipment. and fuel.
Rather than forming"districts" form"trash service areas"using the following:
])Assign areas to providers who currently have a majority of customers in that and surrounding areas.
2)Take into account home base locations for providers so they do not cross each other to get to their customers.
3)Negative annual customer survey serve to reduce providers"trash service area" while positive results allow
growing their area next year.
4)Providers that do not currently have a majority in any one area get areas that do not fit in the pattern in#1 above
or where it is a better fit for some other reason.
5)Pricing should be lower because of better efficiencies. Control needs to be in place due to lack of competition.
Smaller containers should be an option for less cost. Make public the per container charge throughout town so
customers have that information when rating their providers.
6)Fort Collins should have a free yard waste drop off like Loveland does.
1 do not believe most people care which provider they use. Rather,they choose a provider for cost,no bad
experiences,what one neighbor says, or because they had that provider when living elsewhere.
Fred
Email: thomasre(ulamancolostate.edu
Name: richard thomas
Address: 1901 wallenberg drive
First,I recommend the city require HOA's to contract with single providers for trash collection,both residential and
large container.
Second.1 recommend the city offer HEAP Homeowner Association Environmental Assistance Plan(I hope you can
find a better acronym).Allow blocks(contiguous homes maybe 4 blocks in length on both sides of the street)of
homeowners to establish a HOA for trash collection only.The advantage is that a neighborhood homeowners can
reduce their annual cost of trash removal by$80 to$90 per year by contracting with a single source. My HOA has
done this and it works quite well.We pay once a year rather than 12 times and the trash collector bills only once a
year and has no collection problems.
Page 3 - 6 Other Comments re: Trash Study
The city can require compliance from HOAs. The City`s Neighborhood office can probably handle this
Richard Thomas via Email:
First,I recommend the city require HOA's to contract with single providers for trash collection,both residential and
large container. Second,I recommend the city offer HEAP Homeowner Association Environmental Assistance
Plan(] hope you can find a better acronym). Allow blocks(contiguous homes maybe 4 blocks in length on both
sides of the street) of homeowners to establish a HOA for trash collection only.The advantage is that a
neighborhood homeowners can reduce their annual cost of trash removal by$80 to $90 per year by contracting with
a single source. My FICA has done this and it works quite well. We pay once a year rather than 12 times and the
trash collector bills only once a year and has no collection problems. The city can require compliance from HOA's.
The City's Neighborhood office can probably handle this
Email: rikka4ki.comcast.net
Name: Rikka Bothun
Address: 2429 Tamarac
1 am very opposed to the socialistic proposal of creating trash districts. This option is unfair to both Fort Collins
residents and the haulers. It would harm residents because the haulers would have very little incentive to provide
good customer service-people would be stuck with their hauler until the contracts were re-evaluated. A better
option would be to require haulers to do an annual evaluation of their routes to optimize efficiency. This would
benefit residents because there would be fewer trash truck trips through their neighborhood. It would benefit the
haulers because they could maximize the efficiency of their routes,saving on gasoline and maintenance costs.
Chris Maldonado via email:
• Our neighborhood,Martinez Park,made a decision 12 years ago to consolidate haulers to keep traffic down and
wear and tear,we lobbied all forbids and went with GSI.
I don't know how the haulers feel about being districted.....I'm all for free enterprise..............
my concern is that I want to have the same services..._..] love and use the Yard Waste/Composting option they offer
and want to keep that.......... and want to keep the price at the same or lower for all my services.
I was upset when GSI got a new recycling truck, and now instead of like the trash,when they collect from both sides
of the street at the same time,the new recycling truck has amenities only on one side of it...........and so they go up
and down all the streets twice to collect the recycling, which 1 don't understand.....that's twice as much time as they
need then,and WAY more gas,etc.
The trucks also are on a huge timeline and are always racing thr t the neighborhood,all of them.and I'd like to
reinforce the slowing down issue.
Thanks!
Chris Maldonado
Lynn Taylor via email:
In terms of the three trash collection options for the community to review,I would like to see a combination of
creating trash districts and increasing recycling.
• If the trash district option is adopted,here must be a mandate in place for the hauler to provide superior customer
service,and a process for resolving disputes,since the customer would have no option to take their business to
another hauler. I have not yet decided if it would be an aesthetic drawback to see every curbside lined with trash
Page 3 - 7 Other Comments re: Trash Study
containers only one day a week,or whether the current system of seeing a few trash containers at different curbsides
each day is preferable. Additionally, ways to keep the districts equitable in terms of profit for the haulers need to be
addressed, such as when homes/businesses are added to or removed from a district. For instance, it is logistically
plausible to rotate the districts amongst the haulers every 2-3 years?
I would also like to see the haulers provide larger containers for recyelables, and smaller containers for actual trash!
The current small rectangular box that most haulers provide is simply too small for an average family of 4, given the
amount of material we are allowed and encouraged to recycle. 1 think the easier it is for families to recycle, i.e.by
putting everything in one container at the curb like we can do now,the more likely we are to make the effort to do
so. Having to make a separate,personal automobile trip to one of the city's drop-off centers to dispose of excess
recyclables that don't St in the current container partially defeats the goals of improving air quality and reducing
wear on streets.
Lastly,I would like city staff to explore ways to increase yard and garden waste recycling efforts.For example, is a
collaboration with Hageman Earth Cycle possible on a city-wide basis?For those of us who are unable to compost,
an efficient way to recycle garden waste,grass clippings, fallen leaves(beyond the websites offering to take them),
and pruning remains would be most appreciated. Given the number of Christmas trees at the winter recycling sites,I
think many families in our community would be interested in,and willing to engage in, an efficient means to deal
with lawn and garden debris.
Sincerely,
Lynn Taylor
Email:tadowt,,uy'a:gmail.coin
Name: Matt Fischer
Address: 1012 Deer Creek Ln
I am concerned that trash districts will mean higher prices because it creates a monopoly. My vote is for increased
focus on recycling.
Bill Shattuck via Email:
While we just moved here in December.our son went to CSU in 1990 and never left.We currently live in his rental
house in Fort Collins. I had no idea there were 3 trash company's here and our son had no clue either. I subsequently
found out that if 1'd asked his wife,she could have told me.
1 must say that for all the"green'talk here. I am sorely disappointed in what is offered for trash pickup. We have
Waste Management and I have no issues with their service. My issue is what you don't offer.We lived in Thousand
Oaks.CA for 36 years before moving here. For the last 15 years we had 3 bins for trash,recycling and green waste.
Notice I said bins;not tubs.The bins were larger than the waste bin I receive from Waste Management. While I can
understand no green bins through part of the year,why are there no green bins during spring through fall? I do
compost where possible,but I absolutely hate putting green waste in the trash bin.Why no green bins if Fort Collins
is so"green?"Fort Collins seems to permit trash bags instead of bins,which creates opportunity for critters to tear
into the bags.1 see that every week-trash strewn on the street.And,why such small recycling tubs?I can't get all my
recycling into these small tubs.Why not bins like we had in Thousand Oaks?I pay more now for less. The recycling
tubs encourage paper to blow out of the tubs.Not having trucks that can pick up the cans at the curb, leads to
workers comp issues.This ties into the having bags out issue.
We are very happy with living here and I like the people I've dealt with at City hall.Everyone seems to want to help
solve your problem. But,I think Fort Collins is behind the time on trash.Having three different haulers is not an
issue for me. They all do the job expected on them.
Thanks for taking the time to read this. Just heard WM pick up the trash and now have to take out the recycling tub
which is overflowing.Where's that brick?
Sincerely,
Page 3 - 8 Other Comments re: Trash Study
• Bill "Moose" Shattuck, 2200 Clearview Ave.: FC 80521: 970-472-1071
Email: ilyon09(a msn.com
Name: Judy Lyons
Address: 5620 Fossil Creek Parkway, Ft Collins. CO
My thoughts on trash. 1 moved to FTC in February. I do not mean to criticize FTC as a newcomer,but I was
disappointed in the trash system. Hard to believe where I moved from had a much better trash system,although it
did put individual haulers out of business,of course they were bought out. But Waste Management got the township
contract and I was very happy with the trash pickup(greenwise). They came once a week,picked up all the trash
(that laying around, they do not do that in complex where I live),they would always pickup refrigerators,couches,
etc. (they appreciated a call),but of course,no hazardous materials. But the biggest pere: plastics,etc.,paper.
magazines,corrugated cardboard were all picked up in 1 swipe and trash was the next swipe through,all in one
morning. They did a great job. I actually had very little trash,recycled almost everything. They do not take all of
that in FTC and I doubt that I will take it somewhere due to cost of gas and extra time.
Email: isneciner(daemail.com
Name:Jason Speciner
Address: 3008 Phoenix Drive, Fort Collins.CO
I think the idea of increasing incentives for recycling is terrific. It allows customers the ability to continue to choose
their own service provider while focusing on a much longer term solution to ecological issues. From our personal
experience, since we began focusing on recycling as much as we could we have reduced our traditional trash
substantially. If all residences and businesses were committed and encouraged to recycle it could lead to a dramatic
decrease in land fill utilization. 1 believe(without empirical evidence)that the savings in not having to develop a
new land fill as quickly could likely offset the costs of more frequent road maintenance. Less land fill waste may
also offset the emissions from trash hauling vehicles. It's my opinion that creating trash districts or increasing the
• regulation of trash haulers are both bad ideas. Creating trash districts will simply lead to miniature monopolies
throughout the city in each trash district. The only effective recourse a customer would have if they were unsatisfied
with their service or rates would be to move. If regulation were to increase,the net effect would simply be an
increased cost to the customer as the companies look to pass through the extra costs associated with meeting the new
requirements of lighter loads,etc (especially given the cost of gasoline). I think both of these solutions are short
term in nature and do nothing to address or create a long term,sustainable solution. Thank you for your time.
Email: BthackerCdelmresources.com
Name: Bob Thacker
Address:4014 S. Lemay Ave. #9
After reading the various options available I favor Increased regulation on haulers. Our HOA currently has one
hauler for all the units therefore inducing traffic in the HOA. However,I feel further restrictions can be placed on
loan weights,emission standards and noise standards. Recycling should be a way of life and all citizens need to be
required to implement a plan for recycling.
Email: mombrarm0 amail.com
Name: Laura B. Brann
Address: 4501 Boardwalk Drive,Ft.Collins,CO
I am a new citizen to CO and am very interested in your trash program. When it comes to paying for trash pickup or
encouraging more recycling, it boils down to"pay me now or pay me later". Landfills are expensive to close and
land,if it is available,is scarce and expensive to purchase. In Maine , where 1 came from in January,we had just
passed a pay-per-bag method of trash pick up to extend the life of our landfill. Those of us on the recycling
committee were becoming more and more involved in educating the public to increasing their recycling. A single
stream recycling pickup was put into place the month before 1 moved. I understand from friends back East that it is
going well,but more needs to be done in educating the public. 1 currently live in a 250 unit apartment complex. I'd
• be willing to bet you less than 1/4 of these tenants separate their trash from their recyclable trash...by looking at the
dumpster that sits outside my side of the complex.It is hard but not impossible to educate people who live in rental
property. People need to know they have an option and they need to exercise that option,or their landlords may
Page 3 - 9 Other Comments re: Trash Study
have to raise the rent to pay higher taxes or trash pickup bills from their carriers. I would like to get involved in Fort
Collins trash program,but have no transportation since I moved out here. If there is anything I can do to help like
stuffing envelopes for a fund raiser or whatever. Yes, increasing recycling comes with a cost- but so does buying a
new piece of property and developing a new landfill. 1 know from experience some people just don't care while
others just don't have the space for separate containers. I live in a small 1-bedroom apartment and have found a
space for both a kitchen trash can and a separate trash can for my recycling items.If 1 can do it at the age of 74, no
excuse for the rest of the citizens of this city.
REDUCE- REUSE-RECYCLE
Email:Lckt ntic aol.com_
Name: Lynn Kent
Address: 2132 Sunstone
Our community.on their own without any need for a study or a government bureaucracy, arranged with a single
hauler to give a discount to all residents who used their service. Advantage to them,lots of customers in a small
area, advantage to us, we all got a discount.
I'm sure every neighborhood could do this,getting bids from the various haulers. Let the free market make these
decisions,we don't need to spend any government money or create new a bureaucracy to deal with this.
Email arice izfcgov.com
Name: Austin Rice
Address: 1020 Alexa Ct Fort Collins CO 80526
1 think that cost aside,being more environmentally friendly should be our top priority,meaning more recycling and
less emissions, etc.
Email: moineaus 12imsn.com -
Name_Daryl D Clark
Address: 929 E Prospect Rd Unit B Fort Collins,CO 80525
There's rarely a single answer to any problem. I believe creating trash districts is a piece of the puzzle; it just makes
sense. And to be honest, I didn't "shop around" for my trash service when 1 lived in a single family home. Pretty
much an eeme-meeme-money-mo scenario.But I am concerned that costs to consumers would be based on arbitrary
designations like zip code, meaning some families in high income border areas might find it difficult to pay for the
service.
Increasing regulations on haulers is also the right thing to do; all trucks should have a timeline by which they've
changed to hybrid or biodesel.But again,the cost of the changeover could impact the vialbility of some haulers.
And focusing on recycling is a no-bramer. This needs to be the top priority, and perhaps all others will fall into
place.After all,the landfill cannot possibly contain all we now fail to recycle for another 20yrs.
Another option not mentioned is incentives to local businesses for recycling.At PVH we JUST started recycling,
and I have to tell you,a hospital generates a HUGE amount of plastic and cardboard waste,as well as beverage cans.
I am embarrassed that it has taken the organization this long to get on board,but no doubt there are things behind the
scenes I am unaware of.
Also,incentives for businesses to reward employees for alternate transportation to and from work;biking,public
transit,carpooling etc.
Thanks for allowing me to speak up! I look forward to seeing what comes to pass!
PS Would the little battery operated pod system that Wales is just testing at their airport something FC might look
into for public transit? Seems a cool idea; the wait time is what keeps me from utilizing public transit more often;
with how busy people are these days,a more rapid reward and transit time might be just the...ticket. Sorry.
Email: 1 vnnmorale st<i;comc ast.net
Name: Lynn Morales
Address: 4120 Stoney Creek Drive
Page 3 - 10 Other Comments re: Trash Study
• 1 am wondering why we couldn't do a combination of all three choices. We should assign trash districts_increase the
haulers regulations.and increase recycling,all at the same time. If all those ideas would produce benefits:and aren't
mutually exclusive,I say go for it all!I!
Email: mliwang t mean]con,
Name: mark wanger
Address: 2948 silverwood dr
Many cities provide trash pickup at fairly competitive rates. I like having private business competing and providing
private jobs,and I think we can guide services with better regulation to decrease maintenance (tax payer cost)and
GHG from excess miles for these heavy trucks. I'd even consider competitive bids to have only 2 haulers per
district. Definitely increase incentives for recycling by setting price by volume of trash-the large containers now
are execssive,so charge less for a 32 gallon! It's counterproductive to see cardboard boxes in the trash containers.
We encourage"trash sharing". Both we and our neighbors are low volume, so we cancelled our home trash service
and share the service and cost with our neighbor. Lower cost to us.one less stop for the haulers,and self limiting
volume.
Email:jblindberg(ii gmail.com
Name: Jeff Lindberg
Address: 1200 Ashlawn Ct.
I favor the option to focus on increased recycling,and preserve the choice of trash service provider. I have my
doubts about the real impact of trash trucks on neighborhood streets,compared to the rest of the traffic. I also think
the diversion to recycling is more important long term. And 1 think the lack of competition would be bad for
customer service.
• Email:g helen(la gthelen.com
Name: Greg Thelen
Address: 2809 Stonehaven Drive
Keep it simple. If you want to reduce the number of VMTs by trash vehicles,then charge a VMT tax on trash
haulers. The more miles they drive. the more tax they pay. if you want quieter and/or cleaner trash vehicles,then
tax noise/polluting trash vehicles per mile driven. Trash haulers will then find their own ways to reduce VMTs and
pollution. Let the free market decide how best to utilize our natural resources. Your job is simply to tax use of
those resources to encourage more efficient use of those resources. Please do not to try to directly solve the trash
"problems"expressed by a few citizens by adding more regulations/districts/etc.
Email: katiekool(a:comcast.net
Name: katie keel
Address: 822 prescott st
I last lived in Elgin Illinois where it was illegal to NOT recycle newspaper and if you wanted to recycle grass
clippings you had to pay for it. Many people around me do not recycle at all, why bother? We need to make a
MUCH bigger deal out of recycling. My HOA long ago got one trash hauler,a smart move for every neighborhood.
Actually,I would prefer the city take over the whole thing as in every other community I have ever lived and just
use the current companies to do it.
Email: marypbradburyCahotmail.com
Name: Catherine Moore
Address: 1625 E. Stuart St.#H2
I think a combination of all three options would be great! Let's do everything we can to reduce environmental
damage from both landfill and excess truck traffic and also encourage more recycling (though honestly,FC does the
best job of recycling of any place I've ever lived.)We need to be willing to sacrifice a little bit of choice in order to
improve our resource stewardship.
Email: wlannen(d,xemaps.com
Name: Kav Lannen
Page 3 - 11 Other Comments re: Trash Study
Address: 1431 Silk Oak Dr.
If the city converts to a district system,l would want to make sure that I still could receive yard waste service at a
reasonable rate. Gallegos provides yard waste service for my home which keeps weeds,grass clippings.. and
branches out of the landfill. Not all of the trash haulers provide this service today. 1 would also want to make sure
that locally owned businesses such as Gallegos would have an opportunity under the new system.
I would also challenge the assumption that trash trucks are responsible for a significant portion of the wear and tear
on our city streets,and that districling would significantly reduce the wear and tear. We have many other trucks,
such as delivery trucks;on our streets every day. Would eliminating one or two trash trucks a week make much
difference? I do believe there are esthetic issues with frequent garbage trucks and trash collection on multiple days
in neighborhoods,which would be improved by districting since each neighborhood would only have one day per
week to have trash cans on the street and trash trucks driving the streets.
mail: deanrwallace n,comcast.net
Name: Dean Wallace
Address: 1412 Teakwood Dr,80525
1 favor a combination of all three options_Districts will reduce wear on streets(1 read somewhere that a single semi
causes as much wear as 4000 cars; a trash truck might be half? that);but haulers should be allowed to service
customers outside their assigned district for an additional(customer)fee(50%?).That allows customers to decide to
keep their existing hauler if they're willing to pay the extra. (I guess that would be a'modification'of competition
rather than'elimination'of competition.)This would also give an indication if a hauler's'home'district should be
modified.I'm astounded that the city does not currently have'limits on load weights and truck overloading, emission
and noise standards'already(cf.City News, August). I'm of the opinion that more recycling incentives are always
good
Email: cvdcooganCa.msn.com
Name: Cyd Coogan
Address: 1316 Morgan Street
Greetings. I like my trash hauler(Ram)and my pick-up day(Tuesday morning)but I am willing to change to
whatever system is best for the environment. The redundancy of the current system does seem a little crazy at times.
I am,however, concerned about our local business economy and our local labor force. A large/national company
can afford to come in and underbid the first year(or first five)to get the contract and drive the other smaller/local
companies out of business. I also have concerns about the bidding system in general. Companies bid as low as
possible and employees can be hurt by lower pay and working in an understaffed environment. Basically I do not
want a Wal-Mart taking over our trash &recycling system.
Secondly,in response to the goal to reduce our trash quantity,I would like to see a yard waste system implemented.
Fifty years ago,I grew up in a rather non-progressive area of the country,yet we had a yard waste system. (Leaves
were raked into the street and picked up periodically.) I would like to be able to have my leaves and other yard
waste picked up separately and converted to compost or mulch. Over a period of a year,probably about 2/3 of my
family's trash is yard waste(and recyclable products).
Thanks so much for asking for your community's input and for providing an easy method to do so.
Email:htebadudckhounail.com
Name: Beth Carbone
Address: 3813 Ensenada Ct.
Please do NOT create trash districts. Instead put an emphasis on recycling. Gallegos Sanitation Inc. is a leader in
recycling and alternative disposal services. GSI offers yard waste services where yard waste is taken to a local
composting/recycling facility. This yard waste is NEVER introduced into the landfill. Yard waste is
recycled/composted for reuse as mulch or compost. This is a wonderful service for many home gardening projects
or commercial projects.
Also, increased awareness through trash service flyers/mailers about the recycling facilities at the Fort Collins
landfill would increase use of these facilities. It would be great to have an a-waste and metal waste recycling facility
at the landfill. This way,recycling and landfill trips can be condensed into one convenient location and trip. This
would reduce air pollution of consumers taking their trash to facilities all over Fort Collins. This would also reduce
Page 3 - 12 Other Comments re: Trash Study
• the amount of metal and e-waste in the landfill (even though it is illegal for e-waste,it does happen). Inform the
consumers. Most would want increased recycling instead of trash districts. Trash districts only work for companies
with the money to bid on contracts. Local companies lose out!
Email: boterolog(inisn.com
Name: Lenore Bolero
Address: 2701 Stockbury Drive
I'm disappointed that only 3 options are available.
The most important thing to me is for the haulers to have an open market. I live in English Ranch,and GSI gives
those living here lower rates.but we don't have to use them. Therefore,most people use them, and we see few
garbage trucks during the week.
If there is proof that a certain weight damages the roads,then I don't mind putting that limit on the trucks and fees if
they exceed the limits. I'd expect them to pass the costs on to me.but that's okay. I'm sure it's cheaper to protect the
roads than to create districts and then fix the roads.
10 years ago I moved from Bellevue, WA. For many years there we had free curbside recycling. 1 used it in order
to keep my garbage charges low.However,more than once I saw reports that the recycled items were more than the
recyclers could handle,and were put back in the garbage.
Forcing recycling without all of it being recycled(or most)is rediculus. The costs for putting it back in the garbage
system will be passed on to the consumer some how. and I imagine it is cheaper just to pay for it to go in the
garbage from the start.then to have it"recyled" and then discarded.
• Thanks!
Email:jrutsteit2lamar.colostate.edu
Name: Barbara Rutstein
Address: 924 Sandy Cove lane
I hope the Council will finally resolve the issue of multiple trash trucks on residential streets or it will come back to
haunt another Council. It is too bad that we did not create a municipal system years ago because that is the real
answer to this dilemma. I also realize that this is something the Council cannot do now.I wonder if there is a way to
make sure that our local haulers can each a have apiece of the pie? The objective is not put anyone out of business
but to minimize traffic and damage to the streets. if more regulation would accomplish this, fine. If districting does
it,good too. 1 don't think more recycling will solve the basic problem...multiple trucks on residential streets.
Email:blessed I094(ayahoo.com
Name: Connie Pallansch
Address: 3715 Eclipse Ln,Fort Collins, CO 80528
1 have lived in two neighborhoods that the HOA required homeowners to use a specific trash hauler and one in
which the FICA suggested,but did not require the homeowners to use a specific trash hauler. In theory,by all
homeowners using the same trash hauler,the price should be less due to volume of business. However,what I don't
like is that I tend to recycle a considerable amount each week(typically two bins full)and my 96 gallon trash bin is
usually only a 1/4 full. It would be nice to have the option to have larger recycle containers and much smaller trash
containers. I also lived in Germany for 3 years. They base the size of your trash can on the number in your family.
We have approximately a 50 gallon trash can,but because we only had two people in our household, they fastened a
piece of plastic in the middle of the can. In essence,the bottom half of the trash container was hollow and we could
only use the top half for garbage. 1 know from conversations,please dislike regulations or being forced to recycle.
. The city needs to encourage and provide incentives for people to throw away less garbage and recycle more. If an
FICA is using one trash hauler, fine,but we don't necessarily need the largest bin. The bigger the container.the
more trash to easily throw away. That's my thoughts.
Page 3 - 13 Other Comments re: Trash Study
Email: buttercup4321Qi�vahooxoni
Name: Jill
Address: Sweetwater
Our residents in our HOA enjoy the benefits of recycling (including yard waste)and the single bag pick-up option
(in addition to the pick up of the typical household garbage bin)that Gallegos offers. Reduction in these options
would be disappointing.
Email: rdraines(acomcast.net
Name: DeAnna Raines
Address: 2826 Des Moines Dr
Hello,1 am happy with my service and prices 1 have in my BOA(Rigden Farm). We have a contracted price with
RAM waste.. and they do a great job. I do not want to see districting of the trash haulers.as I feel this could disrupt
The service we get in our neighborhood. and potentially cause a lesser"service oriented" trash hauler to win a bid in
our neighborhood/district. My comment for helping to increase the amount people recycle;is to make the recycle
bins larger and lidded,so that newspapers do not blow about,and get wet on rainy days. Also,it would be nice to
have an option for an even smaller trash can(we generally only have 2-3 small bags of trash-and 2 bins of recycle
each week). Thank you.
Email: florimax(aschwandner-web.org
Name: Florian Schwandner
Address: 3814 Rannoch St
After reading the analysis and recommendations in the"Trash Services Study Final Report",one issue comes to my
mind which has not been adequately addressed:the size of the residential recyclables container.
While it is a good idea in my mind to move toward standardized city-owned containers,the effort to reach increased
diversion rates is inherently limited by the volume of recyclables that can be provided for pick-up by residential
customers on a weekly basis. This volume that can be provided is in turn inherently limited by the size of recycling
container provided by the contracted haulers-and de facto currently standardized to the small rectangular plastic bin
(green,blue.or brown seen in different areas of the city).
Other communities like for instance Scottsdale AZ provide the same size recyclables container as the standard waste
containers-thus providing a 50%by volume potential of recyclables.
Currently,Fort Collins collection bins for recyclables cannot achieve that same 50%potential BY FAR-the by far
too small common squared plastic bin in use(and featured on the front page of the summer 08 recyclone times)
inherently prevents reaching that diversion goal-by being too small.
It actually is ridiculously small- our household is really not too hype on recycling but we and many households in
our neighborhood exceed that volume every week by using very,very unsightly bags and cartons(which in the high-
wind conditions in the area creates additional problems).
If 50%diversion is to be achieved,or at least an increase in recyclables percentage of total hauled waste,then the
limit constraints imposed by these small containers has to be addressed.All other efforts would seize to have any
potential impact unless this container size issue is solved.
Email:johnjbalza dcomcast.net
Name:John Balza
Address: 713 Hinsdale Dr.
I'm against creating trash districts-it would move us away from competitive trash rates and toward regulated trash
rates.Our homeowner's association managed to negotiate a great rate and only 1 trash company for the entire
neighborhood- a much better solution.
Page 3 - 14 Other Comments re: Trash Study
1 would look at incentives to encourage recycline.
Email:ma.skies'a ,mail com
Name: Mark Anderson
Address: 713 McGraw Cir, Fort Collins.CO
I feel that the current system is sufficient.
If you want to increase the diversion rates,change the recycling regulations to allow single-source recycling.
I lived in Chandler AZ with a municipal garbage system through the end of 2006. 'There the recycling containers
were as big as the garbage containers,and used automated trucks to collect both refuse and recycling.
Here in Fort Collins I must spend significant time organizing recyclables into categories, when a proper recycling
service provider would save many citizens time and encourage more diversion. I am a busy father and professional,
city ordinances that require me to spend significant time sorting and collapsing and washing trash items (water
impact?)so that they can fit into the narrowly defined recyclable categories is a waste of citizen time if there is the
possibility of simplifying and increasing the volume of diversion away from landfill space.
I didn't lose recycling containers in wind storms in Arizona either.because the containers had enough mass to not go
skipping across fields when the wind blew hard.
On the other hand,if you want to keep private haulers,then I think that you ought to allow the private haulers to
compete for business,this keeps the prices reasonable.
• Implementing a district system is like giving"eminent domain" style power to business,guaranteeing them a market
and disincentivizing customer service and price competition.
We might reduce the traffic on the roads slightly,but at a cost to the populace in increased prices that would well
outweigh any benefit to the maintenance budget.
Don't push budget problems onto the community through reduced competition unless you are willing to take
responsibility for the entire trash and recycling program under the municipal umbrella.
Do what you can to keep landfills near the city so that trash hauling doesn't become a long-haul operation,this will
have a larger impact on pollution generated by haulers than reducing complaints in certain neighborhoods.
"trash haulers want to save mileage and increase diversion as a way to improve profits,don't make theirjob more
difficult.
Don't add more unnecessary government regulation to the trash hauling industry.
Sincerely,
Mark Anderson
Email: bobmacneal�i�rodiev�net
Name:bob macneal
Address: 3124 rockwood drive
Please allow home owners associations to negotiate with individual trash companies to get the most competitive
price for their members. If fort collins is partitioned,this would not be possible. there would be no incentive to
have competitive prices if there is no competition.
D Georg: Look at the"and": Districting and regulation and recycling. Reduce the impact of haulers by using more
• than 3-4 districts and spread the business;use regulations to get a partnership with district contract winners; ensure a
partnership for recycling between citizens,companies and city; intent citizens and haulers to meet City climate task
force goals.
Page 3 - 15 Other Comments re: Trash Study
September 16, 2008
RAM Waste Customer Feedback:
RAM Waste provided their customers, within and outside the City, with the attached flyer
regarding the Trash Study. They also included a postage paid postcard (see below) addressed to
City Council. They asked their customers to send the postcards to City Council.
The City has received approximately 3500 cards. Of those returned to City Council, about 2300
checked both boxes; 800 checked the second box; 300 checked the first box; and 100 wrote over
the choices on the card to express their support for the City's proposed actions.
A box with all of the postcards will be placed in the Council Office in case any Council Member
wishes to review the cards.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Ann Tumquist
I
❑ I am opposed to the City's proposed districting of
Residential trash collection.
❑ I want to be able to choose my own hauler.
Address
Signed Date
4RAM
WASTE SYSTEMS,INC.
- Locally Owmed-
IMPORTANI' INFORMATION REGARDING YOUR SERVICE — SUMMER 2008
SUPPORT YOUR FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN WASTE COLLECTION
Once again,the City of Fort Collins has spent valuable time and taxpayers' dollars investigating trash districting and
taking control of residential trash collection. Trash collection in Fort Collins is currently driven by the competitive
market; the competition ensures high quality, low cost&safe,customer-focused service. Locally-owned Ram Waste
Systems,Inc. has been providing such quality service for over 25 years.
The City's trash study was put together by an out-of-state consultant unfamirliar with our community. A large
portion of the study was based on inaccurate assumptions and incomplete data,which had a major impact on the
results and recommendations. In an effort to bring a local perspective,Ram Waste Systems, Inc. —along with our
competitors—met with the City's consultants to provide valuable input and real experiences. Unfortunately,our
information was not utilized much in the study. Even the Fort Collins City Council had issues with this study and it
is being redone. Ironically, the haulers have independently been able to consolidate residential trash collection so
that approximately 50%of all collection is done based on contracts with an individual hauler and a homeowners
association.
IF A DISTRICTING SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED,THE FOLLOWING WILL OCCUR:
✓ Increased rates,fees and taxes to support more government administration and regulation.
Loss of freedom to choose your hauler. If you are not satisfied with your assigned hauler,you
will not be able to switch.
✓ Lower level of customer service due to loss of competition.
✓ You may be forced to pay for services you do not want or need.
✓ Loss of personalized and/or special services.
✓ Loss of freedom to support local business:
City staff and special-interest supporters have not been clear in explaining the reasons behind districting,and the
study uses inaccurate assumptions to manufacture perceived benefits. The City claims to be a"supporter of local
business,"but the proposed districting will put local haulers out of business.
LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD - WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT!
The City of Fort Collins is seeking public comment on this issue through the month of August 2008. Please contact
the City and let them know you want to keep the current competitive market system along with the freedom to
choose your hauler. As with most issues, increased government involvement is not the answer.
PLEASE E-MAIL YOUR COMMENTS TO: www.fcgov.com/trashstudy(click on comments)
OR
PLEASE FILL-OUT AND MAIL-IN the enclosed,stamped,addressed postcard to City Council
Members with the statement that the customer is opposed to the City's proposed districting of residential hash
on.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND BUSINESS. SINCERELY,
The employees and their families of Ram Waste Systems Inc.
Locally-owned and serving Fort Collins for over 25 years.
1 � 1111 k fa 1 I IT
i rim, 1
7,��r��ai./✓a�� �` �
la ij Go'e'6144°4" )
�,�p6 �s�1�,Pi fly-alE!R�'F,�%?�X44`i°�a A,fy�� a� a��3$` �i���I d�F, '`I y • �5,i �I
N✓, yti�.Y°•y, E{E n4Si id #ax.oai �d] !I. �1� le � ��J7
�
1l-)t"iryygg tCCyyxr
I °i
�ts k�rp�E pp�� $a�4�SIt9s"C"i9al�za
s E 7d{�Fsa*"'f",},af g S+�yja7R'�-. 41ap +`1 -
[eaS � '
ig
21atn ;i��''e3pi4 CviAX
!+ ll
gs'�i�s➢.I itrl (a.W o- i,v + in tyx xji �ye a 4 (?
I� aEgha?Y ZaT. + iF i ;"r +v �i�cJ3e� >N 3iyE �.
}
E
qq p �r ro jz
t t - e�.i � •a `� n� _5� _.gyp. ?:.
µ
r (
F � z
n . Mi
s-"R
kd n a✓.y�}rgeit; llM�`S tst.s aa,�� $�� rE e�
r a �
SL
ATTACHMENT
Trash Services Study
Final Report
. y • - . may _ • ; •. �.
P • to
City of • Collins ,
City of Fort Collins
July 1 , 2008
Z5Consulting Group , Inc . R3 Consulting Group , Inc
4811 Chippendale Drive , Suite 708
Resources Respect Responsibility Sacramento , CA 95841
Tel . 916-576-0306
Fax: 916-331 -9600
www. r3cgi . com
July 1 , 2008
Ms . Ann Turnquist
Council Policy Manager
City of Fort Collins
300 La Porte Avenue
Fort Collins , CA 80522-0580
Subject : — Trash Services Study Final Report
Dear Ms . Turnquist :
R3 Consulting Group Inc . ( R3 ) was engaged by the City of Fort Collins ( City) to complete a Trash
Services Study to determine opportunities to reduce the impacts of trash collection services in the
City and increase diversion . The attached Final Report presents our findings and
recommendations .
We wish to thank you and City staff for their assistance during our review , notably Susie Gordon ,
Senior Environmental Planner, and Rick Richter, Pavement Management Program Manager. We
also wish to thank the management of Gallegos Sanitation , RAM Waste Systems and Waste
Management who met with us at the beginning of the engagement and provided valuable
information in support of our review .
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City. Please do not hesitate to call me or
Richard Tagore- Erwin at (916 ) 576-0306 , or e- mail us at wschoen (@r3cgi . com or
rterwin _ r3cgi . com if you have any questions or comments regarding our Final Report.
Yours truly,
R3 CONSULTING GROUP INC .
YV
William H . Schoen
Principal
Cc . Richard Tagore- Erwin
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EX - 1
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EX-1
Project Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXA
Summary Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EX-2
Review of Trash Collection Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EX-2
Review of Diversion Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EX-5
Review of Collection System Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EX-9
Section 1 - Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1
Project Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - 1
Project Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -1
Report Organization , , . , , . mm , , mm , , m1m2
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -2
Current Collection System Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -2
History of Trash Districting Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -3
Diversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -5
Section 2 - Review of Trash Collection Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -1
Street Maintenance Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 1
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . m . . . m . . . m . . . m . . . . . . . . . . . . m . . . m . . . m . . 2- 1
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
Air Quality / Vehicle Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 11
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 12
Neighborhood Aesthetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -12
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 14
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 13
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 14
Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 14
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 14
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 14
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 17
Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 17
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 17
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 19
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2- 19
TOC - i
Table of Contents Other Vehicle Street Maintenance Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -20
Impact of Overloaded Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -21
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-21
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-21
Section 3 = Review of Diversion Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 1
Evaluation of Diversion Rate Metrics and
Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 -1
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3- 1
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3- 1
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3
Evaluation of Current Policies , Practices and
Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 -4
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-6
Evaluation of Current Recycling Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 -7
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8
Options / Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3- 11
Coordinating Diversion and Sustainability
Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 13
Section 4 - Review of Collection System
Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 1
Collection System Structure Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 1
Background / Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M . 4- 1
Alternatives Considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 1
Analysis of Collection System Structure
Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2
Current Open Competition System without any
Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
Open Competition System with Increased
Licensing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3
Districted Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
City-Wide Contract for Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6
Survey of Collection System Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6
State of Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6
OtherAreas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-9
Market Impacts of Districted Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-9
[Z5 New Haulers Bidding on Contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-9
Local Haulers Discontinuing Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 10
TOC - ii
Table of Contents
Tables
1 Residential Trash & Recycling Vehicle Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
2 Comparison of Open Competition and Districted
Collection Trash and Recycling Vehicle Impacts . . . . . . . . . 2-6
3 Comparison of Trash and Other Vehicle
Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-20
4 Licensed Hauler Disposal and Diversion Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9
5 Trash Services Survey Summary Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7
6 Recycling Services Survey Summary Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-8
Figures
1 Pavement Life Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2
2 Emissions Standards Time Line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8
Appendices
A Best Management Practices - Sample Contract
Language
B Trash Truck Safety Devices
C Comparative Trash Truck Load Factors
D Draft Strategic Plan for 50 % Diversion :
Preliminary Staff Recommendations
E Waste Composition Data
F Residential Collection System Structure
Options — Comparative Matrix
G Colorado Municipal League and Colorado
Recycles - Survey Results
[Z5
TOC - iii
Table of Contents This page intentionally left blank.
[Z5
TOC - iv
Executive
Executive Summary Summary
Background
The City' s residential collection system is an open competition
system in which licensed haulers compete for accounts . While the
haulers are regulated through the City' s licensing process ,
Municipal Code requirements and applicable ordinances ( i . e . ,
Pay-As-You -Throw and Recycling Ordinances ) , that regulation is
limited . There are few regulatory requirements specific to
minimizing the impact of trash collection services with respect to
air quality , noise , and the cost of street wear or improving
neighborhood aesthetics and safety . In addition , while haulers
must offer recycling services to residents and businesses , there
are no associated diversion levels that the haulers must achieve
as a condition of their license .
Project Objectives
The overall project objective was to prepare a comprehensive
study that answers the following problem statement/question :
In what ways can the City reduce the impacts of trash
collection services in Fort Collins, addressing issues of
street wear, air quality, neighborhood aesthetics, noise
and other neighborhood impacts ?'
Are there ways the City might also improve diversion
rates for recyclables ?
A major related question is whether there would be a net benefit
from switching from the current open competition residential
collection system to some form of districted collection system . As
specified in the City' s Request for Proposals ( RFP ) , the review of
options to address the above project objectives , as well as
potential changes to the existing open competition system , was to
include consideration of:
Alternatives that make improvements to the system
without harming existing haulers.
The City' s RFP specifically mentioned safety as an additional issue to
address although it was not referenced in the problem statement/ IZ3
question .
EX - 1
Executive Summary Findings
Summary Our major findings are presented below followed by our suggested
priority options/recommendations , which are listed in Bold Italics .
As appropriate , we recommend that the City work with the
licensed haulers and seek their input related to the various
options/recommendations presented in this report . The objective
of any such collaboration would be to implement meaningful
improvements to the City' s trash collection system that support the
City' s objectives without being unnecessarily burdensome on the
haulers .
Review of Trash Collection Impacts
Street Maintenance Impacts
• Trash trucks are typically the heaviest vehicles regularly
operating on residential ( local ) streets and are a major
contributor to wear and tear on those streets .
• The most significant step the City can take to minimize
trash truck street maintenance impacts is to reduce the
number of trash truck miles traveled on the City's streets .
• In general , all other factors the same , moving from an open
competition collection system to a districted collection
system (or a City-wide contract for services ) would be
expected to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled
with a corresponding decrease in the associated street
maintenance impacts .
• Potential residential street maintenance savings
associated with a districted collection system are estimated
to be on the order of +/- $ 170 , 000 annually .
• Requiring that haulers not load vehicles in excess of
manufacturer recommendations and legal load weights
would also help to control street maintenance impacts .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Require that haulers not load vehicles in excess
of manufacturer's recommendations or
limitations imposed by state or local vehicle
weight restrictions. Require haulers to
implement an ongoing monitoring program to
assure compliance with that requirement.
✓ Require 2 fixed rear axles on all new vehicles.
Require full time use of pusher or tag axle on
any existing vehicles with a single fixed rear
axle.
[Z5 ✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or
City- Wide Contract for Services to reduce the
EX - 2
Executive
number of residential trash truck miles traveled Summary
m m a r
and the associated street maintenance impacts, y
Air Quality / Vehicle Emissions
• It is estimated that residential trash trucks operating in the
City generated as much as 200 to 300 tons per year of
carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) emissions , in addition to nitrogen
oxide and particulates .
• The most significant step the City can take over the short
and medium term planning period to reduce vehicle
emissions is to require haulers to comply with the EPA
2010 diesel engine emission standards . With those
standards , emissions from diesel engines will be a fraction
of what they were less than 10 years ago .
• Natural gas and electric hybrid vehicles , bio-diesel fuel ,
operate-at- idle technology , automatic engine shut-off
systems and other options may also provide additional
emission benefits and should be considered , as applicable .
• Implementing districted collection (or a City-wide contract
for services ) would reduce the number of trash collection
vehicle miles travelled and the associated vehicle
emissions .
• Potential CO2 reductions associated with a districted
collection system are estimated to be on the order of +/-
140 tons annually .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Work with the haulers to develop a schedule for
fleet compliance with the 2010 EPA Emission
Standards.
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or
City- Wide Contract for Services to reduce the
number of residential trash truck miles traveled
and the associated vehicle emissions :
Require EPA 2010 Emission Standard
compliant vehicles as a condition of the
award of districts.
Neighborhood Aesthetics
• Establishing license standards related to vehicle
appearance (e . g . , washing , and painting ) , maintenance
(e . g . , control of fluid leaks ) and operational standards (e . g . ,
controlling litter) would support improve neighborhood
aesthetics .
• Implementing a districted collection system (or a City-wide
contract for services ) would reduce the number of trash [Z5
EX - 3
Executive trucks traveling on residential streets . It would also reduce
S u m m a r the number of days per week collection service occurs in a
Yneighborhood and allow for standardizing trash containers ,
all of which would improve neighborhood aesthetics .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Establish vehicle cleaning and painting
requirements as a condition of the required
license.
✓ Implement districted collection to reduce the
number of trash trucks on residential streets,
the number of days per week collection service
occurs and allow for standardizing trash
containers:
Roll-out City-owned standardized
wheeled trash containers with City logo.
Noise
• As a first step in its efforts to reduce noise associated with
trash collection services , the City should establish noise
standards for all haulers as a condition of their license and
require the haulers to verify compliance with those standards .
• Converting to natural gas vehicles and using operate-at- idle
technology would significantly reduce vehicle engine noise .
Without the necessary fueling infrastructure , however, natural
gas vehicles are not a viable option in the City at this time .
Operate-at-idle systems , however, are generally standard on
all new side- loading vehicles and existing side-loaders can be
retrofitted with the technology . Manufacturers are also starting
to test this technology on rear- and front- loading vehicles .
• " Smart" back- up alarms that sense the level of ambient noise
and adjust their volume accordingly can be used to reduce
back-up alarm noise .
• Placing time limits on commercial collection activities near
residential neighborhoods can help address noise related to
commercial collection activities .
• Using plastic lids or plastic dumpsters , treating containers , lid
supports and truck forks with sound -deadening materials and
encouraging " best practices" training for drivers would reduce
noise from commercial collection activities .
• Implementing districted collection (or a City-wide contract for
services ) would reduce the noise produced by trash trucks in
transit from point-to- point due to fewer vehicles operating on
residential streets . The noise associated with collection
operations would also be limited to a single day and time in
each neighborhood . The noise at the point of collection ( i . e . ,
EX - 4
Executive
emptying containers ) would not be reduced , however, since Summary
there would be no change in the number of pickups . y
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Establish noise standards that are to be met by
all haulers as a condition of their license and
require haulers to verify and report on
compliance with those standards.
✓ Implement districted collection to reduce the
number of trash trucks on a typical residential
street and vehicle miles traveled.
Safety
• Requiring haulers not to overload vehicles and assuring
that all vehicles are specified with certain safety equipment
(e . g . , ABS breaking systems , rear and side strobe lights ,
reverse motion sensors , exception based video recorders )
would support improved safety .
• The City should consider working with the haulers to
sponsor a "Slow Down to Get Around" safety campaign .
This industry sponsored campaign is designed to
encourage the public to use the same amount of caution
when passing a trash truck as they do when passing a
school bus , emergency vehicle or road construction crew .
• Implementing a districted collection system (or a City-wide
contract for services ) would reduce trash truck miles
traveled and support improved safety .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Require that haulers not load vehicles in excess
of manufacturer's recommendations or
limitations imposed by state or local vehicle
weight restrictions. Require haulers to
implement an ongoing monitoring program to
assure compliance with that requirement.
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or
City- Wide Contract for Services to minimize
residential trash truck miles traveled.
Review of Diversion Issues
Diversion Metrics
• There is a limitation to the City' s ability to accurately
calculate its diversion rate . The Larimer County Landfill ,
and other neighboring landfills used by the licensed
haulers do not have , or do not routinely use scales for
weighing incoming loads . Tonnage is estimated by [Z5
EX - 5
Executive multiplying the volume of the collection vehicle by density
Summary factors established by each hauler, which vary significantly
(from 500 to 900 pounds per cubic yard ) .
• The lack of scales at the landfills places a ( potentially high )
degree of uncertainty on the City' s current estimated
disposal data and the associated calculated diversion rate .
• While the licensed haulers are required to provide certain
data , that data is not sufficient to provide the City with the
ability to effectively evaluate individual hauler or program
performance . If the City is to make effective progress
towards its established diversion goal additional
information needs to be provided by the haulers and that
data needs to be accurate .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Track and report the following diversion rates :
Overall for the City;
By waste stream (residential,
commercial, roll-ofo ;
By program type (e. g. , residential
curbside recycling program, yard waste
program) ;
By account, by program (e. g. , the
average pounds per week of curbside
recyclables collected per solid waste
account) ; and
By individual licensed hauler by program
and waste stream as a percentage of the
material that they collect (control) .
In support of the above recommendations we further
recommend that the licensed haulers be required to:2
Report the number of residential solid waste
accounts by service level (e. g., 30-, 60-1 90-
gallon)3;
Report the number of commercial accounts by
service level and collection frequency for both
solid waste and recyclables (service
volume%ollection frequency matrix) ;
2 The recommended information should be readily available or easily
calculated based on available data .
3 The City may also wish to obtain the total number of HOA and HOA
contract accounts and specific HOAs serviced to enable it to more
effectively analyze trash truck street maintenance impacts . This
[Z3 information may also be necessary if the City decides to implement a
Districted Collection System or City-Wide Contract for Services .
EX - 6
Executive
Provide calculated curbside recycling and yard Summary
m m a r
waste diversion rates on a pounds per y
residential solid waste account per week basis;
Provide calculated diversion rates for the
material they control for each waste stream as
part of their regular reporting requirements;
Provide an accounting of total reported
disposal and diverted volume/tonnage by
individual facility (e. g. , Larimer County Landfill,
North Weld Landfill, Earth Cycle etc.);
Include historical data for each required data
set as part of the regular reporting process so
that trends can be tracked and are clear to all
parties;
✓ Review reporting forms to confirm that haulers
are providing required information in a
complete and accurate form. Revise / reinforce
required reporting requirements if necessary;
and
✓ Require that haulers provide complete and
accurate data as a condition of their license.
Provide the City with the right to audit required
information to verify its accuracy and/or require
the haulers to have their data audited by an
approved independent third party on periodic
basis to verify its accuracy.
Current Policies Practices and Programs
• The City has in place a number of key policy and program
components in support of its efforts to increase diversion
including the City' s Pay-As-You -Throw Ordinance and
Recycling Ordinance .
• While the City' s Recycling Ordinance requires haulers to
provide recycling service to residential and commercial
customers it lacks a mechanism to hold the haulers
accountable for their performance related to diversion .
• The City needs to more actively regulate diversion
activities , and more specifically , hauler diversion
performance (e . g . , establish minimum required hauler
diversion requirements ) if it is to significantly increase
diversion .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Establish minimum diversion requirements for
the licensed haulers for the material streams
that they control, either as part of the Recycling
EX - 7
Executive Ordinance or as a condition of the license or a
S u m m a r district agreement (e. g., Require residential
Yhaulers to divert a minimum average of 10
pounds of curbside recyclables per solid waste
account per week).
✓ Amend the City's residential PAYT Ordinance
so that "rate design " further enhances waste
reduction efforts per the Strategic Plan Phase 1
staff recommendation.
✓ Roll-out any changes to the residential PAYT
program in conjunction with comprehensive
strategy to increase residential recycling (e. g.,
universal roll-out of City-owned single stream
curbside recycling containers, universal roll-out
of residential yard waste (organics) program
with City-owned yard waste containers) .
Current Recycling Efforts
• The City has set a diversion goal of 50 % by 2010 .
• Significant additional diversion potential exists within the
City' s residential , commercial and roll -off waste streams .
• The licensed haulers are currently diverting approximately
7 % of the material that they collect/control ( 14 % of the
residential waste stream , 2 % of the commercial waste
stream and 7 % of the uncompacted roll -off waste stream ) .4
• If the City is to significantly increase diversion , the licensed
haulers will need to significantly increase the amount of
material they divert and/or other diversion options will need
to be developed ( e . g . , a City-wide contract for residential
recycling services ; post-collection residential and
commercial mixed waste processing capacity ; construction
& demolition debris processing capacity ) .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Establish minimum curbside recycling program
diversion requirements for the haulers (e. g. , 10
pounds per solid waste account per week) as a
condition of the residential license.
✓ Provide universal roll-out of City owned single
stream recycling containers.
4 These diversion rates are based on the licensed haulers reported
disposal and diversion data for January — June 2007 . The City' s
calculated diversion rate of 27 % is based on the haulers ' reported
diversion as well as diversion associated with various other sources
including recycling companies , the City' s Climate Wise partners ,
[Z3 recycling by large businesses not accounted for elsewhere and projected
source reduction .
EX - 8
Executive
✓ Revise residential PAYT rate structure per the Summary
m m a r
Strategic Plan Phase 1 staff recommendation, y
Provide recycling and yard waste services as
part of a "bundled" residential rate (Le. , no
additional cost for recycling and yard waste
service) .
Review of Collection System Structures
Our review of Collection System Structures considered the
following options :
• Current Open Competition System without any Changes ;
• Open Competition System with Increased Licensing
Requirements ;
• Districted Collection System ; and
• City-Wide Contract for Services .
Current Open Competition System without any Changes
• This option would maintain the current open competition
system as regulated without any changes .
• Existing hauler interests would be protected and customers
would maintain their ability to select their hauler .
• This option would do nothing to reduce trash collection
service impacts or increase diversion .
Open Competition System with Increased Licensing Requirements
• This option would maintain the current open competition
system , but add additional licensing requirements in
support of the City' s objectives to reduce trash collection
impacts and increase diversion .
• Existing hauler interests would be protected and customers
would maintain their ability to select their hauler .
• This option would not provide the reduced impacts that
would result from the reduction in residential trash truck
miles traveled associated with a districted collection
system (or City-wide contract for services ) .
Districted Collection System
• This option would break the City up into districts with the
City awarding separate contracts for each district to one
hauler. To effectively district it will be necessary for the City
to first determine which accounts are to be included (e . g . ,
HOAs ) and then obtain accurate account information by
geographic region of the City .
EX - 9
Executive This option would provide for reducing overall residential
Summary trash collection impacts largely in relationship to the
reduction in the number of vehicle miles traveled .
• This option would provide the opportunity to take other
actions to decrease residential trash collection impacts that
are not possible or may not be as easily implemented
under an open competition system (e . g . , requiring certain
types of vehicle or vehicle specifications as a condition of a
district agreement) .
• This option would provide a more effective structure for
establishing minimum diversion requirements and/or
incentives for haulers to increase diversion than an open
competition system .
• The option may provide for lower rates due to greater
collection efficiencies and a "guaranteed " customer base .
• Under this option the City may be required to take over
customer billing to allow it to establish a uniform City-wide
rate structure .
• This option would not protect the existing haulers market
share since they would be required to compete for the right
to provide service within a district with no guarantee that
they would be awarded a district.
• This option would not provide residents with the ability to
select their hauler.
• This option would increase City administrative
requirements .
City-Wide Contract for Services
• This option is similar to the districted collection system
option above ; however, rather than break the City up into
districts a City-wide contract would be awarded to a single
hauler.
• The benefits of this system are similar to the districted
collection system . In addition , this option has several
benefits over a districted collection system :
o It may generate increased competition by the
haulers given the larger associated market share ;
o Administrative requirements are less since they are
specific to one hauler rather than multiple haulers ;
o It is not necessary for the City to control the billing
process to provide a uniform City-wide rate ; and
o It offers the potential for the lowest possible rates
[Z5 due to economies of scale .
EX - 10
Executive
• This option could be incorporated into a hybrid approach Summary
with either a districted or an open competition system for y
trash collection services and a City-wide contract for
residential recycling services . In the case of an open
competition system for trash collection , however, this
would result in different collection days for trash and
recycling for many customers . We are not aware of any
jurisdictions that have such a system .
Alternatively the City could maintain the open competition
system but specify the day that service is to be provided in
the various areas of the City . This would provide for same
day trash and recycling service , but require the haulers to
reconfigure their collection routes to be consistent with the
specified service days .
• This option would not protect the existing haulers market
share since they would be required to compete for the right
to provide service within a district with no guarantee that
they would be awarded a district .
• This option would not provide residents with the ability to
select their hauler.
• This option would increase City administrative
requirements .
Priority Options/Recommendations
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or
City- Wide Contract for Services to reduce the
overall impacts associated with residential
trash collection services and support a more
effective system for increasing diversion from
the residential waste stream.
This recommendation is based entirely on the
consideration of the best collection system structure to
meet the City' s stated project objectives of:
• Reducing trash collection service impacts ; and
• Increasing diversion .
The recommendation does not consider other factors ,
including the impact on haulers and the associated loss of
the ability of customers to choose their hauler .
IZ3
EX - 11
Executive This page intentionally left blank.
Summary
[Z5
EX - 12
Introduction Section 1
Project Objectives Introduction
The overall project objective was to prepare a comprehensive
study that answers the following problem statement/question :
In what ways can the City reduce the impacts of trash
collection services in Fort Collins, addressing issues of
street wear, air quality, neighborhood aesthetics, noise
and other neighborhood impacts ?
Are there ways the City might also improve diversion
rates for recyclables ?
A major related question is whether there would be a net benefit
from switching from the current open competition residential
collection system to some form of districted collection . As
specified in the City' s Request for Proposals ( RFP ) , the review of
options to address the above project objectives , as well as
potential changes to the existing open competition system , was to
include consideration of:
Alternatives that make improvements to the system
without harming existing haulers.
Project Focus
The primary focus of this study was on the City' s residential
collection system and a review of options to reduce residential
trash collection service impacts and increase residential diversion .
Many of the issues reviewed and options considered , however,
also apply to the commercial and roll -off collection systems . In
fact , due to the nature of the commercial collection system (e . g . ,
10 licensed haulers ) , the benefits resulting from certain options
may be greater within the commercial collection system than the
residential collection system . As such , if the City is to realize the
full potential of options to reduce trash collection service impacts
and increase diversion it cannot limit itself to the residential sector .
This includes consideration of potential changes to the collection
system structure and/or regulatory requirements associated with
the commercial and roll -off collection systems as well as the
residential collection system . With that said , we believe that an
initial focus on the residential collection system represents a
reasonable starting point .
As appropriate , we recommend that the City work with the
licensed haulers and seek their input related to the various
options/recommendations presented in this report . The objective
of any such collaboration would be to implement meaningful
improvements to the City' s trash collection system that support the
Section 1 - 1
Introduction City' s objectives without being unnecessarily burdensome on the
haulers .
Report Organization
The report is organized into the following three major sections and
key subsections :
Review of Trash Collection Impacts :
• Street Maintenance Impacts ;
• Air Quality / Vehicle Emissions ;
• Neighborhood Aesthetics ;
• Noise ; and
• Safety .
Review of Diversion Issues :
• Evaluation of Diversion Rate Metrics and Measurements ;
• Evaluation of Current Policies , Practices and Programs ;
and
• Evaluation of Current Recycling Efforts .
Collection System Structure Alternatives :
• Current Open Competition System without any Changes ;
• Open Competition System with Increased Licensing
Requirements ;
• Districted Collection System ; and
• City-Wide Contract for Services .
For both the Review of Trash Collection Impacts and Review of
Diversion Issues , background information is provided followed by
an analysis of related issues , as applicable . Various
options/recommendations are then presented for the City' s
consideration . Those options/recommendations listed in Bold
Italics represent our suggested priority items .
Background
Current Collection System Structure
Residential , commercial and roll -off solid waste collection services
in the City are provided through an open competition system in
which licensed haulers compete for accounts throughout the City .
All licenses are valid from the date of issuance and expire on the
31 st of December of each year.
Section 1 - 2
Introduction
Article XV of the City' s Municipal Code establishes certain license
requirements including :
• Proof of general comprehensive liability/automobile
insurance of not less than $500 , 000 ;
• Recordkeeping and report requirements ;
• The provision of curbside recycling services to residential
customers and the availability of recycling services to
multi-family and commercial customers ;
• The provision of volume-based rates ; and
• Various performance standards including hours of
operation and vehicle identification requirements .
There are currently three ( 3 ) licensed haulers providing residential
collection services in the City:
• Gallegos Sanitation , Inc . ( Gallegos/Dicks ) ;
• Ram Waste Systems , Inc . ( Ram ) ; and
• Waste Management , Inc . (WMI ) .
Under the current open competition system multiple haulers may
provide service on the same street on the same or different days
of the week. This creates the potential for six different trucks using
any neighborhood street in one week ( 3 trash and 3 recycling
vehicles )5 . The number of trash trucks traveling on residential
streets has been limited in certain neighborhoods where
homeowners associations ( HOAs ) have contracted with a single
hauler or where residents have voluntarily agreed to use one
hauler. As a result , the City has been able to achieve some of the
benefits of a formal trash districting system without implementing
a districting system . Most new HOAs voluntarily make one of
these two arrangements with trash haulers .
History of Trash Districting Policy
In 1995 , the City Council adopted a policy to reduce the average
number of trash trucks per week on residential streets from six to
two on at least 80 % - 85% of the residential streets . The purpose
of this policy was intended to respond to complaints from citizens
about trash truck traffic and to reduce street maintenance impacts .
Subsequently , the City engaged a consulting firm to perform an
initial districting feasibility analysis and another firm to identify the
costs associated with implementing districting . In 1998 , the City
engaged Hilton , Farnkopf & Hobson to perform a more detailed
feasibility analysis of creating a districted trash collection system
for residential customers . The purpose of that analysis was to
5 Gallegos Sanitation also operates a yard waste route that provides
service to a limited number of residential accounts .
Section 1 - 3
Introduction provide a greater understanding of what would happen if the City
were to award residential trash hauling contracts for specified
geographic districts in the City . That analysis found various
benefits to the City and customers from districting , including :
• Districting would result in a reduction to the number of
trash and recycling trucks traveling on City streets and this
reduced number of trucks would reasonably be expected
to also reduce traffic congestion , noise and air pollution
and street maintenance costs ;
• A districted system comprised of five or less districts would
likely result in savings as much as $500 , 000 annually
( based on 1998 study conditions ) from the current open
competition system ' s current residential rates ; and
• Other benefits such as improved aesthetics , comparability
of services and rates and reduced City liability may accrue
from districting .
However, the analysis also identified certain disadvantages to the
City , customers and collection companies :
• Districting requires increased attention by the City Council
and staff both during the implementation stage and
thereafter;
• Customers lose their ability to choose their collector;
• Districting may result in changes that will adversely affect
customers such as transitioning to a different hauler,
adjusting to new services and even increased rates in
some particular cases ; and
• It is unlikely that all current haulers will continue to provide
residential service in the City and those remaining may be
operating at lower levels of profitability .
The outcome of the 1998-99 Council discussion of the trash
districting concept was direction from Council to postpone the
districting concept and to instead fund new waste reduction
projects and to promote voluntary trash consolidation in
neighborhoods . Concerns that lead Council to defer any action on
trash districting included the impact of their decision on local trash
haulers who might not be awarded a district in a competitive
process , and citizen concerns about the possibility of reduced
quality of service and the lack of choice in their trash hauler.
Since the Council 3s 1999 direction to defer the possible
implementation of a districted trash system , a number of changes
have occurred including :
• The number of licensed residential haulers has decreased
[Z5 from six in 1998 to three in 2008 ;
Section 1 - 4
Introduction
• HOAs have been urged to contract with a single hauler or
encourage all residents to voluntarily agree to use one
hauler. Most new HOAs voluntarily make one of these two
arrangements with trash haulers ; and
• In recent years , funding for street maintenance has been
subject to budget reductions . A 2007 study of the
Pavement Management Program found that the current
street system funding levels are inadequate to maintain the
streets to their adopted standards .
Diversion
The City of Fort Collins is currently diverting approximately 27
percent of its waste stream from disposal and has established a
goal of diverting 50 percent by the year 2010 . Findings of the 2005
Garbage and Recycling Survey conducted by Corona Research
confirmed that residents are eager to recycle , with 98 percent of
respondents expressing the belief that recycling is "good for the
City of Fort Collins" . They are supportive of new measures to
divert waste and willing to pay some part of the costs that may be
incurred to develop new programs .
[Z5
Section 1 - 5
Introduction This page intentionally left blank.
[Z5
Section 1 - 6
Review of Trash Collection Impacts Section 2
This section provides an analysis of the following trash collection Review of Trash
service impacts :
Street Maintenance Impacts ; Collection
• Air Quality / Vehicle Emissions ; Impacts
• Neighborhood Aesthetics ;
• Noise ; and
• Safety .
Street Maintenance Impacts
Background / Overview
Road maintenance is designed to address deterioration . While
roads will eventually deteriorate if simply left unused , most
deterioration is associated with use ; and the damage caused by
vehicles goes up much more than proportionately with size and
weight . Hence , 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 , so there is less weight on each wheel ,
then the damage is reduced . 6
Trash trucks are typically the heaviest vehicles regularly operating
on residential ( local ) streets . As a result , they are a major
contributor to the wear and tear on those streets . While trash
trucks also contribute to the wear and tear on collector and arterial
streets , those streets are designed to a higher standard and
experience significantly more vehicle trips and large truck trips
than local streets . As such , the relative impact of a trash truck on
collector and arterial streets is significantly less than that on local
streets . Commercial solid waste collection in the City , however, is
provided through an open competition license system , with
approximately 10 licensed commercial haulers currently operating
in the City . This large number of commercial haulers increases the
impact of trash trucks on the City' s collector and arterial streets
compared to a system in which there are fewer licensed haulers or
a single service provider (e . g . , a municipal or contracted system ) .
The pavement condition index ( PCI ) is a common unit of measure
used to rate the condition of pavements . The PCI rates pavements
on a score of 0 to 100 with a higher value indicating better
pavement condition . Rapid deterioration of pavement typically
6 A. Rufolo , Cost-Based Road Taxation , Cascade Policy Institute ,
November 1995 .
Section 2 - 1
Review of Trash occurs after roadways drop to a PCI score of 60 or lower. Studies
Collection have shown that every dollar spent performing preventative
maintenance on a roadway with a PCI of 70 or higher saves $4 in
Impacts future costs — it would otherwise cost about $5 to rehabilitate the
same roadway once rapid deterioration occurs' (as shown in
Figure 1 ) . Ensuring adequate funding for an effective pavement
management system is , therefore , critical to achieving a cost
effective pavement management system .
Figure 1
Good Roads Cost Less to Maintain
Pavement Condition Index Goal 70+
100 $ 1 for
Excellent / renovation here
85 �(
Good will cost
70 $4 to $5
Pavement Fair here
Condition 55 1
Index Poor fJ
40
Very Poor
0
5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years 25 years
The goal of a pavement management program is to bring all roads
up to a "good " to "excellent" condition where they can be
maintained most cost effectively . The strategy often
recommended is referred to as the " Best First Approach " , which
concentrates spending initially on routine and preventative
maintenance on those roads that are currently in "fair" to "good "
condition . This extends the useful life of those roads , preventing
rapid deterioration . Spending money on routine maintenance now
prevents additional spending in the future on more expensive
repairs .
The City' s goal is to maintain a PCI of greater than 70 which falls
within the "Good " range . The City has been able to maintain its
streets at or near this target which has allowed it to provide cost
effective maintenance . The 2008 and 2009 approved budgets ,
however, do not provide sufficient funding to maintain streets at
their current level . The 2008 budget is more than $ 1 . 0 million less
than that required to maintain streets at their current level while
the 2009 budget is more than $2 . 5 million less than required . If
J . Gerbracht, Bay Area Roads Close to "Tipping Point", Metropolitan
[Z5 Transportation Commission , Street Talk , March 2006 .
Section 2 - 2
funding continues to be less than that required to maintain the Review of Trash
streets at their current condition the quality of the City' s streets will Collection
decrease over time and maintenance costs will increase . This is a
negative cycle and one that should be avoided if at all possible . Impacts
Analysis
Open Competition vs . Districted Collection Impacts
In general , all other factors the same , moving from an open
competition collection system to a districted collection system
would be expected to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled
with a corresponding decrease in the associated street
maintenance impacts . However, when considering trash truck
street maintenance impacts and the potential effect of districted
collection on those impacts it is important to consider that :
• Both the size of the collection vehicles and the average
number of passes each vehicle makes down each
residential street segment may change under a districted
system . As a result the impact per vehicle may be more or
less than under the current open competition system .
• At least one hauler provides both residential and
commercial service with the same vehicle . If that hauler
was not awarded a residential district its vehicles would
continue to impact those residential streets it uses to
access commercial accounts , assuming it continued to
provide commercial service .
• If a hauler(s ) not currently providing residential or
commercial service in the City was awarded a district
under a competitive procurement , that hauler might also
compete for commercial accounts with a resulting increase
in commercial trash truck impacts .
Our approach to projecting trash truck street maintenance impacts
is based on common principles of pavement design and vehicle
loading . The basic premise is that all vehicles , including trash
trucks , exert an impact on streets that can be quantified . That
impact or "vehicle loading " can be expressed as an Equivalent
Single Axle Load ( ESAL ) , which is a function of the vehicle' s
weight and the distribution of that weight over the vehicles axles .
By projecting the number and type of vehicles (e . g . , cars , trucks ,
trash trucks ) 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 . , trash trucks ) can
then be determined based on the percentage of the total ESALs
attributed to that vehicle type .
For purposes of our analysis , we requested information on the
types of residential trash and recycling trucks used by the licensed [Z5
haulers and their average load weights . We also obtained
Section 2 - 3
Review of Trash manufacturer axle weight profiles for the same or similar truck
types and reviewed traffic count data and street maintenance
Collection
expense and funding information provided by the City . Information
Impacts provided was used to develop residential trash and recycling truck
axle weight profiles . This information was then used to project the
impacts of trash and recycling trucks on the City's residential
streets , which was expressed as percentage of the total vehicle
impacts experienced by those streets .
In developing the projections it is important to note that the
calculated impacts are based in part on various assumptions
including :
• The average number of vehicle trips per residential street;
• The percentage of total vehicle trips made by trucks other
than trash and recycling trucks and the average axle
weights of those vehicles ; and
• The average number of trash and recycling truck trips per
week on a typical residential street .
Reasonable changes to those assumptions can have a material
impact on the calculated impacts .
Note: One hauler uses vehicles with a single fixed rear axle and
a pusher axles. The impact of those vehicles increases
significantly if the pusher axle is not used during collection
operations. Also pusher and tag axles generally have two
tires per axle rather than four, which also increases the
impacts relative to a fixed rear axle with four tires.
Table 1 below provides a comparison of the calculated combined
trash and recycling truck impacts on residential streets as a
percentage of the total vehicle impacts . The table presents the
results for various assumptions regarding the average number of
passes trash and recycling trucks make each week on residential
streets .
The table also provides :
• The allocation of the annual cost required to maintain the
residential streets at their current condition to trash and
recycling trucks in proportion to their calculated vehicle
impacts ; and
• The projected annual carbon dioxide ( CO2 ) emissions
associated with each scenario .
s A dead axle , also called lazy axle , is not part of the drive train but is
instead free- rotating . Many trucks and trailers use dead axles for strictly
load-bearing purposes . A dead axle located immediately in front of a
drive axle is called a pusher axle . A tag axle is a dead axle situated
behind a drive axle (Source : Wikipedia ) .
Section 2 - 4
Review of Trash
Collection
Impacts
Table 1
RESIDENTIAL TRASH & RECYCLING VEHICLE IMPACTS
Allocated Portion of
Average Vehicle Passes / Week / Total Annual Cost Annual CO2 Emissions (1 )
Residential Street to Maintain
Percent of Total
Vehicle Impacts Residential Streets
Trash Recycling at Current
Truck Passes Truck Passes Total Passes Condition Pounds Tons
($2008 )
6 . 0 6 . 0 12 . 0 20 . 1 % $ 5061000 8133000 407
5 . 0 5 . 0 10 . 0 17 . 1 % $ 432 , 000 6789000 339
4 . 0 4 . 0 8 . 0 14 . 0 % $ 354 , 000 5429000 271
3 . 0 3 . 0 6 . 0 10 . 8 % $ 272 , 000 407 , 000 204
2 . 0 2 . 0 4 . 0 7 . 4 % $ 186 , 000 271 , 000 136
1 . 0 1 . 0 2 . 0 3 . 8 % $ 96 , 000 1361000 68
EPA Emission Facts : Average Carbon Dioxide Emissions Resulting from Gasoline and Diesel Fuel
For purposes of a base case analysis of the effects of changing
from the current open competition system to a districted collection
system we assumed that :
• There are an average of 4 residential trash truck and 4
recycling truck passes on each residential street segment
each week for the open competition system (e . g . , 2 trash
trucks and 2 recycling vehicles making two passes down
each residential street each week) ; and
• There will be an average of 2 residential trash truck and 2
recycling truck passes each week for a districted collection
system .
Table 2 below provides a comparison of the trash and recycling
truck impacts and the allocated street maintenance cost for the
current open competition system and a districted collection system
based on these assumptions . As shown , the associated impacts
and allocated pavement maintenance costs for a districted system
are essentially half that for the current open competition system
based on the noted assumptions .
The effect of changes to the assumed number of vehicle passes
for the open competition system and/or a districted collection
system listed above can be determined using the information
Section 2 - 5
Review of Trash presented in Table 1 above . As an example , if we assume an
average of 6 rather than 8 total trash and recycling trips per week
Collection
for the current open competition system , the associated " Percent
Impacts of Total Vehicle Impacts" is 10 . 8 % rather than the 14 . 0 % for the
base case shown in Table 2 . The associated reduction in the
" Percent of Total Vehicle Impacts" in this case is 3 .4 % ( 10 . 8 % -
7 . 4 % ) rather than 6 . 7 % . The corresponding reduction in the
"Allocated Portion of Total Annual Cost to Maintain Residential
Streets at Current Condition " would be approximately $86 , 000
($2727000 - $ 186 , 000 ) rather than the $ 168 , 000 for the base case
($354 , 000 - $ 186 , 000 ) shown in Table 2 .
Table 2
COMPARISON OF OPEN COMPETITION AND DISTRICTED COLLECTION
TRASH & RECYCLING VEHICLE IMPACTS
Total Trash & Allocated Portion of
Recycling Total Annual Cost Annual CO2 Emissions
Vehicle Passes / Percent of Total to Maintain
Collection System Week / Vehicle Impacts Residential Streets
Residential at Current
Street Condition Pounds Tons
($2008 )
Open Competition 8 . 0 14 .0% $ 354 , 000 5421000 271
Districted Collection 4 .0 7 .4% $ 186 , 000 2717000 136
Reduction ( Districted vs. Open )(' ) 4.0 6.7% $ 1683000 271 ,000 136
The Districted Collection "Percent of Total Vehicle Impacts" and "Annual Cost to Maintain Residential Streets at Current
Condition" is greater than half the calculated impacts for the Open Competition System due to the methodology used , which
assumes a constant number of vehicle trips for each scenario.
While the estimated impacts are subject to changes in the various
underlying assumptions , we believe that the analysis provides a
reasonable projection of the magnitude of trash truck impacts on
the City' s residential streets , which is supported by various
independent third-party estimates . Appendix C (Comparative
Trash Truck Load Factors ) provides a comparison of the
estimated passenger car equivalents estimated for the residential
trash and recycling trucks operating in the City to independent
references in support of the reasonableness of the estimates used
in our analysis .
Change in Street Design Standards
The City adopted new design standards for streets in 1999 that
are expected to increase the available vehicle loads streets can
handle over their lifetime . These new standards do not affect the
calculated percentage impacts of trash and recycling trucks on
residential streets , since that calculation is not based on street
design standards . Those standards would , however, be expected
to reduce annual maintenance costs over time . As a result , the
Section 2 - 6
allocated street maintenance costs attributed to trash and Review of Trash
recycling trucks would be reduced accordingly .
Collection
Options / Recommendations
✓ Require that haulers not load vehicles in excess of Impacts
manufacturer's recommendations or limitations
imposed by state or local vehicle weight restrictions
(see Appendix A for sample language) . Require
haulers to implement an ongoing monitoring program
to assure compliance with that requirement;
✓ Require 2 fixed rear axles on all new vehicles. Require
full time use of pusher or tag axle on any existing
vehicles with a single fixed rear axle;
✓ Encourage the Police Department to more aggressively
monitor and enforce vehicle weight limits ;
✓ Establish a street maintenance impact fee to provide
funding to offset pavement maintenance cost impacts
associated with trash collection services (see Appendix A
for sample contract language ) ;
✓ Require co-collection vehicles9 ; and
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or City- Wide
Contract for Services to reduce the number of
residential trash truck miles traveled and the
associated street maintenance impacts.
Air Quality / Vehicle Emissions
Background / Overview
The nation ' s trash truck fleet is huge , more than three times the
size of urban bus fleets , and nearly 100 % dependent on diesel
fuel . That diesel fuel is often burned in old engines that operate
without state-of-the-art pollution controls . Trash trucks are also
one of the most fuel inefficient vehicles on the roads today , with
an average fuel efficiency of approximately 2 . 8 miles per gallon .
As a result , trash trucks are a major cause of air pollution in cities
across the country . Diesel engines have , however , gotten cleaner
since the late 1980 ' s . In fact , with new federal emissions
standards diesel engines manufactured in the United States
starting with the 2007 model year are the cleanest in the world .
EPA Standards
In 2000 , the EPA established stringent standards designed to
reduce emissions from on - road heavy-duty trucks and buses by
up to 95 percent and to cut the allowable levels of sulfur in diesel
9 Co-Collection vehicles have split bodies that allow for collection of two
materials (e . g . , trash and recyclables ) in the same vehicle thereby
reducing the number of vehicle trips per street segment .
Section 2 - 7
Review of Trash fuel by 97 percent10 . The EPA rule was the most significant mobile
Collection source initiative since the 1970 Clean Air Act Amendments
establishing the U . S . Mobile Source Emission Control Program .
Impacts Beginning with the 2007 model year, 100 percent of the on-road
diesel heavy duty engines ( HDEs ) are required to use a diesel
particulate filter and 50 percent of the engines are required to use
nitrogen oxide ( NOx) exhaust control technology . Beginning with
the 2010 model year, 100 percent of the on - road heavy-duty
diesel engines will require NOx exhaust technology .
Figure 2 below provides an illustration of the improvements in
engine emissions that have occurred over the last 25 years . With
the 2010 standards the emissions from model year 2010 HDE ' s
will be a small fraction of what they were less than 10 years ago .
Figure 2
Emission Standards Time Line
1994
5.0
L 1996
s
T' 4.0
i `. I_I L f I_I f<
OI
u
U
= 2002
2 . 5
Z
x
O
Z
1 .2 2007
x
Z � Defactor Standard
Phase in Period
0. - 2010
0.0
O. 0 0. 01 0.10
PARTICULATE [g/ HP -hr]
Source : http ://www. cumminswestport. com/products/emissions . php
It is important to understand , however, is that these standards
apply to engine manufacturers and not to fleet operators . There
are no requirements that fleet operators , including trash haulers ,
comply with the standards within any specific time period . Relying
10 As of 2006 , refiners and importers nationwide are required to ensure
that at least 80% of the volume of the highway diesel fuel they produce
or import is ultra low sulfur diesel ( ULSD ) compliant. By 2009 95% of
diesel fuel will have a sulfur limit of 15 parts per million ( ppm ) . By
December 1 , 2010 100 % of the diesel fuel sold will need to meet that
limit. ULSD fuel enables the use of cleaner technology diesel engines
and vehicles with advanced emission control devices , resulting in
[Z5 significant improved air quality .
Section 2 - 8
solely on fleet turnover to achieve the full benefits of the new Review of Trash
engine standards could take up to 20 years due to the reliability of Collection
diesel engines . In the meantime many of the older dirtier diesel
engines will continue to remain in service . Impacts
Natural Gas Vehicles
Natural gas engines offer the potential for significant reductions in
trash truck emissions . Natural gas is also a secure , domestically
produced fuel that reduces the demand for petroleum- based fuels
and imported oil . Replacing 50 % of the estimated 136 , 000 diesel
trash trucks operating in the country with natural gas trucks would
annually displace approximately 600 million gallons of diesel fuel ,
the equivalent of 14 . 3 million barrels of oil — a meaningful step
toward energy security11 . An added benefit is that natural gas
engines are significantly quieter than diesel engines .
In the past four years the number of natural gas trucks in the
United States has more than doubled , and nearly 700 natural gas
garbage trucks are in operation today . By 2010 it is projected that
over 2 , 200 natural gas garbage trucks will be operating in the
US12 . Two-thirds of the estimated 700 natural gas garbage trucks
in operation in the US operate on liquid natural gas ( LNG ) , while
the rest use compressed natural gas (CNG ) .
Natural gas engines have already shown that they can meet the
2010 EPA emission requirements while also generating half the
NOx emissions of 2010 compliant diesel engines . Natural gas
trucks , however, produce lower torque ( power) , are heavier and
take longer to fuel than diesel vehicles . While natural gas vehicles
can cost substantially more than diesel , the new emission
requirements and rising diesel fuel costs could erase the cost
advantage that diesel trucks have had over natural gas .
A major impediment to natural gas trash trucks in the City is the
lack of fueling infrastructure .
Biodiesel
Biodiesel is clean burning alternative fuel , produced from
domestic , renewable resources . Biodiesel contains no petroleum ,
but it can be blended at any level with petroleum diesel to create a
biodiesel blend . It can also be used in compression - ignition
(diesel ) engines with little or no modifications . Biodiesel is
biodegradable , nontoxic, and essentially free of sulfur and
aromatics . Each of the licensed residential haulers reported that
they have experimented with Biodiesel with mixed results .
Problems with clogging of filters , jelling , cost and warranty issues
were cited .
11 INFORM ; Greening Garbage Trucks : Trends in Alternative Fuel Use ,
2002-2005 .
12 Ibid . [Z5
Section 2 - 9
Review of Trash Operate-at-idle Technology
Collection Operate-at-idle technology can also reduce emissions . Operate-
at- idle systems allow an engine to run at much lower revolutions
Impacts per minute ( RPM ) and thus conserve diesel 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-
at- idle systems . 13 Operate-at- idle technology is generally standard
on all new side loading equipment . Retrofitting existing vehicles
can be done at a cost of from $ 1 , 500 to $ 10 , 000 . Truck
manufacturers are just starting to test operate-at-idle technology
on rear- and front- loading vehicles .
An added advantage of operate-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-at- idle trash truck the hydraulic
system is capable of packing without revving the engine and
generating the associated engine noise .
Automatic Engine Shut-Off Systems
Idling engines can burn up to one ( 1 ) gallon of fuel per hour. 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
Connections , a national solid waste management firm , has
installed automatic engine shut off devices on some of their
vehicles that shut the engine down after five minutes of idling . This
five minute standard is consistent with the proposed time frame in
EPA's Model State Idling Law .
Other Options
On the horizon , several other fuel and technologies are being
tested in prototype vehicles including :
• Hybrid -electric drive trains
• Bio- methane ( biofuels )
While these technologies may offer future benefits they have yet
to be proven in a large scale commercial environment . Volvo ,
however, recently introduced the first hybrid garbage truck in
Sweden . If testing goes well , Volvo plans to begin producing the
13
Ideal Idle Idea ; K. Simpson , Waste Age , Sep 1 , 2006 12 : 00 PM
Section 2 - 10
hybrid trucks in 2009 . Volvo's hybrid technology consists of a 320 Review of Trash
horsepower diesel engine which shuts down at rest combined with Collection
an electric motor that powers the truck at speeds up to 12 miles
per hour. Regenerative braking is used as a means to recapture Impacts
energy to recharge the lithium ion batteries . Besides being much
quieter, gas savings and CO2 emission reductions on the order of
20-30 percent are expected . la
Waste Management Inc . has reported that it is exploring using
waste methane ( bio- methane ) from its landfills as a fuel for trash
trucks . The Orange County Transportation Authority in southern
California is currently using methane from the county 7s landfills in
a portion of its LNG fleet .
Reducing engine idle speeds , maintaining proper tire pressure ,
maintaining air filters and other steps can also be taken to improve
fuel efficiency and minimize engine emissions .
Analysis
As discussed above , with the 2010 EPA standards emissions from
new diesel engines will be a fraction of what they were less than
10 years ago . When all trash trucks achieve compliance with
those standards there will be a significant improvement in the
emissions from trash trucks operating in the City . The most
significant step the City can take to reduce trash truck emissions
is , therefore , to establish a specific timeline for licensed haulers
( residential and commercial ) to bring their fleets into compliance
with EPA's 2010 emission requirements . The State of California
established such a timeline requiring fleet operators to bring their
fleets into compliance with specific standards within a relatively
short time frame ) . At a minimum the City could ban the registration
of any truck prior to 1994 , in order to remove some of the dirtiest ,
most polluting engines from the road . Idle- in -gear technology and
automatic engine shut-off systems would also provide for
additional emission reductions15
While natural gas engines already meet the 2010 requirements
the lack of local fueling infrastructure and other factors likely
preclude this as a viable short- to medium-term option in the City .
Also , while Biodiesel may offer some emission benefits ,
operational problems cited by some of the haulers will need to be
addressed for this to represent a reliable long term option .
Implementing a Districted Collection System or City-Wide Contract
for Services would also be expected to reduce overall vehicle
14 Volvo introduces first hybrid garbage truck, works on DME fuel , Posted
Apr 8th 2008 11 :41AM by Jeremy Korzeniewski;
www. autobloggreen. com.
15 This could then be followed by an ongoing graduated compliance
schedule that would ban vehicles prior to 1998 , 2002 and 2007 over
some reasonable time frame .
Section 2 - 11
Review of Trash emissions as a result of the reduction in the number of residential
Collection trash collection vehicle miles traveled . As illustrated in Table 1
above , it is estimated that residential trash trucks operating in the
Impacts City generated as much as 200 to 300 tons per year of CO2
emissions annually , in addition to nitrogen oxide and particulates .
These emissions might be reduced by as much as half with a
Districted Collection System or City-Wide Contract for Services .
Options / Recommendations
✓ Work with the haulers to develop a schedule for fleet
compliance with the 2010 EPA Emission Standards;
✓ Prohibit the use of any truck with an engine older than
model year 1994 in the City ;
✓ Require operate-at- idle technology on all new vehicles ;
require existing vehicles to be retrofitted ;
✓ Require installation of automatic engine shut-offs and
mandate shut down after a set number of minutes of idling
(e . g . , 5 minutes consistent with EPA' s Model State Idling
Law) ;
✓ Encourage hauler use of synthetic oils , effective tire
maintenance programs and other fuel saving measures ;
✓ Limit the number of residential and commercial licenses
(e . g . , issue no more than the current number) ;
✓ Require natural gas vehicles if the necessary fueling
infrastructure can be developed ;
✓ Evaluate opportunities for other alternate fuel / alternate
technology vehicles (e . g . , hybrid electric drive trains ) as
they become commercially viable ; and
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or City- Wide
Contract for Services to reduce the number of
residential trash collection vehicle miles traveled and
the associated vehicle emissions :
01 Require EPA 2010 Emission Standard compliant
vehicles as a condition of the award of districts;
01 Require operate-at- idle technology on residential
vehicles as a condition of the award of the districts ;
and
Require use of County Landfill to reduce vehicle
miles traveled .
Neighborhood Aesthetics
Background / Overview
The appearance of a neighborhood is impacted by trash collection
services both with respect to the presence of containers and the
vehicles providing collection services . Under an open competition
Section 2 - 12
system adjacent residents collection schedules may vary resulting Review of Trash
in containers placed at the curbside for collection on multiple days Collection
of the week . Additionally, containers currently come in all shapes
and sizes and differing colors and bags are also used . Under a Impacts
districted system , all services would typically be provided on the
same day in a given neighborhood so streets are free of trash and
recycling containers six days out of the week . Containers can also
be standardized to provide a more uniform appearance .
The City currently has few if any permit requirements related to
the appearance and condition of trash collection vehicles .
Standards can be established regardless of the collection system
structure related to , among other things :
• Cleaning and maintaining vehicles so that they present a
"clean , professional and new-like appearance" ;
• Minimizing vehicle oil , fuel and other fluid spills ; and
• Controlling litter.
Analysis
Collection Days
Unless the City were to pursue a districted collection system or
require that all collection operations under the current open
competition system occur on a specific day in each neighborhood
( i . e . , districted service days ) it is likely that many neighborhoods
will continue to have multiple trash service days . Should the City
implement districted collection , however, collection services could
be limited to one day per week .
Standardizing Containers
Districted collection would also allow for standardizing residential
trash collection containers . In which case the City could own the
containers and have the City logo rather than the haulers logo on
the containers . Regardless of the collection system structure the
City could provide for the universal roll -out16 of City-owned
standardized single stream recycling containers .
Cleaning and Painting Trucks
The City's municipal code does not specify any requirements for
cleaning and painting trash trucks or commercial containers or any
other requirements related to aesthetics including controlling litter
and vehicle spills . Such requirements are standard in many
franchise agreements and contracts and to lesser degrees license
requirements . The City of Lone Tree ' s recent residential solid
waste collection agreement with Pro Disposal specifies , among
other things that the contractor shall use "vehicles that are
16 All residential accounts would be provided with a recycling container
rather than needing to request one . Any customer not wishing to
[Z5
participate would need to specifically request to "opt-out" .
Section 2 - 13
Review of Trash maintained in a clean, first-class manner" and that vehicles "shall
Collection be thoroughly washed not less than once each week and shall be
repainted as necessary. "
Impacts Options / Recommendations
✓ Establish vehicle cleaning and painting requirements
as a condition of the required license (see Appendix A
for sample language);
✓ Establish performance standards related to controlling
litter, spills etc . (see Appendix A for sample language ) ;
✓ Provide universal roll -out of City-owned standardized
single stream recycling containers with City logo (see
Appendix A for sample contract language ) ; and
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or City- Wide
Contract for Services to reduce the number of trash
trucks on residential streets, the number of days per
week collection service occurs and allow for
standardizing trash containers:
Roll-out City-owned standardized wheeled trash
containers with City logo.
Noise
Background / Overview
Noise from trash trucks can be related to a number of factors
including :
• Engine noise ;
• Backing alarms ;
• Noise at Point of Collection ( Dumping of material such as
glass in curbside recycling systems ) ; and
• Dumping commercial bins .
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 (e . g . , decibel ratings
within a specified distance from the vehicle ) that haulers must
comply with during collection operations .
Analysis
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 :
Section 2 - 14
• Converting to either a compressed natural gas ( CNG ) or Review of Trash
liquefied natural gas ( LNG ) engine ; and Collection
• Using "operate-at- idle" technology" .
In addition to the above options , a well built , tight fitting , well Impacts
maintained vehicle can also help reduce noise .
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 . 18
As mentioned above , a major impediment to the use of natural
gas trash trucks in Fort Collins is the lack of required fueling
infrastructure .
As discussed previously, in addition to fuel savings operate-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-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 .
Backing Alarms ( Beepers )
Vehicle backing and noise associated with vehicle backing alarms
are most often associated with commercial collection activities .
Placing limits on 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 .
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 .
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 ,
17 With non operate-at- idle vehicles the engines need to rev when the
body is packing . With an operate at idle vehicle there is an hydraulic
system on the body which is capable of providing the hydraulic pressures
need to pack without revving the engine , which creates noise .
18 Ahhhh . . . the Peaceful Sounds of Garbage Trucks ; N . Stiles ; MSW
Management May/June 2007 .
Section 2 - 15
Review of Trash only the number of vehicles making those pickups . The noise
Collection produced in transit from point-to- point would be reduced however
due to fewer vehicles . The noise associated with collection
Impacts operations would also be limited to a specific day and time in each
neighborhood .
Dumping Commercial Bins
Dumping of commercial bins can be very noisy and particularly
noticeable in the early morning hours . A number of options are
available to reduce the noise associated with commercial
collection activities including19 :
• Treating lid supports with sound -deadening material - Lid
supports are small metal arms that are anchored on one
end which can be rotated to support the lid in an open
position . During dumping the arm swings freely and can
strike other metal objects ;
• Treating the containers with sound -deadening materials -
The reverberation of the sides of metal containers creates
loud noises ;
• Treating the forks of trucks with sound -deadening material
- A great deal of noise is generated by the metal forks used
to pick up the containers within the sleeves on the
container;
• Using plastic lids or plastic dumpsters where the Fire
Marshall will allow their use ;
• Promoting the use of larger storage containers and
reduced collection frequency ; and
• Encouraging " Best Practices" training for drivers - Driver
behavior is one of the single most important factors
affecting noise generation .
Time of Collection
Section 15 . 421 of the City' s Municipal Code states that , " No
collector shall operate any vehicle for the purpose of collection of
solid waste or recyclable materials on any street designated by
the City as 'local residential" or 'local collector" between the hours
of 7:00 p. m. and 7: 00 a . m. (the "Nighttime Hours ') " . 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 .
19 Report and Recommendations of the Noise Review Board on
Reducing Nighttime Noise from Garbage and Recycling Collection ;
IZ3 September 8 , 2005 , City of Portland Noise Review Board Subcommittee
on Garbage Collection .
Section 2 - 16
within 200 feet of a residential area ) . The City' s municipal code Review of Trash
does not place any limits on the time of commercial collection . Collection
Vehicle Maintenance
Effective vehicle maintenance can also reduce noise . Assuring Impacts
that vehicles are well built , tight-fitting and well maintained will
help reduce vehicle noise .
Options / Recommendations
✓ Establish noise standards that are to be met by all
haulers as a condition of their license and require
haulers to verify and report on compliance with those
standards. (see Appendix A for sample language) ;
✓ Require operate-at- idle technology on all new vehicles ;
require existing vehicles to be retrofitted ;
✓ Require natural gas vehicles if the necessary infrastructure
can be developed ;
✓ Require " Smart" back- up alarms ;
✓ Remove glass from the curbside recycling program ;
✓ Require various steps to be taken to reduce the noise
generated by the collection of commercial containers near
residential areas ( e . g . , treating containers , lid supports and
truck forks with sound deadening materials ; using plastic
lids or dumpsters ) ;
✓ Limit the time commercial collection activities can occur
within a specified distance of residential areas (see
Appendix A for sample contract language ) ;
✓ Require vehicles to be well maintained ; and
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or City- Wide
Contract for Services to reduce the number of trash
trucks on a typical residential street and vehicle miles
traveled:
Require operate-at-idle technology on
residential vehicles as a condition of the award
of the districts.
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 job in the country with a fatality rate approximately 10 IZ3
Section 2 - 17
Review of Trash times the national average . A University of Miami study found that
Collection the leading cause of on-the-job fatalities for refuse and recyclable
material collectors is impatient motorists who try to pass the
Impacts 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 . , districted collection ) ,
make the public more aware of collection vehicles and drivers
(e . g . , signage , lights ) and provide 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 .
Industry Safety Initiatives
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 . Allied Waste Industries , 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 . As a result of these and other actions Allied ' s
accident rate declined approximately 20 percent in each of the first
three years following implementation and driver feedback has
been very positive .
Slow Down to Get Around Safety Campaign
Jurisdictions throughout the country have adopted the "Slow Down
to get Around " safety campaign to enhance the visibility of the
collection vehicles and have dramatically reduced rear-ending
accidents . 20 The program is designed to raise safety awareness
when passing utility , waste and service vehicles . The aim is to
encourage drivers to use the same amount of caution as when
passing a school bus , emergency vehicle or road construction
crew .
Fully Automated Vehicles
The use of fully-automated vehicles can greatly contribute to
worker safety . Automated collection eliminates the constant
manual lifting of cans and bags associated with manual collection
systems and is more efficient than semi-automated collection .
Automated collection uses wheeled carts that are lifted by a
mechanical arm on the side of the truck . The driver controls the
entire collection process without leaving the drivers seat.
Automated systems have been shown to result in decreased
workers compensation costs and allow experienced older (often
20 See http ://www. rumpke . com/Our_Commitment/Safety . asp for more
information on the Slow Down to get Around safety campaign .
Section 2 - 18
safer) workers and others who might not be able to effectively Review of Trash
function in a manual system to remain on the job . Collection
DriveCam
DriveCam is an exception based video event recorder that is Impacts
mounted on the windshield behind the rearview mirror and
captures sights and sounds inside and outside the vehicle .
Exceptional forces such as hard braking , swerving , collision , etc.
cause the recorder to save critical seconds of audio and video
footage immediately before and after the triggered event .
DriveCam reports that its video system and safety program has
reduced vehicle damages , workers' compensation and personal
injury costs by 30 to 90 percent in more than 70 , 000 commercial
and government vehicles around the world . Waste Connections ,
the nation ' s fourth largest collection company recently announced
that it has begun implementing the DriveCam solution nationally
across all major business lines in all four geographic regions .21
GPS systems can also be used to identify risky driver behavior
and other activities to improve safety and is becoming more widely
used in many parts of the solid waste industry .
Analysis
It is in the interest of the haulers to operate safely and it is
assumed that they are dedicating appropriate care and attention
to safety and safety related issues . The City may , however, be
able to enhance overall hauler safety by establishing certain
safety related requirements as a condition of the hauler license .
This could include requiring haulers not to overload vehicles and
assuring that all vehicles are specified with certain safety
equipment (e . g . , ABS breaking systems , strobe lights , reverse
motion sensors ) . Appendix B contains a list of various trash truck
safety devices that the City may wish to consider
encouraging/requiring the haulers to use . It is suggested that any
consideration of requiring certain vehicle specifications related to
safety be done in conjunction with the haulers to assure that any
such requirements are reasonable , appropriate and provide
meaningful benefit .
Options / Recommendations
✓ Require that haulers not load vehicles in excess of
manufacturer's recommendations or limitations
imposed by state or local vehicle weight restrictions.
Require haulers to implement an ongoing monitoring
program to assure compliance with that requirement
(see Appendix A for sample contract language);
21 http ://www. drivecam . com [Z5
Section 2 - 19
Review of Trash ✓ Work with haulers to develop appropriate and effective
Collection safety specifications for all new vehicles (e . g . , rear and
side strobe lights ) and a timeline for retrofitting existing
Impacts vehicles as a condition of the hauler license (see Appendix
A for sample contract language ) ;
✓ Require haulers to participate in City sponsored/initiated
" Slow Down to Get Around " safety campaign ; and
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or City- Wide
Contract for Services to minimize vehicle miles
traveled:
Require fully-automated vehicles ;
O Require vehicles to have appropriate optional
safety equipment; and
Establish safety incentives (e . g . , sliding scale profit
ratio based on safety record ) .
Other Vehicle Street Maintenance Impacts
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 3 below provides a comparison
of the average ESAL ' s for the various vehicle types noted22 to the
estimated ESAL's of residential trash and recycling trucks
operating in the City . The impacts are also presented in
Passenger Car Equivalents .
Table 3
COMPARISON OF TRASH AND OTHER VEHICLE IMPACTS
Vehicle Type Number of ESAL Factor Passenger
Axles (1 ) Car
General Classification AASHTO Classification Equivalents
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 0.2190 274
Buses Buses 2 or 3 0.6806 851
Residential Trash Trucks 3 1 .0230 17279
Long Haul Semi-Trailers Various Classifications 3 - 5+ 1 . 1264 1 ,408
22 Based on sample data reported by American Association of State
[Z5 Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO ) Guide for Design of
Pavement Structures .
Section 2 - 20
Review of Trash
As shown , residential trash trucks have an estimated impact Collection
equivalent to approximately 1 , 300 passenger cars . This is
comparable to the findings of other studies that we have Impacts
conducted as well as that reported by various independent third
parties (Appendix C ) . The impact of recycling trucks is much less
but still significant, and roughly equivalent to the impact of local
delivery trucks23 . One point to note is that the impact of large
delivery trucks (3 or more axles ) is approximately two-thirds that of
local delivery trucks (2-axle / 6 Tire Trucks ) based on the sample
population . This tends to support the positive benefit additional
axles can have on lowering overall vehicle impacts .
In reviewing this comparison it is important to note that the
impacts shown are based on a random sampling of vehicles .
There can be wide variability of impacts within the general vehicle
types noted . As an example a larger local delivery truck hauling
construction materials , heavy furniture or food supplies may have
a significantly greater impact than a smaller local delivery truck
hauling overnight packages .
Impact of Overloaded Vehicles
Background / Overview
The impact that a vehicle exerts on a section of pavement is
related to the vehicle' s axle weights . As axle weight increases the
impact increases at a rate much greater than proportionally . As
such , overweight vehicles exert a significantly greater pavement
maintenance impact than that same vehicle at or below its legal
weight , in addition to presenting a potential safety hazard .
Analysis
A trash truck operating at one ( 1 ) ton over a legal payload of 10
tons ( 10 % overweight) exerts an impact approximately 50 % more
than a vehicle loaded to its legal weight . That same vehicle
operating at two (2 ) tons (20 % overweight) over its legal payload
exerts an impact approximately 100 % higher than when loaded to
its legal weight24 .
The fact that the Larimer County Landfill , and certain other
neighboring landfills , do not have scales and charge haulers
based on volume presents a potential incentive for haulers to
maximize vehicle payloads . This may foster the overloading of
vehicles . While this potential may exist , it does not necessarily
23 Our projection of recycling truck impacts is based on the smaller non-
compacting vehicles that two of the haulers are currently using . It is
certainly conceivable that larger compacting vehicles could be used for
collection of single stream recyclables in the future with a much larger
associated impact .
24 Source : AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures . [Z5
Section 2 - 21
Review of Trash mean that haulers are overloading their vehicles , which can cause
Collection increased vehicle wear-and -tear. One of the haulers reported
having recently completed a route audit that included weighing
Impacts vehicles and modifying routes in an effort to ensure legal
payloads .
IZ3
Section 2 - 22
Review of Diversion Issues Section 3
This section provides an evaluation of the following diversion Review of
issues :
• Diversion Rate Metrics and Measurements ; Diversion Issues
• Current Policies , Practices and Programs ; and
• Current Recycling Efforts .
Evaluation of Diversion Rate Metrics and
Measurements
Background / Overview
Fort Collins is one of the leaders in recycling in the State of
Colorado . The City' s current diversion rate is estimated at 27 %
and it has adopted a diversion goal of 50 % by 2010 . The City has
undertaken a range of programs and policies in support of its
recycling efforts including a Pay-As-You -Throw ( rate structure )
ordinance and the requirement that licensed haulers provide
recycling services to residential accounts upon request . The City
completed a 5- Year Strategic Plan : Strategies to Reach 50%
Diversion from Landfill Disposal (Strategic Plan ) in 2006 . That
Plan evaluated a wide range of options to increase diversion
resulting in Phase 1 and Phase II Strategic Plan Staff
recommendations , which are provided in Appendix D .
While the City currently tracks an overall Citywide diversion rate , it
does not regularly track and report diversion by waste stream
( residential , commercial , roll -off) , program (e . g . , curbside
recycling ) or by licensed hauler.
Analysis
Diversion Calculation Limitations
An important component of the City' s efforts to increase diversion
is the availability of complete and accurate data to allow it to
accurately track tonnages diverted and disposed . There is ,
however , a limitation to the City' s ability to accurately calculate its
diversion rate . The Larimer County Landfill , and other neighboring
landfills used by the licensed haulers do not have scales . Tonnage
is estimated by multiplying the volume of the vehicle by a density
factor established by each licensed hauler . In recent Tonnage
Summary Reports the three licensed residential haulers reported
density factors of 500 , 750 and 900 pounds per cubic yard .
Changes to those estimates would materially impact the
calculated disposal tonnages and the City' s calculated diversion
rate . The lack of scales at the landfills places a relatively high
degree of uncertainty on the City' s disposal data and the
associated calculated diversion rates . IZ3
Section 3 - 1
Review of In addition to the limitations associated with the lack of actual
disposal weight data , the City' s diversion rate calculation does not
Diversion Issues account for processing residue25 manufacturer "out-throws" 26 , or
distinguish between recovered material that is processed as
manufacturing feed stock and material that is used as landfill
alternative daily cover27 . While the City's methods for calculating
diversion are not unreasonable we believe it would benefit from
further tracking and reporting of material diverted from the waste
stream to provide it with a more complete understanding of the
final disposition of that material .
Additional Data Needs
Accurate data is an important component of the City's efforts to
track, effectively plan for and achieve additional cost effective
diversion . While the licensed haulers are required to provide
certain data , that data is not sufficient to provide the City with the
ability to effectively evaluate individual hauler or program
performance . For the City to most effectively manage its solid
waste collection system additional accurate information needs to
be provided by the haulers .
The City should also review the information the haulers are
currently providing and confirm that it is consistent with the license
requirements . Our review raised a number of questions / concerns
related to the accuracy of the data provided :
• One hauler reported the same volume of Solid Waste
Collected as Recycled Materials Collected ; and
• One hauler reported that recycling figures for wood waste ,
Construction and Demolition (C& D ) material and metal
scrap were " Unavailable" .
Also , it was not clear if reported Construction & Demolition , Yard
and Wood Wastes Recycled reflect the total volume delivered to a
processing facility or if those figures are adjusted for portions of
those loads that are not recovered . If they are not adjusted for
non - recoverable portions then they should be .
Expanded Diversion Goals / Targets
In addition to requiring additional data from the haulers to support
effective solid waste management planning we suggest that the
City establish specific diversion targets for each program and
25 Processing residue is material that is collected through a recycling
program but is removed during processing and includes contaminants
and fines . Processing residue from single stream recycling programs can
often exceed 10% of incoming material .
26 Contaminants to paper are known as out-throws and prohibitive
materials . Out-throws are usually paper of a different type , a small
2percentage of which may be acceptable .
Material used in place of dirt to cover landfilled material at the end of
each day.
Section 3 - 2
waste stream . These targets should be based on an objective Review of
analysis of the associated diversion potential . Progress should Diversion Issues
then be tracked against those specific targets .
Options / Recommendations
✓ Track and report the following diversion rates:
Overall for the City;
By waste stream (residential, commercial, roll-
ofo;
By program type (e. g. , residential curbside
recycling program, yard waste program) ;
01 By account, by program (e. g. , the average
pounds per week of curbside recyclables
collected per solid waste account) ;
By individual licensed hauler by program and
waste stream as a percentage of the material
that they collect (control); and
City disposal and diversion data in support of its
Action Plan for Sustainability to reduce or divert
trash production by 50 percent by 2010 ( i . e . , how
much of the waste City municipal operations
generate is diverted ) .
In support of the above recommendations we further recommend
that the licensed haulers be required to : 28
✓ Report the number of residential solid waste accounts
by service level (e. g., 30-, 60-, 90-gallon)29;
✓ Report the number of commercial accounts by service
level and collection frequency for both solid waste and
recyclab/es (service volume%ollection frequency
matrix);
✓ Provide calculated curbside recycling and yard waste
diversion rates on a pounds per residential solid waste
account per week basis;
✓ Provide calculated diversion rates for the material they
control for each waste stream as part of their regular
reporting requirements;
✓ Provide an accounting of total reported disposal and
diverted volume/tonnage by individual facility (e. g. ,
28 The recommended information should be readily available or easily
calculated based on available data .
29 The City may also wish to obtain the total number of HOA accounts
and HOA contract accounts and the specific HOAs serviced to enable it
to more effectively analyze trash truck street maintenance impacts . This
information may also be necessary if the City decides to implement a [Z5
Districted Collection System or City-Wide Contract for Services .
Section 3 - 3
Review of Larimer County Landfill, North Weld Landfill, Earth
Cycle etc.) ;
Diversion Issues ✓ Include historical data for each required data set as
part of the regular reporting process so that trends
can be tracked and are clear to all parties;
✓ Review reporting forms to confirm that haulers are
providing required information in a complete and
accurate form. Revise / reinforce required reporting
requirements if necessary;
✓ Require that haulers provide complete and accurate
data as a condition of their license. Provide the City
with the right to audit required information to verify its
accuracy and/or require the haulers to have their data
audited by an approved independent third party on
periodic basis to verify its accuracy;
✓ Establish specific diversion targets for each program and
waste stream based on an objective analysis of the
available potential and track progress against those
targets ; and
✓ Encourage the County to install scales at the Larimer
County Landfill .
Evaluation of Current Policies , Practices , and
Programs
Background / Overview
Ordinances
The City has established the following ordinances and incentive
programs in support of increased diversion :
Recycling Ordinance - Requires haulers to provide curbside
recycling at no extra charge upon customer' s request . The
collection of materials from multi -family and/or commercial
customers is not required if the collector determines that there is
not sufficient space available to allow the placement of recycling
containers .
Pay-As-You -Throw ( PAYT ) Ordinance — Requires haulers to
provide a variable rate structure (volume- based or pay-as-you -
throw ) for all single and two-family residences , including those
participating in group trash service accounts such as HOAs . Trash
companies may elect to charge a small monthly service charge , in
addition to the volume charges , to cover their fixed operational
costs .
E -Waste Ordinance - Prohibits disposal of electronic equipment
(as defined by the State of Colorado Hazardous Waste
[Z5 Regulations 1007-3 , Section 260 . 10 ) in the waste stream .
Section 3 - 4
Enclosure Ordinance - Requires recycling areas to be built along Review of
with trash enclosures for all new commercial or multi-family Diversion Issues
housing construction ) .
Current Recycling Programs
Residents of the City currently have access to the following
recycling programs and services :
Single stream curbside recycling (without wheeled
containers ) ;
• Limited yard waste collection ( provided by one of the
licensed haulers at an additional cost ) ;
• Drop-off recycling center; and
• Miscellaneous third - party programs (e . g . , a-waste
recycling ) .
Analysis
While the City has in place some key policy and program
components in support of its efforts to increase diversion , it needs
to more actively regulate solid waste management activities in the
City if it is to significantly increase diversion . This holds true
regardless of the collection system structure (e . g . , open
competition , districted collection , etc . ) .
Recycling Ordinance — The City's recycling ordinance establishes
a good framework for the provision of recycling services by the
licensed haulers . However, without accompanying hauler
performance standards ( i . e . , minimum diversion rates ) it is unlikely
that the City will come close to realizing the diversion potential that
exists in either the residential or commercial waste streams .
PAYT Ordinance — PAYT systems have been shown to be one of
the most effective steps a jurisdiction can take to increase
recycling . The Strategic Plan that the City has developed includes
Phase 1 Strategies . Those strategies included amending the
City' s residential PAYT Ordinance so that " rate design " further
enhances waste reduction efforts . It was also recommended that
the City' s PAYT Ordinance be amended to include all commercial
customers , require a recycling fee embedded in the rates and
charge volume- based pricing . We support both of these efforts .
We suggest, however, that any changes to the commercial rate
structure also consider the potential for collection frequency based
incentives . Charging commercial accounts based purely on
volume without consideration for frequency (e . g . , charging the
same for a 4-yard container one-time per week as a 1 -yard
container four-times per week) provides no incentive for accounts
to reduce collection frequency . Increasing storage volume and
decreasing collection frequency would result in reduced vehicle
miles traveled and reduced trash collection impacts . [Z5
Section 3 - 5
Review of E-Waste Ordinance — The City has found that the private sector
has the capacity to meet the public' s demand for reuse and
Diversion Issues recycling opportunities for electronic equipment. At least two of
Fort Collins's trash haulers have also reported that they plan to
offer a special recycling collection program for customers' E-
waste . The City should support these efforts and/or consider
alternative means for providing convenient E-waste collection
opportunities for the City' s residents . One option is to integrate E-
Waste (and potentially Universal Waste ( U -Waste )30 and
Household Hazardous Waste collection ) into a bulky waste
collection program . On -call bulky waste programs that include E-
waste collection and diversion requirements are becoming
relatively common in parts of Northern California .
Enclosure Ordinance — The City' s Enclosure Ordinance appears
to adequately address new development requiring the provision of
"adequate space for the collection and storage of refuse and
recyclable materials . " The related Trash and Recycling Enclosures
Design Considerations recommend that the amount of space
provided for the collection and storage of recyclable materials be
at least as large as the amount of space provided for the collection
and storage of refuse materials .
The Ordinance pertains to all new commercial and multi -family
structures and all existing commercial and multi-family structures
proposed to be enlarged by more than 25 percent or where a
change of use is proposed . What it does not cover are existing
multi-family and commercial properties . In many cases these
properties have limited space available for recycling containers
which we understand is a major issue and one that needs to be
addressed as part of the City' s efforts to expand commercial
recycling . Finding an effective approach for providing diversion
opportunities for these and all commercial accounts should be a
priority .
Options / Recommendations
Recycling Ordinance
✓ Establish minimum diversion requirements for the
licensed haulers for the material streams that they
control, either as part of the Recycling Ordinance or as
a condition of the license or a district agreement (e.g.,
Require residential haulers to divert a minimum
average of 10 pounds of curbside recyclables per solid
waste account per week); and
✓ Establish a compensation system that would reward
haulers for achieving diversion in excess of the required
30 Universal wastes are hazardous wastes that contain mercury, lead ,
cadmium , copper and other substances . Examples of these wastes are
batteries , fluorescent tubes , and some electronic devices .
Section 3 - 6
minimum diversion level along with penalties for failing to Review of
achieve the required minimum ) . Diversion Issues
PAYT Ordinance - Residential
✓ Amend the City's residential PAYT Ordinance so that
"rate design " further enhances waste reduction efforts
per the Strategic Plan Phase 1 staff recommendation;
✓ Roll-out any changes to the residential PAYT program
in conjunction with comprehensive strategy to
increase residential recycling (e. g., universal roll-out
of City-owned single stream curbside recycling
containers, universal roll-out of residential yard waste
(organics) program with City-owned yard waste
containers) ; and
✓ Provide any future residential yard waste or organics
program as part of a bundled residential rate with no
additional cost to participate in that service .
PAYT Ordinance - Commercial
✓ Amend the City' s PAYT ordinance to include all
commercial customers ; require recycling fees to be
embedded in rates and charge volume- based pricing per
the Strategic Plan Phase 1 staff recommendation ;
✓ Roll -out any commercial PAYT system in conjunction with
comprehensive strategy to increase commercial recycling
(e . g . , establishing minimum commercial diversion rates ;
contract for a commercial recycling , provide commercial
organics program at reduced rate ) ; and
✓ Consider rate design that provides not only for volume
based incentives but also frequency premiums to
encourage increased storage volume and decreased
service frequency to reduce vehicle miles traveled and
other trash collection impacts .
E-waste Ordinance
Evaluate residential hauler proposed E -waste collection programs
and determine if they will provide an effective means for capturing
these materials . If so , support those efforts and consider requiring
all residential haulers to provide comparable services . If not ,
consider requiring provisions for an effective residential E-waste
collection ( potentially as part of bulky waste collection service ) as
a condition of the license or districted collection agreement , or as
a separate contracted service with fee embedded in the rates .
Evaluation of Current Recycling Efforts
Background / Overview
City staff has recommended the following five ( 5 ) Strategic Plan
Phase 1 Strategies : [Z5
Section 3 - 7
Review of • Increase / enhance the City' s education program ( in one-
year increments ) regarding specific measures to be initially
Diversion Issues implemented ;
• Provide customers , upon request to their trash haulers ,
with optional curbside yard waste collection services on a
weekly basis . This measure will require that yard waste
does not cost more than equivalent costs for trash by
volume ( consistent with PAYT rates ) ;
• Create a refundable construction & demolition ( C & D )
deposit system based on square footage of project (or
comparable criterion ) , with total deposit to be refunded
upon certification that the appropriate level of recycling
was accomplished ;
• Amend the City' s PAYT ordinance to include all
commercial customers ; require recycling fee to be
embedded in rates and charge volume- based pricing ; and
• Amend the City' s PAYT residential trash rates ordinance
so that " rate design " further enhances waste reduction
effort .
Our review of opportunities for the City to increase diversion was
not intended to be a comprehensive review of all options and
alternatives . Instead we focused our efforts on building upon the
significant and thoughtful analysis that the City has already
conducted as presented in the Strategic Plan and more
specifically the Phase 1 Strategies .
Analysis
While we support the general recommendations presented in the
City' s Strategic Plan and the five (5 ) Phase 1 Strategies the City
needs to take more aggressive steps if it wishes to significantly
increase diversion . This is particularly true with respect to the
haulers roles and responsibilities related to increased diversion
given that they control the majority of the waste being currently
disposed .
Additional Diversion Potential
Appendix E contains waste composition data based on the recent
Larimer County waste composition study . Assuming this
information reasonably represents the City' s waste stream it is
clear that significant additional diversion potential exists . As
reported in Table E -2 :
• 19 . 1 % of the residential waste stream consists of mixed
recyclable paper, newspaper and cardboard that could be
recovered through the existing curbside recycling program
while 25 . 4 % consists of food waste ( 17 . 4 % ) and yard
waste (8 . 0 % ) that could be recovered through a new
residential organics program , for a total of 44 . 5 % ; and
Section 3 - 8
• 21 . 3 % of the commercial waste stream consists of mixed Review of
recyclable paper, newspaper and cardboard while 22 . 2 % Diversion Issues
consists of food waste ( 15 . 9 % ) and yard waste (6 . 3 % ) , for
a total of 43 . 5 % .
Licensed Hauler Diversion Rates
Table 4 below provides a summary of 2006 disposal tonnage by
waste stream for the licensed haulers and the total tons diverted .
Table 4
LICENSED HAULER DISPOSAL AND DIVERSION DATA
2006
Method of Collection
Cubic Yds Tons % of Total
Compacted Residential 131 , 619 49 , 357 23 %
Compacted Commercial 208 , 756 78 , 284 37 %
Roll -off Compacted 1101178 411317 20 %
Roll -off Loose 1821764 41 , 122 20 %
Total Disposed 633 , 317 210 , 079 100%
Total Recycled 165120
Total Hauler Controlled 2267199
Hauler Controlled Diversion Rate 7 . 1 %
As shown , the associated diversion rate for the total material
controlled by the haulers ( Hauler Controlled Diversion Rate ) was
calculated at 7 . 1 % . Analysis of the hauler Tonnage Summary
Reports for January through June 2007 resulted in a calculated
hauler controlled diversion rate of 7 . 2 % , which is generally
consistent with the 7 . 1 % shown in Table 4 . 31 On an individual
waste stream basis the licensed haulers realized a diversion rate
of 13 . 6 % for the residential waste stream ( 13 . 3 % curbside
recycling program + 0 . 3 % Gallegos yard waste program ) , 2 . 3 % for
the commercial waste stream ( Compacted Commercial + Roll-off
Compacted) , and 7 . 3 % for the uncompacted waste stream (Roll-
off Loose ) .
As a point of comparison we offer the South Bayside Waste
Management Agency ( SBWMA) in San Mateo County California
( San Francisco Bay Area ) which has what we consider to be an
effective mix of residential and commercial programs and
31 It should be noted that one hauler reported " Unavailable" for certain
diversion information which may mean that actual diversion is higher
than calculated . If such is the case , however, it supports the need for
complete and accurate data to allow the City to effectively analyze , plan IZ5
for and realize available cost effective diversion .
Section 3 - 9
Review of supporting contractual requirements and rate incentives 32 . The
SBWMA' s franchised hauler has averaged a residential hauler
Diversion Issues controlled diversion rate of 46% through its weekly curbside
recycling (two-sort) and yard waste programs for the five year
period ending in 2005 . The hauler controlled commercial diversion
rate has averaged 20% over that same time period . The combined
hauler controlled residential and commercial diversion rate has
averaged 32 % . While the SBWMA has more comprehensive
diversion programs than the City it is by no means what we
consider to be state-of-the-art. The SBMWA is aggressively
pursuing additional diversion opportunities including single stream
recycling and adding food waste to its residential organics
collection program .
The fact that 35% of the City' s waste stream is estimated to be
Commercial Compacted with an additional 17 % Roll-off
Compacted (52 % combined total ) points out the need for the
development of an effective plan for commercial diversion . This is
particularly necessary given that it is estimated that less than 3 %
of the commercial waste controlled by the haulers is currently
diverted .
The Roll-off Loose waste stream accounts for approximately one-
quarter of the City' s waste stream . As reported above , the
diversion rate for this waste stream is estimated at 7 . 3 % .
Uncompacted roll -off loads as well as self haul loads are generally
highly recoverable . From a total tonnage and recoverability
standpoint these waste streams may offer the greatest single
opportunity for the City to cost effectively increase diversion ,
provided there is the necessary processing capacity and markets
for recovered materials .
General Findings
If the City is to significantly increase diversion , the licensed
haulers will need to significantly increase the amount of
material they divert and/or other diversion options need to
be developed (e . g . , residential and commercial recycling
32 The SBWMA is comprised of 13 member agencies with approximately
90 , 000 residential accounts and 10 , 000 commercial accounts . It is
currently in the process of contracting for a new franchise that will
include single stream recycling and the addition of food waste to the
residential yard waste program . Residential customers are provided with
weekly residential curbside and yard waste collection services at no
additional charge . Commercial customers are also provided with
recycling services at no additional charge by the franchised hauler. Other
recyclers have the right to pay for or collect recyclables for free .
Commercial organic waste collection is provided at a reduced rate . While
the rates and rate structures for the 11 member agencies vary , the
residential rates are generally volume based with the cost of a second
container two times that of the first.
Section 3 - 10
contracts ; comprehensive post-collection mixed waste Review of
iversi
processing capacity ) ; D on Issues
• Recycling is a net cost to the haulers and there is currently
no financial incentive ( or regulatory requirement) for the
haulers to aggressively pursue diversion . The pursuit of
aggressive diversion by any given hauler may put it at a
competitive disadvantage relative to any other hauler who
is not putting forth a similar level of effort and realizing
similar results ;
• Rates may need to be increased to significantly increase
diversion ;
• Local landfill costs are relatively low compared to many
areas of the country , which impacts the cost effectiveness
of recycling . The Larimer County Landfill currently charges
$ 5 . 81 per cubic yard for compacted waste . This is
equivalent to between $ 11 . 62 and $23 . 24 per ton for
densities of 1 , 000 and 500 pounds per cubic year
respectively ;
• Recovery of source separated materials from commercial
accounts may be limited by space constraints which
preclude placing additional recycling containers onsite ; and
• The County Landfill provides a good centralized location
for the development of C & D , composting and/or other
processing capacity in support of the City' s efforts to
increase diversion .
Options / Recommendations
The Strategic Plan provides a good framework for the City' s
efforts to increase diversion . As a next step we suggest that the
City focus on further refining its Strategic Plan Strategies to divert
material from the residential , commercial and uncompacted waste
streams ( Roll -off Loose ) . That effort should include supporting
available processing capacity and markets for recoverable
materials . We offer the following suggestions in support of that
effort .
Residential Waste Stream
✓ Establish minimum curbside recycling program
diversion requirements for the haulers (e. g. , 10 pounds
per solid waste account per week) as a condition of
the residential license;
✓ Establish a compensation system that would award
haulers for achieving diversion in excess of the required
minimum diversion level along with penalties for failing to
achieve the required minimum (see Appendix A for sample
language ) ; [Z5
Section 3 - 11
Review of ✓ If districted collection is pursued , have the haulers propose
minimum diversion levels they would be willing to
Diversion Issues guarantee ( i . e . , Ibs/solid waste account/week ) . Consider
the level of guarantee in determining the award of the
district . Establish a system that would award haulers for
achieving diversion in excess of their proposed minimum
diversion level along with penalties for failing to achieve
the proposed minimum ;
✓ Provide universal roll-out of City owned single stream
recycling containers;
✓ Provide universal ( not optional ) roll -out of weekly yard
waste services with City owned containers (with the ability
to expand to food waste if/when processing capacity is
available ) ;
✓ Revise residential PAYT rate structure per the
Strategic Plan Phase 1 staff recommendation. Provide
recycling and yard waste services as part of a
"bundled" residential rate (i. e. , no additional cost for
recycling and yard waste service) ;
✓ Support the development/viability of private sector
composting capacity ( e . g . , Earth Cycle ) and/ or pursue the
development of public sector ( e . g . , City and Larimer
County ) or public / private partnership for the development
of residential and commercial organics processing
capacity ; and
✓ Develop public or private sector capacity for food waste
composting .
Commercial Waste Stream
✓ Require licensed haulers to divert a minimum amount of
the material they control as a condition of their license ;
✓ Establish a commercial recycling contract with the cost
embedded in the commercial rate structure ( i . e . , no
additional cost for recycling ) . Charge haulers a " recycling
fee" to pay for the commercial recycling contract cost
( unless they can demonstrate that they have achieved a
required minimum level of diversion ) ;
✓ Explore the need/potential for some level of mixed
commercial waste recovery capacity ( i . e . , Dirty MRF with
selective routing ) if space constraints preclude effective
source separation programs ;
✓ Develop a commercial food waste collection program ; and
✓ Develop public or private sector capacity for food waste
composting .
Section 3 - 12
Uncompacted Roll -Off Review of
✓ Create refundable C& D deposit system per the Phase 1 Diversion Issues
Strategic Plan staff recommendation ;
✓ Support the development of private sector C & D processing
capacity or pursue the development of public sector (e . g . ,
City and Larimer County) or public / private partnership for
the development of necessary C& D processing capacity ;
and
✓ Consider establishing specific C& D licensing standards
with minimum diversion requirements .
Coordinating Diversion and Sustainability Planning
The City' s RFP requested that the consultant "Consider applying
concepts from Industrial Ecology ( i . e . , Materials Flow Analysis ) to
pull together data in context of achieving community goals and
optimizing efficiencies . " Industrial Ecology is the shifting of
industrial processes from linear (open loop ) systems , in which
resource and capital investments move through the system to
become waste , to a closed loop system where wastes become
inputs for new processes . Industrial Ecology draws on the fact
that natural systems do not have waste in them and that we
should model our systems after natural ones if we want them to be
sustainabless
The concept of Industrial Ecology is similar to the concept of Zero
Waste that is becoming the driving force behind solid waste
management planning in many progressive jurisdictions .
Zero Waste can be defined as :
• Zero Waste of Energy , Materials and Human Resources ;
• Zero Solid Waste ;
Zero Hazardous Waste ;
• Zero Emissions to Air, Water or Soil ;
• Zero Waste in Production Activities ;
• Zero Waste in Product Life Cycle ; and
• Zero Toxics .
Zero Waste , like Industrial Ecology supports the development of a
more sustainable closed loop solid waste management system in
which waste streams from one process become raw products for
other. While it is beyond the scope of this engagement to
undertake a mass balance of the City' s solid waste stream , we
support the integration of Industrial Ecology and Zero Waste
planning concepts into the City' s overall sustainability planning
efforts .
ss Wikipedia
5
Section 3 - 13
Review of
Diversion Issues
[Z5
Section 3 - 14
Review of Collection System Section 4
Structures Review of
Collection System Structure Alternatives Collection
Background / Overview System
The City' s residential collection system is an open competition Structures
system in which licensed haulers compete for accounts . While the
haulers are regulated through the City' s licensing process ,
Municipal Code requirements and applicable ordinances ( i . e . ,
Pay-As-You -Throw and Recycling Ordinances ) , that regulation is
limited . There are few regulatory requirements specific to
minimizing the impact of trash collection services with respect to
air quality, noise , and the cost of street wear or improving
neighborhood aesthetics and safety . In addition , while haulers
must offer recycling services to residents and businesses , there
are no associated diversion levels that the haulers must achieve
as a condition of their license .
Alternatives Considered
Our review of Collection System Structures considered the
following alternatives :
1 . Current Open Competition System without any Changes
This option would maintain the current open competition
system as regulated without any changes .
2 . Open Competition System with Increased Licensing
Requirements
This option would maintain the current open competition
system however additional licensing requirements would be
established in support of the City' s objectives to reduce trash
collection service impacts and increased diversion . It should
be noted that the City currently has some of the most
aggressive licensing requirements in the State . There are ,
however, a number of additional hauler requirements that the
City could establish to reduce trash collection service impacts
and increase diversion as discussed elsewhere in this report .
These include :
• Additional hauler reporting requirements ;
• Vehicle emission standards ;
Vehicle cleaning and painting requirements ;
• Noise standards and noise reducing vehicle and
container specifications ;
• Vehicle safety specifications ; [Z5
Section 4 - 1
Review of Required management of overloaded vehicles ; and
Collection Establishing minimum hauler diversion requirements .
System 3 . Districted Collection System
Y This option would require that the City be divided into two or
Structures more geographic districts . A competitive procurement process
would then be undertaken through the issuance of an RFP
( Request for Proposals ) . The City would then award a contract
to a single hauler to provide service within each district .
Specific terms and conditions related to reducing vehicle
impacts , increasing diversion and other desired terms and
conditions would be specified in the contract . 3a
To effectively district it will be necessary for the City to
determine which residential accounts are to be included (e . g . ,
single family , multi -family , HOAs ) and obtain accurate account
information by geographic region of the City .
4 . City-Wide Contract for Services
This option is similar to Option 3 above . However, rather than
break the City up into districts , a City-wide contract would be
awarded to a single hauler.
This option could potentially be incorporated into a hybrid
approach with either a districted or open competition system
for trash collection services and a City-wide contract for
recycling services . In the case of the open competition system ,
however, this hybrid approach may result in different collection
days for trash and recycling services for many accounts . We
are not aware of any jurisdictions that have such a system .
Alternatively the City could maintain the open competition
system but specify the day that service is to be provided in the
various areas of the City . This would provide for same day
trash and recycling service , but require the haulers to
reconfigure their collection routes to be consistent with the
specified service days .
Analysis of Collection System Structure Alternatives
An analysis of each the four collection system options is provided
below . Appendix F provides a matrix that compares these options
with respect to criteria developed with City staff.
34 The contract could be issued with the RFP . Haulers could then be
required to state any exceptions to the proposed contract terms and
conditions and offer acceptable replacement language as part of their
proposal . Any subsequent contract negotiations could then be limited to
the stated exceptions .
Section 4 - 2
Review of
Current Open Competition System without any Changes Collection
Benefits of Current Open Competition System
Major benefits of maintaining the current open competition system System
as regulated include the freedom residents have to choose a Structures
hauler and the relatively limited City administrative requirements .
In addition , there would be no impact on the existing haulers .
Unlike a districted or contracted system the City does not have to
manage a procurement process or regulate rates , and residents
would not be required to transition to a new hauler. Also , the City
is not involved in the billing process . Under a districted system the
City may need to take over the billing function if it wants to
establish a uniform city-wide rate .
Issues / Concerns of Current Open Competition System
One of the major issues related to an open competition system is
the increased impacts that result from multiple vehicles providing
collection services in the same area . In addition , while the limited
administrative requirements of an open competition system can be
considered a benefit on one hand , it also presents a major
constraint . As discussed above , under the current open
competition system there are few regulatory requirements related
to minimizing trash collection service impacts . Also , while haulers
must offer recycling services to residents and businesses , there
are no associated diversion levels that the haulers must achieve
as a condition of their license .
Open Competition System with Increased Licensing
Requirements
Benefits of Increased Licensing Requirements
Maintaining the existing open competition system with increased
licensing requirements would provide many of the same benefits
as the current open competition system , while providing the City
with greater control over trash collection services . Decreased
trash collection service impacts and increased diversion would
both be potential benefits that could be realized .
Issues / Concerns of Increased Licensing Requirements
While increased licensing requirements would allow the City to
take certain actions to reduce trash collection service impacts and
increase diversion , it does not reduce the number of trash
collection vehicles operating in any given area of the City. As
such , the City would not realize the associated reduction in trash
collection service impacts that would result from a districted
collection system or a city-wide contract for services . Also , while
the City could establish certain additional licensing requirements
to reduce trash collection service impacts and increase diversion ,
certain options that would be available under a districted or City [Z5
-
Section 4 - 3
Review of wide collection system are not possible or may not be as easily
Collection implemented .
Districted Collection
System Benefits of Districted Collection
Structures During our discussions with the haulers , the question was raised
as to what districting could accomplish that could not be
accomplished through the existing open competition system . The
answer is that a districted collection system provides :
A means for reducing overall trash collection impacts largely in
relationship to the reduction in the number of vehicles and vehicle
miles traveled .
All other factors the same, districted collection would be
expected to reduce vehicle emissions, trash truck noise
and pavement maintenance impacts, increase safety and
improve neighborhood aesthetics.
The opportunity to take other specific actions to decrease
residential trash collection impacts that are not possible or may
not be as easily implemented under an open competition system .
As an example, the City could require certain types of
vehicles or vehicle specifications that would support its
goal of reducing trash collection service impacts as a
condition of a hauler being awarded a district (e. g. ,
vehicles that comply with EPA 2010 emission standards
with operate-at-idle technology) . All haulers would be able
to develop their proposals based on the specified
requirements knowing that they could capitalize their
investment over the term of the agreement (e . g. , 7-years)
with a guaranteed revenue base . While similar
requirements could be placed on an open competition
system it is likely to be a more difficult and contentious
process given the lack of a guaranteed contract term and
revenue base .
A more effective structure for establishing minimum diversion
requirements and/or incentives for haulers to increase diversion .
The City could establish diversion as a major criterion for
award of the districts and select a hauler in part based on
their willingness to guarantee a higher diversion rate.
Hauler compensation could then be tied to the actual
diversion level achieved relative to the guarantee (i. e . ,
additional compensation for exceeding, and penalties for
failing to achieve the guarantee) .
The potential for lower rates for the City' s residents .
Districted collection would result in more efficient collection
services and should reduce collection costs. The cities of
Section 4 - 4
Review of
Lafayette and Superior, which both recently shifted from an Collection
open competition residential collection system to a
contracted system, reported significant reductions in rates. System
Issues / Concerns of Districted Collection Structures
While a districted collection system offers potential advantages
over an open competition system it is not the " be all and end all "
solution . For example , there are various options that the City can
undertake to reduce certain trash truck impacts regardless of the
collection system structure . Some of these options may have a
greater impact than that which might be realized through districted
collection alone . Also , the loss of "customer choice" is a very real
and potentially significant downside of a districted collection
system . In addition , the City may need to take over customer
billing to allow it to implement a uniform rate city-wide .
Districted collection also presents a significant challenge (as well
as opportunity ) for the existing haulers . Under a process in which
haulers compete for the right to provide service within a district
( i . e . , a competitive procurement ) it is likely that there will be
winners and losers . Some haulers may acquire a larger market
share while others are likely to lose some or their entire residential
market share .
Should the City decide to move forward with a districted collection
system , it should be prepared for opposition from both haulers and
some residents . A staff member of jurisdiction in Colorado that
recently switched from open competition system to a contract with
a single hauler reported that it was a very difficult process for staff
and the city council . There were harsh accusations , threats of
legal action and many calls from angry residents . That same staff
member also stated that once the system had been changed they
received calls from some of the same people that had been
opposed to the change that were now in support of the new
system . Should the City decide to move forward with a districted
collection system we recommend that staff speak with
representatives of other jurisdictions that have switched from an
open competition to a contracted system to solicit their insights
and recommendations .
Potential Options to Protect Existing Haulers
City staff provided the following guidelines related to steps that
might be taken as part of a districted collection system
procurement process to protect the interests of the existing
haulers :
• The City cannot limit the pool of potential proposers . It can
however , require that a proposer be a licensed hauler,
although haulers not currently licensed would have to be [Z5
Section 4 - 5
Review of given the opportunity to apply for and receive a license if
Collection they qualified ;
• The City can structure the process to limited the number of
System districts that can be awarded to a single hauler; and
Structures The City can give some level of preference to local
haulers .
City-Wide Contract for Services
Benefits of City-Wide Contract for Services
The benefits of an exclusive city-wide contract are similar to a
districted collection system . In addition , administrative
requirements are specific to one-hauler rather than multiple
haulers and it is not necessary for the City to control the billing
process to provide a uniform city-wide rate .
Issues / Concerns of City-Wide Contract for Services
The issues/concerns of a city-wide contract are also similar to a
districted system . In addition , limiting services to only one hauler
could result in reduced competition on a long term basis , if
existing haulers go out of business or decide not to compete for
the contract in the future .
Options / Recommendations
✓ Implement a Districted Collection System or City- Wide
Contract for Services to reduce the overall impacts
associated with residential trash collection services
and support a more effective system for increasing
diversion from the residential waste stream.
This recommendation is based entirely on the consideration of the
best collection system structure to meet the City' s stated project
objectives of:
• Reducing trash collection service impacts ; and
• Increasing diversion .
The recommendation does not consider other factors , including
the impact on haulers and the associated loss of the ability of
customers to choose their hauler.
Survey of Collection System Structures
State of Colorado
Trash Collection
The Colorado Municipal League and Colorado Recycles
conducted a survey involving 271 jurisdictions in the State in 2006
to determine the methods used to provide trash collection in their
communities . The survey focused on residential trash services
and was not designed to gather data about commercial , industrial
Section 4 - 6
Review of
or other services . Of the 222 jurisdictions that responded , 47 Collection
(21 % ) reported that they provide municipal trash service and 44
(20 % ) reported that they provide service through contracts with System
one or more private trash haulers . The majority , 131 (59% ) of Y
jurisdictions that responded ( including the City of Fort Collins ) , Structures
reported that they rely on the private market place to bring
residents and trash haulers together in some type of contractual
arrangement. In this regard the City's current open competition
system is similar to that of most other jurisdictions in the State .
The results of the survey are summarized in Table 5 below .
Appendix G includes more detailed trash collection survey results .
Table 5
TRASH SERVICES SURVEY SUMMARY RESULTS
Percent of Percent of
Number of Percent of All Percent of Population of
Category of Response Municipalities Municipalities Responding Population All Population of
Served Responding
Responding in Survey Municipalities Municipalities Municipalities
in Survey
Trash Service is a Municipal 47 17% 21 % 19076 ,484 32 % 33%
Service
Trash Service is a Municipal 44 16% 20 % 126 , 133 4% 4%
Service Through Contract
Trash Service is Provided 131 48% 59% 25104 , 955 62% 64%
Through Private Contracts
Subtotal 222 82% 100% 35307,572 98% 100%
Did not Respond 49 18% 655740 2%
Total 271 100% 393735312 100%
Based on analysis of the survey results it was reported that :
" . . . there is no observable predictor as to which communities are
likely to fall into any one of the three categories. There are very
large cities, medium size cities and very small cities represented
in each category. Moreover, there is no observable geographic
preference for one category over another. Communities that
provide contract service or rely on private entities to arrange the
service exist either side-by-side or in close driving proximity to
cities that provide municipal service. '° 35
Since that survey was conducted we understand that the following
jurisdictions have or are planning to switch to a contract with a
single hauler for residential trash collection services :
• Firestone
35 www . coloradocurbside . com/discussion papers . collection . html [Z5
Section 4 - 7
Review of • Fruita
Collection ' Georgetown
• Lafayette
System 0 Minturn
Structures ' Ouray
Superior
Recycling Survey
The survey also gathered information about the methods used by
jurisdictions to provide residential curbside and drop-off recycling
services . The results of the survey are summarized in Table 6
below .
Table 6
RECYCLING SERVICES SURVEY SUMMARY RESULTS
of % Population of
# of % of All % Population of
Category of Response Municipalities Municipalities in Municipalities Population All Municipalities Municipalities
Responding Survey With Curbside Served in Survey with Curbside
Service Service
Curbside Recycling Service is a 8 3% 8% 840,540 25% 28%
Municipal Service
Curbside Recycling Service is a 21 8% 22% 123,670 4% 4%
Municipal Service Through Contract
Curbside Recycling Service is Provided
Through Private Contracts Under a 6 2% 6% 349,698 10% 12%
Mandate to Provide
Curbside Recycling Service is Provided
Through Private Contracts Under 5 2% 5% 131 ,614 4% 4%
Mandate to Offer
Curbside Recycling is a Private
Contract Arrangement Between 55 20% 58% 1 ,593, 332 47% 52%
Consumer and Hauler
Subtotal 95 35% 100% 3,038,854 90% 100%
No Curbside Recycling but Drop Off 74 27% NA 216,648 6% 6%
Recycling is Available
No Verification That Curbside or Drop 104 38% NA 106,734 3% 3%
Off is Available
Total 271 100% 100% 3,373,312 100% 100%
The majority of the jurisdictions reported No Curbside Recycling
but Drop Off Recycling is Available (27 % ) or there was No
Verification that Curbside or Drop Off is Available ( 38 % ) .
However, these jurisdictions comprise less than 10 % of the total
population of the municipalities in the survey .
Of those jurisdictions with curbside service , the majority (58 % )
reported that Curbside Recycling is a Private Contract
Arrangement between the Consumer and Hauler. Fort Collins
reported that " Curbside Recycling Service is Provided Through
Private Contracts Under a Mandate to Provide, which is the case
in 6 % of the jurisdictions with curbside service .
Section 4 - 8
Review of
Appendix G includes more detailed recycling survey results . The Collection
reader is also referred to www . coloradocurbside . com for additional
survey information . System
Other Areas �7
California
Structures
In California , where jurisdictions are under a State mandate to
achieve 50 % diversion , the majority of jurisdictions have exclusive
residential collection contracts (franchises ) . A significant number
of jurisdictions also have exclusive commercial contracts , although
open competition commercial collection systems are also
prevalent , particularly in Southern California . A number of larger
cities also have districted residential collection systems including
the cities of San Jose and Stockton .
100 Largest Cities
A 1997 survey of residential collection services in the 100 largest
cities in the country conducted by HFH Consultants found that
exclusive municipal service was provided in 62 % of the cities .
That survey also found that exclusive private service ( under
contract or contract agreement) was provided in 18 % of the cities ,
6 % had open competition where several haulers compete for
residential customers , and 15% had combinations of the above or
other arrangements .
The most common arrangement for commercial collection was
open competition among private haulers offered in 60 % of the
cities , while 12 % of the cities reported exclusive municipal service .
In 13 % of the cities , the municipal collection operation competes
with private haulers for commercial customers and another 15 % of
the cities reported that they had an exclusive private contract .
Market Impacts of Districted Collection
Switching from an open competition system to a districted
collection system (or City-wide contract) will impact the existing
licensed haulers residential market share . It is possible that some
of the haulers will increase market share while others will lose
some or their entire residential market share . Licensed haulers not
currently providing residential services may also participate in the
procurement process and gain market share .
New Haulers Bidding on Contracts
The ability of a new hauler not currently operating in or near the
City to effectively compete for districted collection services
depends in part on the ability of that hauler to secure a local
corporation yard from which it can operate . This can be a
significant hurdle for market entry for many haulers , particularly
smaller haulers that do not have the resources of larger regional
Section 4 - 9
Review of or national haulers . While larger regional or national haulers may
Collection be in a better position to secure a local corporation yard the effort
involved can still represent a significant hurdle for market entry . In
System our experience it is not common for haulers that do not have
established local operations to attempt to establish a base of
Structures operations to compete for a new contract . Any such decision to do
so is likely to be based on the potential value of the contract as
well as the potential for securing additional market share from that
base of operations . In the case of the City , it may be more likely
that one of the licensed haulers that is not currently providing
residential services may attempt to enter the residential market
through the competitive procurement process . Should a hauler not
currently licensed or operating in the City successfully compete for
a collection district , it is certainly possible , if not likely , that hauler
would also pursue commercial and roll -off accounts in the City .
Local Haulers Discontinuing Business
Whether or not a licensed residential hauler may be forced out of
business if it is not awarded a district likely depends on what
portion of that hauler' s revenue is derived from residential services
within the City . Losing its share of the City' s residential market
would be expected to negatively impact a hauler' s bottom line . If,
however , the hauler has other operations either within or outside
of the City , those operations may be sufficient to provide for its
ongoing viability . In such a case that hauler could compete for the
City' s residential districts in the future as they come up for bid .
In our experience it is not uncommon for haulers to lose contracts
(districts ) but still maintain local operations servicing other markets
and compete for those contracts in the future . Should the City
decide to pursue a districted collection system it can do a number
of things to " level the playing field " and support competition for
future procurements . These actions include owning the residential
solid waste and recycling containers and requiring all new vehicles
as part of the contracts . This would remove some of the major
advantages the current service provider would have over other
haulers interested in proposing on the contract .
IZ3
Section 4 - 10
Appendices
Appendices
IZ5
Appendix A
Append ix A
Best Management Practices —
Sample Contract Language
100 Trash Collection Service Appendix A
mpacts
Best
1 . 1 Emissions Management
1 . 2 Neighborhood Aesthetics Practices —
General Provisions Sample Contract
General Provisions . All collection equipment used by Language
CONTRACTOR in the performance of services under this
Agreement shall be of high quality . The vehicles shall be
designed and operated so as to prevent collected materials from
escaping from the vehicles . All hoppers shall be closed on top
and on all sides with screening material to prevent collected
materials from leaking , blowing or falling from the vehicles . All
trucks and containers shall be watertight and shall be operated so
that liquids do not spill during collection or in transit .
All collection vehicles utilized by CONTRACTOR pursuant
to this Agreement shall provide automated or semi-automated
collection except where such service is not feasible because of
topographic or other physical factors . The determination that
automated or semi -automated collection vehicles are not feasible
shall be made by the City Representative after consultation with
CONTRACTOR . Where automated or semi -automated services
are not feasible , CONTRACTOR shall consult with the City
Representative regarding the collection equipment to be utilized .
( San Jose , CA)
Vehicle Cleaning
Cleaning . Collection vehicles shall be thoroughly washed
and thoroughly steam cleaned regularly, to present a clean
appearance of the exterior and interior compartment of the
vehicle . City may inspect vehicles at any time to determine
compliance with sanitation requirements . Contractor shall make
vehicles available to the Alameda County Health Department for
inspection , at any frequency it requests . (City of Union City , CA)
Cleaning . Vehicles used in the collection shall be
thoroughly washed at a minimum of once per week, and
thoroughly steam cleaned on a regular basis so as to present a
clean appearance and minimize odors . All vehicles shall be
painted on a regular schedule to maintain a clean , professional ,
new-like appearance , although the City Representative may
require the painting of any vehicle that does not present a
satisfactory appearance at any time . The vehicles shall be [Z5
Page A- 1
Aendix A painted in a uniform manner; although refuse , recycling , and
ppgreen waste vehicles may have different painting schemes . All
graffiti shall be removed immediately . City may inspect vehicles at
any time to determine compliance with sanitation requirements .
Contractor shall make vehicles available to the County Health
Best Department for inspection at any frequency it requests . ( City of
Management Salinas , CA)
City of Brighton , CO . The City of Brighton ' s Municipal Code
Practices — Article 8- 12 Garbage Collection states , among other things that
Sample Contract "vehicles shall be equipped with a tight box or tank so that no
p garbage or liquids shall escape therefrom and shall be kept
Language thoroughly clean . . . "
Litter / Vehicle Spills
Minimization of Spills . Contractor shall use due care to
prevent vehicle oil , vehicle fuel , or other liquids from being spilled
during Collection or Transportation operations . If any Solid
Waste , Recyclable , or Organic Materials are spilled or scattered
during Collection or Transportation operations , the Contractor
shall promptly clean up all spilled and scattered materials .
Contractor shall not transfer loads from one vehicle to
another on any public street , unless it is necessary to do so
because of mechanical failure , emergency (e . g . , combustion of
material in the truck ) , accidental damage to a vehicle , or unless
approved by the City .
If Contractor fails to perform some or all of the
requirements described in this Section , the Contractor shall pay
the City Liquidated Damages as described in Section 13 . 5 . ( Union
City , CA)
Clean - Up . During Collection , the Contractor shall clean - up
litter in the immediate vicinity of any Container storage area
( including the areas where Containers are delivered for Collection )
whether or not Contractor has caused the litter . Each Collection
vehicle shall carry protective gloves , a broom , and shovel at all
times for cleaning up litter . Cat- litter or similar absorbent material
shall be used by Contractor for cleaning up liquid spills . The
Contractor shall discuss instances of repeated spillage not caused
by it with the Customer of the Premise where spillage occurs , and
Contractor shall report such instances to City . If the Contractor
has attempted to have a Customer stop creating spillage but is
unsuccessful , the City will attempt to rectify such situation with the
Customer. ( Union City , CA)
Covering of Loads . Contractor shall cover all open Drop
Boxes , with a City-approved cover, at the pickup location before
Transporting materials to the Designated Disposal Location or
Processing Sites . ( Union City , CA)
Page A-2
Minimization of Spills . Contractor shall use due care to Appendix A
prevent materials placed in the collection containers from being
spilled or scattered during the collection or transportation process .
If any material is spilled during collection , the Contractor shall Best
promptly clean up all spilled materials . Each collection vehicle
shall carry a broom and a shovel at all times for this purpose . Management
Contractor shall not transfer loads from one vehicle to another on
any public street , unless it is necessary to do so because of Practices —
mechanical failure or accidental damage to a vehicle . ( City of
Salinas , CA) Sample Contract
City Ownership of Carts Language
Ownership of Carts . Ownership of carts shall rest with the
CONTRACTOR , except that ownership of carts in the possession
of a Service Recipient at the end of this Agreement shall rest with
the CITY . At its sole discretion , CITY may elect not to exercise its
rights with regards to this Article and in such case the carts shall
remain the property of the CONTRACTOR upon termination of
this Agreement . In this event , CONTRACTOR shall be
responsible for removing all carts in service from the Service Area
and reusing or recycling such carts . ( City of Piedmont , CA)
1 . 3 Noise
Vehicle Noise Level . All Collection operations shall be
conducted as quietly as possible and must comply with U . S . EPA
noise emission regulations currently codified at 40 CFR Part 205 ,
and other applicable State , County and City noise control
regulations . ( City of Piedmont , CA)
Collection Vehicle Noise Level . The noise level generated
by collection vehicles using compaction mechanisms during the
stationary compaction process shall not exceed seventy-five ( 75 )
decibels at a distance of twenty-five (25 ) feet from the collection
vehicle measured at an elevation of five (5 ) feet above ground
level using the "A" scale of the standard sound level meter at slow
response . CONTRACTOR shall cause each collection vehicle to
be tested no less than once every three ( 3 ) years during the
months of March and April , beginning March of 2008 .
CONTRACTOR shall maintain copies of certificates of testing
showing the results of the vehicle testing and shall make such
certificates available for inspection upon request by the City
Representative . CONTRACTOR shall not use any collection
vehicle that does not meet the noise level limitations of this
Section . ( City of San Jose , CA)
Noise - All Collection operations shall be conducted as
quietly as possible and shall conform to applicable Federal , state , [Z5
Page A- 3
Appendix A county , and City noise level regulations . Contractor shall promptly
ppresolve any Complaints of noise during the morning or evening
hours of the day to the satisfaction of the City . ( Union City , CA)
Best Schedules - Residential Solid Waste , Residential
Recyclable Materials and Plant Materials shall be collected on
Management weekdays between 6 : 00 AM and 6 : 00 PM . To preserve peace
and quiet , no Solid Waste , Recyclable Materials or Plant Materials
Practices — shall be Collected from or within two- hundred (200 ) feet of
residential Premises between 6 : 00 P . M . and 6 : 00 A. M . on any
Sample Contract day . Contractor shall notify Agency and service recipients in
writing at least two (2 ) weeks before an alternate Collection day is
Language scheduled when the regularly scheduled Collection day falls on a
Holiday when no Collections are scheduled . Collection of Solid
Waste from Commercial , industrial and institutional Properties
shall be scheduled at the direction of the Agency . ( SBWMA)
1 . 4 Safety
Vehicle Loading . Contractor shall not load collection
vehicles in excess of the manufacturer' s recommendations or
limitations imposed by state or local weight restrictions on
vehicles . ( Salinas , CA)
Collection Vehicles . CONTRACTOR shall not use any
collection vehicle older than model year 2001 , and shall not use
any collection vehicle that is more that six (6 ) years old or has
more than 250 , 000 miles unless such vehicle is a Rebuilt Vehicle .
( San Jose , CA)
Safety Markings and Devices . All collection equipment
used by CONTRACTOR in providing collection services under this
Agreement shall have appropriate safety markings including , but
not limited to , highway lighting , flashing and warning lights , and
clearance lights . All such safety markings and devices shall be in
accordance with the requirements of the California Vehicle Code ,
as may be amended from time to time , and shall be subject to the
approval of the City Representative . (San Jose , CA)
Vehicles Safety Features and Equipment . All of
CONTRACTOR' s collection vehicles will be equipped with the
following items to assure both public and employee safety during
all on - route and off- route operations :
o ABS braking system
o Rear vision camera - Smart Light safety systems
c Hopper Camera
c Back- up alarm warning
[Z5 o Reverse motions sensor alarm
c Battery disconnect
Page A-4
o Safety triangles Appendix A
o Fire extinguisher
o Dual air horn
o Prutsman 7" x 16" West Coast Mirrors
o Dual convex safety mirror Best
o Body hoist , rear door warning alarm Management
o Rear working strobe warning light
Practices —
The back- up cameras , back- up lights , audible warning devices ,
and yellow hazard lights are activated when CONTRACTOR' s Sample Contract
vehicle is forced to maneuver in safety sensitive areas , ensuring
the highest level of safety on city streets . In addition , each vehicle is Language
equipped with a broom , shovel , absorbent materials , and other
approved clean - up devices and materials for emergencies or any
spillage or leaks that may occur ( Spill Kit) . Each vehicle has two-
way radio communication with CONTRACTOR ' s office ,
dispatcher, customer service representatives , and operations
supervisors to maintain the highest level of access and
communication . ( Piedmont , CA ( Exhibit 11 based on hauler
proposal ) )
1 . 5 Street Maintenance Impacts
Vehicle Impact Fee . Initially , Contractor shall pay a Vehicle
Impact Fee to the City each month equal to $ 0 . 33 per Residential
unit that receives Collection services by the Contractor.
Thereafter, the Vehicle Impact Fee shall be adjusted annually
based on the change in the All Urban Consumers Index ( CPI - U )
all items , for the San Francisco , Oakland -San Jose , CA, Base
Period 1982 - 1984 = 100 , not seasonally adjusted , compiled and
published by the U . S . Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics . ( Union City , CA) .
2 . 0 Diversion Requirements/
Incentives
2 . 1 Minimum Diversion Requirements
Minimum Requirements . The CITY requires the
CONTRACTOR to use its best efforts to achieve a minimum
annual diversion rate of sixty five percent ( 65 % ) for Single family
dwelling Collection Services , Multi -family dwelling Collection
Services , Commercial Collection Services , City Collection
Services , and Debris Box Collection Services , or such other
amount as may be set in accordance with the provisions of Article
25 of this Agreement during each Calendar Year beginning
January 1 , 2009 . The annual diversion rate will be calculated as
Page A-5
Appendix A "the tons of materials collected by CONTRACTOR from the
pp provision of Collection Services that are sold , processed , or
shipped to a recycler or re- user and net of any residue amounts ,
as required by this Agreement , divided by the total tons of
materials collected by CONTRACTOR in each Calendar Year.
Best ( City of Piedmont, CA)
Management Failure to Meet Minimum Requirements .
Practices — CONTRACTOR' S failure to meet the minimum diversion
requirements set forth above in Article 5 . 01 may result in the
Sample Contract termination of this Agreement or the imposition of liquidated
damages . In determining whether or not to assess liquidated
Language damages or terminate the Agreement , the CITY will consider the
good faith efforts put forth by the CONTRACTOR to meet the
minimum diversion requirements . This consideration will include
the methods and level of effort of the CONTRACTOR to fully
implement the public education and diversion plans attached to
and included in this Agreement as Exhibits 8 and 9 , respectively.
( City of Piedmont, CA)
2 . 2 Diversion Incentives
Operating Ratio and Allowed Profit. The Contractor shall
be entitled to a profit on its Operating Costs , to be determined by
use of an Operating Ratio ' .
The Operating Ratio number will be determined using a
sliding scale , under which the Operating Ratio number will
decrease (and , thus , the Contractor's profit margin will increase )
the more Recyclable Materials collected by Contractor are
diverted by Contractor from landfilling ( i . e . , " Recovered Materials"
as defined in this Agreement) . The percentage of Recovered
Materials diverted from landfilling by Contractor shall be measured
by determining the percentage by weight ( in tons ) of Recovered
Materials diverted by Contractor from landfilling out of: (a ) all Solid
Waste collected by Contractor in the South Lake Tahoe Basin
Waste Management Authority Franchise Area from collection
routes ; ( b ) all Solid Waste received by Contractor at the Materials
Recovery Facility from haulers other than Contractor's collection
trucks ; and (c) all Recyclable Materials collected at Contractor's
buyback centers and through other recycling programs operated
by Contractor ( hereinafter the " Recovery Percentage" ) .
Contractor shall not receive diversion credit for the recovery of
Recyclable Materials collected outside of the Authority Franchise
Area or from recycling programs operated by third parties . The
' Profit based on an Operating Ratio is calculated by dividing the total
Allowable Costs by the Operating Ratio (e . g . , 90% ) and then subtracting
the Allowable Costs . (e . g . , Profit on $ 1 , 000 , 000 Allowable Costs with a
90 % Operating Ratio = ($ 1 , 000 , 000 /. 90 ) - $ 1 , 000 , 000 = $ 111 , 111 or
11 . 1 % profit) .
Page A-6
Recovery Percentage shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Appendix A
The Operating Ratio number shall vary with Contractor' s
Recovery Percentage in accordance with the following sliding Best
scale :
Operating Ratio Number Recovery Percentage Management
94 . 34 0- 15 % Practices —
93 . 90 16
93 . 46 17 Sample Contract
93 . 02 18
92 . 59 19 Language
92 . 17 20
91 . 74 21
91 . 32 22
90 . 90 23
90 . 50 24
89 25-28
88 29-32
87 33- 100
The amount of profit ( "Allowed Profit" ) to be received by
Contractor for a given period shall be determined by multiplying
the total projected Operating Costs for the period by a fraction , in
which the numerator shall be one hundred ( 100 ) and the
denominator shall be the Operating Ratio number applicable to
the period as determined by using the foregoing sliding scale .
The Allowed Profit shall then be determined by subtracting the
projected Operating Costs from the product of the aforesaid
multiplication . For example , if projected Operating Costs for a
year were $ 5 , 000 , 000 and the Operating Ratio number to be used
was 90 , the Allowed Profit would be calculated as follows :
100/90 = 1 . 11 ( rounded off to one one- hundredths )
$ 5 , 000 , 000 x 1 . 11 = $ 55550 , 000
$ 555505000 - 510005000 = $ 5505000
Allowed Profit = $ 5501000
Recycling Revenue Bonus for Extraordinary Diversion . In
addition to the foregoing calculation of Allowed Profit , Contractor
shall be entitled to receive as and for additional profit , twenty-five
percent (25 % ) of Contractor' s gross revenues from the sale of
Recyclable Materials diverted from Iandfilling by Contractor
pursuant to this Agreement for those rate periods in which
Contractor' s Recovery Percentage is equal to or greater than
thirty-seven percent ( 37 % ) , and a total of fifty percent ( 50 % ) of
Contractor' s gross revenues from the sale of Recyclable Materials
diverted from Iandfilling by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement
for those rate periods in which Contractor' s Recovery Percentage
Page A- 7
Appendix A is equal to or greater than forty percent (40 % ) . ( El Dorado
pp county , CA)
Best
Management
Practices —
Sample Contract
Language
[Z5
Page A-8
Appendix B
Appendix B
Trash Truck Safety Devices
Appendix B
TRASH TRUCK SAFETY DEVICES
Optional Equipment'
Item Description Vehicle Source
Specification
Reverse Audible sound system in the cab of Optional Norcal/SBWMA
Motion vehicle that senses objects (cars , people , Proposal
Sensors poles , etc. ) in the reverse path of the
vehicle and provides an audible alert in
the cab for the driver.
Battery A mechanical switch that will disengage Optional Norcal/SBWMA
Disconnect energy from battery to vehicle . This is Proposal
used to prevent dead batteries from
electrical items left on or potential
electrical issues related to loose wires .
Rear/Side Automatic flashing light mounted on the Optional Norcal/SBWMA
Strobe rear of the vehicle and activated during Proposal
Warning collection operation . Used to alert people
Lights that the vehicle is operating in the area .
Spill Kits Emergency kits comprised of various Optional Norcal/SBWMA
absorbent material to help control and Proposal
limit exposure caused by a vehicle fluid
spill including (oil , fuel , hydraulic fluid ,
anti -freeze , etc. )
Rear, Side , Camera and video system used to assist Optional BEST/SBWMA
Hopper driver with viewing the activity behind , Proposal
Cameras & along side , or in the hopper of the vehicle .
Video
Driver Truck mounted camera systems that Optional Waste Age
Camera record truck and driver activity. These are
Systems used to help improve driver performance
and record events throughout the day .
GPS Used for operational monitoring functions Optional Waste Age
including monitoring vehicle travel paths ,
speed , hard stops and starts , and time
the vehicle was in the area .
Lane Position Used to detect out-of- lane drift and driver Optional Waste Age
Monitors fatigue .
' - Items that are available to be installed on new or used equipment with the buyer
paying an additional cost for the item , installation , and ongoing maintenance .
Page 1 of 4
Appendix B
TRASH TRUCK SAFETY DEVICES
Optional Equipment'
Item Description Vehicle Source
Specification
Infrared Night In cab display system that shows a Optional Waste Age
Vision temperature-based view of objects
beyond headlights .
Tire Pressure Used to monitor tire pressure with an Optional FMCSA. dot .
Warning audible alert to the driver of a potential gov
System tire pressure issue to help prevent blow
outs , flat tires , and breakdowns .
Electronic Monitors vehicle side ways movement Optional FMCSA. dot .
Stability and balance and automatically reduces gov
Controls speed to reduce roll over hazards .
Electronic Automatic systems to monitor and alert Optional Waste Age
System driver of potential hazards caused by
Monitoring wear or vibration to brakes , wheels , or
drives line .
Page 2 of 4
Appendix B
TRASH TRUCK SAFETY DEVICES
Standard Equipment'
Item Description Vehicle Source
Specification
ABS Braking Control system to assist braking to avoid Standard Norcal/SBWMA
Systems wheels from locking up and skidding . Proposal
Convex Mirror Used to aid driver to view objects on the Standard Norcal/SBWMA
sides of the vehicle . Proposal
' - Standard — Equipment normally selected by new buyers and installed on most new vehicles .
Page 3 of 4
Appendix B
TRASH TRUCK SAFETY DEVICES
Required Equipment3
Item Description Vehicle Source
Specification
Back Up Audible sound system that is Required DOT Inspection
Alarms automatically activated when the vehicle Sheet
transmission is set in reverse .
Safety Emergency reflect devises to be used in Required DOT Inspection
Triangles the event of a breakdown to warn other Sheet
drivers of a potential road hazard .
Fire Portable hand held fire extinguisher to be Required DOT Inspection
Extinguisher used in the event of a fire . These can Sheet
range in size from a small , medium , or
large unit ( 1lb . 5 lb . 10 lb . , etc . )
Dual Air Warning system used to alert people or Required DOT Inspection
Horns other drivers of a potential hazard from Sheet
oncoming vehicle .
Side Mirrors Used to aid driver to view objects on the Required DOT Inspection
sides of the vehicle . Sheet
Hoist , Arm , Audible alert for driver and personnel Required DOT Inspection
Rear Door outside of vehicle that mechanical lifting Sheet
Warning devises are activated and operational .
Alarms
3 - Required items either by DOT , OSHA, or ANSI standards
Page 4 of 4
Appendix C
Appendix C
Comparative Trash Truck Load Factors
Appendix C
COMPARATIVE TRASH TRUCK LOAD FACTORS
Passenger Car Equivalents
Reference Jurisdiction / Data Source
Trash Trucks Recycling Trucks
( 1 ) Bonestroo 830
(2) Napa , CA 886 869
(3) Roseville Public Works 11000
(4) GBB 1 , 125 525
(2) Fort Collins 19279 274
(2) Long Beach , CA 11279 11064
(5) 1 Metro Council 11500
(2) San Mateo, CA 11549 263
(6) Chanhassen 11650
(2) La Habra Heights , CA 11730 11347
( 1 ) Memo to Rick Getschow, City Administrator, Lauderdale, from Paul Heuer, Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates,
Engineers & Architects, 4/9/01
(2) R3 Consulting Group
(3) Impact of Heavy Trucks on Low Residential Streets , presented by Duane Schwartz, Roseville Public Works Director, 10/11 /01
to Roseville Solid Waste Commission
(4) Comparative Economic Analysis of MSW and Recycling Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Areas, prepared for Metro
Council by GBB , 9/94; data from late summer through fall , 1993
(5) Study of Organized Collection in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area , 1985
(6) City of Chanhassen Organized Collection Study, Final Report, 9/93, Resource Strategies Corporation
Appendix C
COMPARATIVE TRASH TRUCK LOAD FACTORS
Comparison of Projected Trash Truck Impacts(Passenger Car Equivalents) Comparison of Projected Recycling Truck Impacts
(Passenger Car Equivalents)
1 ,600
N 2,000
e 11800 11400
1 ,600
3 1 ,400 w 1 ,200
w 1 ,200
v 11000 1 ,000
w
`m
800 V 800
600
400 rn 600
a 200 m
400
yti`°o C) GP J�°\ GP y5ec GP a 200
o�Go G°
San Mateo, Fort Collins GBB Napa, CA Long Beach, La Habra
�o �a CA CA Heights, CA
Jurisdiction / Data Source Jurisdiction / Data Source
Appendix D
Appendix D
Draft Strategic Plan for 50 % Diversion :
Preliminary Staff Recommendations
Appendix D
DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN FOR 50% SOLID WASTE DIVERSION
PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY TABLE
Plan Element
Subgoal 1 Provide For` Collins residents and the business community with information and education about waste diversion
1 - 1 (1 ) Increase/enhance the City's education program (in one-year increments) regarding specific measures to be initially implemented .
Subgoal 2 Target organics to be separated from the waste stream, for collection and delivery in making secondary products such as
compost, mulch, or composition construction material.
2 1 (1 ) Provide customers , upon request to their trash haulers , with optional curbside yard waste services on a weekly basis . This measure
will require that yard waste does not cost more than equivalent costs for trash , by volume (consistent with pay-as-you-throw rates).
2 2 After sufficient infrastructure has been developed to accept large volumes of organic debris to be composted , add requirement for
largest candidate firms (e .g . , restaurants and grocery stores) to recycle commercial food waste.
2-3 Prevent yard waste from being discarded in Fort Collins' curbside trash collection system .
Subgoal 3 Target waste material generated by new construction and by demolition activities to be diverted from the waste stream
and used in manufacturing secondary products.
3- 1 Establish contract preferences to encourage recycling and waste reduction for City of Fort Collins construction & demolition (C&D )
jobs .
3 2 0 ) Create a refundable C&D deposit system based on square footage of project (or comparable criterion ), with total deposit to be
refunded upon certification that appropriate level of recycling was accomplished .
3-3 In the absence of appropriate private-sector facilities necessary for accepting C&D waste , ultimately create a City sponsored drop-
off site .
Subgoal 4 Divert more of the waste generated by the commercial sector.
4- 1 Offer 3 months recycling free to businesses (City-funded )
4-2 City provides technical assistance / waste audits to businesses
4-3 Adopt ordinance making it mandatory for businesses that dispose of more than 10yd3 of trash weekly to install a recycling bin .
4-4 Actively urge smaller / non-recycling businesses to implement singe-stream recycling systems .
4-5 Assist with the formation of recycling cooperatives for small businesses .
4-6 Awards grants, zero-interest loans , and incentives to businesses for waste prevention efforts.
4-7 Adopt City procurement guidelines and/or incentives for recycled content.
4-8 Strengthen the City organization's recycling program ; emphasize source reduction .
4 9 0 ) Amend the City's PAYT ordinance to include all commercial customers ; require recycling fee to be embedded in rates and charge
volume-based pricing .
4- 10 Ultimately, make recycling mandatory for all businesses.
Subgoal 5 Divert more of the waste generated by the residential sources.
5- 1 0 ) Amend Fort Collins' pay-as-you-throw ( PAYT) residential trash rates ordinance so that "rate design" further enhances waste
reduction efforts .
5 2 Implement ongoing curbside recycling program improvements , including more designated materials and standard options for larger
recycling containers , etc.
5-3 Encourage multifamily housing managers/residents to adopt single-stream recycling systems.
5-4 Encourage private partnerships for constructing multiple community drop-offs to collect more recyclables (paper, glass, etc. )
5-5 Prevent discarded computers from being placed in Fort Collins' curbside trash collection system .
5-6 Adopt the requirement for service providers to collect single stream recycling from residential customers as soon as market trends
allow.
Subgoal 6 Create a dedicated city "waste diversion fee " that would be used to fund new recycling opportunities, grants and zero-
interest loans for waste diversion innovation, as well as other Strategic Plan activities.
(' )Recommended Phase 1 Program
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Natural Resources Department
City of Fort Collins
March 28 , 2006 Council Worksession
Attachment 1 : Preliminary Staff Recommendations
DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN
for 50 % SOLID WASTE DIVERSION
City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Department
Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner
John Armstrong, Environmental Planner
200 West Mountain Avenue • P. O . Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221 -6600
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Preliminary Staff Recommendations :
DRAFT STRATEGIC PLAN FOR 50 % SOLID WASTE DIVERSION
City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Department
INTRODUCTION
Fort Collins ' involvement in recycling and waste reduction traces back to 1977 city master
planning policies and the introduction of local curbside recycling in the 1980 ' s . Adoption of a
pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) trash ordinance followed in 1995 . A 1999 resolution adopted by the
City Council for increasing waste diversion levels paved the way for more innovations . When an
update was made to the Council in February 2005 , measurements showed the community was
still only half-way to its goal of 50% diversion by 2010; clearly, new and revitalized efforts were
necessary to make significant advances .
During a six-month strategic planning process , dozens of new programs ' were explored for
diverting more of the community' s waste stream away from landfill disposal. A highly
experienced consulting team led by Skumatz Economic Research Associates was hired for the
project, and a group of knowledgeable stakeholders was recruited as a steering committee for the
project. Extensive community involvement helped ensure that public input was incorporated
into the December, 2005 strategic plan report.
This document introduces staff s preliminary proposal for a package of over 20 new measures
that will help Fort Collins divert 50% (or more) of its waste stream. The Strategic Plan for 50%
Solid Waste Diversion has been designed to provide both an appropriate range of actions and the
sequence of changes necessary to reach the community' s goal in a timely manner. The new
measures were chosen for their feasibility, effectiveness , and pro-activeness . They represent
staff s recommended approach, which came out of all the ideas that were explored with help
from the public, consultants, and Steering Committee members who participated in the planning
process .
If Council agrees to adopt a Strategic Plan, staff recommends prioritizing five programs for early
implementation. These include : a one-year education campaign about local recycling and waste
reduction opportunities ; opportunity for all customers to receive weekly yard waste recycling ; a
construction and demolition (C&D) deposit that refunds the full deposit for projects that recycle ;
amend the City' s pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) ordinance to include commercial customers so that
all receive recycling service ; restructure Fort Collins ' PAYT ordinance with "rate designs" that
further enhance waste reduction efforts .
' Table 5-2 (pages 40 — 43) of the draft SERA report (Fort Collins Solid Waste 5- Year Strategic Plan), available at
www.fcgov.com/recyclin /tg/ aWn tgtrash .
Page 1 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Background/Context
A number of cities , including Chicago, San Francisco, Portland (OR) , and San Diego have been
successful at reaching, and surpassing, 50% waste diversion levels by applying innovative
policies and programs2 . However, relatively few communities in this part of the country have
made such a high commitment to waste diversion, especially those that do not manage municipal
trash collection, and therefore have limited funding (Fort Collins citizens employ the services of
a completely privatized trash collection system) .
A number of economic variables are critical to consider in a strategic plan. Fort Collins '
geographic location increases shipping costs to recycling markets that are predominantly found
in coastal transportation centers . Local recycling opportunities that are not fully developed need
to be stimulated. However, Colorado has not adopted the legislative mandates that successfully
motivate waste reduction in many other states (quite the opposite happens due to the abundance
of landfills that have been built in our state) ; therefore, local ordinances and requirements play an
important role. The regional infrastructure necessary to accomplish higher levels of waste
diversion (i. e. , processing or remanufacturing plants) requires greater levels of investment, so
incentives are important to consider. Because the market for recyclable commodities is so
susceptible to global influences such as energy prices and international demand, waste reduction
and recycling programs adopted for Fort Collins must be as economically sound and solvent as
possible.
Key Objectives
Five main objectives were used to evaluate, model , and select "packages" of programs from
among the initial list of new ideas that were submitted by the consultant.
1 . Target materials that have the most potential to be diverted and those that represent the
largest amount of volume that can be diverted 3 ,
2. Elicit waste reduction contributions from all sectors of the community, including
residential, commercial, institutional (e. g. , the City), multi-family, and key stakeholder
businesses such as trash haulers and recycling companies,
3 . Distribute costs so that no single sector is unfairly affected,
4. Optimize positive, intended consequences and interrelationships among potential new
programs,
5 . Anticipate market forces that will create successful opportunities for our local recycling
system, which includes service providers , the business community, recycling
professionals, commodity brokers, as well as local citizens and their political
representatives, and
6. Address concerns and needs that were expressed by citizens of Fort Collins in a
community-wide survey.4
2 Waste News article: Municipal Recycling Survey. February 13 , 2006 (www.wastenews.com )
3 Figure 5- 1 , 5-2 (pages 32, 33) draft SERA report (Fort Collins Solid Waste 5- Year Strategic Plan).
4 Appendix D, ibid
Page 2 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
How Recommendations Were Evaluated
The econometric modeling that was used to calculate the costs and effectiveness of new
programs for Fort Collins draws from an extensive, proprietary computer program developed by
Skumatz Economic Research Associates . (For 25 years , this firm has researched the impacts of
solid waste reduction policies and programs in over 1 ,500 North American communities . ) Fort
Collins ' own measurements of local waste generation and recycling activities provided the
baseline data for SERA' s Strategic Plan model; the customized tool now belongs to the City for
use in future planning.
Public Input
Public involvement was critical to guiding the strategic planning process . Numerous articles and
announcements were printed in the media that helped the City obtain comments and ideas . An
open house in December 2005 was attended by over 60 citizens and there were a number of
"visits" to an interactive website (www .fcgov.talkin tg rash ) .
A group of stakeholders representing a broad cross-section of the community met regularly to
assist staff and the consultants with developing and ranking strategies to include in the Plan. The
Steering Committee included:
Trash hauling companies
Recyclers — public & private
County landfill staff
Commercial composter
Environmental consultant
Citizen advisory committee members
As part of Fort Collins ' strategic planning project, a public opinion survey was conducted by
Corona Research, with a margin of error of � 4. 9 percent and a 95 percent confidence level in the
results . (A smaller survey was also administered to poll businesses in Fort Collins about their
attitudes and opinions about recycling and waste reduction. ) Survey questions were specifically
designed to seek information that relates to developing plans for new programs . The responses
from the 403 completed telephone interviews indicate an extremely high interest in, and support
of, recycling among Fort Collins citizens . In terms of importance, respondents were more likely
to state that the ability to recycle conveniently, and the ability to recycle many materials , is more
important than having inexpensive trash and recycling services .
There appears to be additional demand for curbside recycling ; nearly three-quarters (73 percent)
of survey respondents reported that they participate in curbside recycling. While there are many
reasons for not recycling, the largest single reason (37 percent of non-recyclers) is that curbside
recycling is not available to them; this may be attributed to the fact that curbside recycling is not
always provided to residents of multi-family dwellings .
Page 3 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Yard waste appears to be an area of particular potential for recycling. A total of 39 percent of
respondents report that they put yard waste out with the trash. About 1 /3 of respondents report
that they would use a community composting facility even if there was a small fee. Demand is
greater for curbside pickup of yard waste; over half would be "very likely" or "somewhat likely"
to use the service, even if there was a small fee.
There is a belief that recycling has not yet hit its potential. On average, respondents believe that
over 40 percent of their own trash could be recycled. A total of 79 percent believe that it is
feasible to divert 50 percent of garbage to recycling. Respondents also expressed price
flexibility for increased services . A total of 82 percent of households believe that their current
charges for trash and recycling are reasonable, and 78 percent would be willing to pay "a bit
more" to achieve the City' s recycling goal . Half of respondents would pay three dollars more per
month, while 93 percent would be willing to pay an additional 50 cents per month.
The findings of the public opinion survey confirm that Fort Collinites are clearly eager to
recycle, with 98 percent of respondents expressing the belief that recycling is "good for the city
of Fort Collins ." They are supportive of new measures to divert waste (89 percent believe that
the City should pursue additional means of recycling and diversion) and willing to pay some part
of the costs that may be incurred to develop new programs . These findings , and the public
comments that were received, were weighed together with our best estimation about costs and
impacts in developing the following preliminary Strategic Plan.
Phase-in Schedule
For the purposes of modeling, it was necessary to enter start-dates for the strategies that were
evaluated. Staff applied a phased approach with two basic stages . Many strategies were
modeled that could essentially be started right away, while several others would be better to
initiate in five or eight years , after the infrastructure has grown or intermediates steps have been
taken. It is important to plan for a highly flexible implementation schedule in order to respond to
changes over time such as adjusted market conditions or innovations in technology.
In the interests of assisting the City Council to provide immediate direction for the community,
staff developed a summary list of five new measures to investigate for Phase I implementation.
• Strategy 1 - 1 . Increase/enhance the City' s education program (in one-year increments)
regarding specific measures to be initially implemented.
• Strategy 2- 1 . Provide customers , upon request to their trash haulers , with optional
curbside yard waste collection services on a weekly basis .
• Strategy 3 -2 . Create a refundable C&D deposit system based on square footage of
project (or comparable criterion), with total deposit to be refunded upon certification that
appropriate level of recycling was accomplished.
• Strategy 4-9 . Amend the City' s PAYT ordinance to include all commercial customers ;
require recycling fee to be embedded in rates and charge volume-based pricing.
• Strategy 5 - 1 . Amend Fort Collins ' pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) residential trash rates
ordinance so that "rate design" further enhances waste reduction efforts .
Page 4 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Next Steps
At the March 28 , 2006 work session, the City Council' s feedback will be sought for the overall
package of new measures, and for the concept of adopting a long-term strategic plan. If the
Council concurs about a summary list of new measures to begin implementing immediately, staff
will begin preparing a business plan for each one, including more detailed benefit / cost analyses ,
schedule for implantation, and budget estimates . These project outlines will be submitted as
soon as possible for Council ' s formal endorsement.
Page 5 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
STRATEGIC PLAN FOR 50 % SOLID WASTE DIVERSION
GOAL : The City will strive to divert 50 % of the community's waste stream from landfill
disposal by 2010.
Subgoal l : Provide Fort Collins residents and the business community with information
and education about waste diversion.
Strategy 1 - 1 . Increase/enhance the City' s education program (in one-year increments)
regarding specific measures to be initially implemented .
Modeled costs : $40 / ton City6, $ .50 / ton community?
Modeled diversion: 1 . 3 % (5 ,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Subgoal 2 : Target organics to be separated from the waste stream, for collection and
delivery in making secondary products such as compost, mulch, or composition
construction material.
Strategy 2- 1 . Provide customers, upon request to their trash haulers, with optional curbside
yard waste collection services on a weekly basis . This measure will require that yard waste
does not cost more than equivalent costs for trash, by volume (consistent with pay-as-you-
throw rates) .
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $ 120 / ton community
Modeled diversion: 1 . 9% (7 ,500 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Strategy 2-2. After sufficient infrastructure has been developed to accept large volumes of
organic debris to be composted, add requirement for largest candidate firms (e. g. ,
restaurants and grocery stores) to recycle commercial food waste.
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $ 12 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 0.4% ( 1 ,700 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2011 , two years
Strategy 2-3 . Prevent yard waste from being discarded in Fort Collins ' curbside trash
collection system.
5 Underlined to indicate strategy was included in staff' s recommendation for Phase I implementation.
6City cost per ton is the estimated cost to city government to divert one ton of new material per year following full
implementation of a given program.
7 User cost per ton is the estimated cost to the community (i.e. , residents and businesses) to divert one ton of new
material per year following full implementation of a given program.
Page 6 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $30 / ton community
Modeled diversion: 9 .0% (34,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2011 , two years
Subgoal 3 : Target waste material generated by new construction and by demolition
activities to be diverted from the waste stream and used in manufacturing secondary
products.
Strategy 3 - 1 . Establish contract preferences to encourage recycling and waste reduction for
City of Fort Collins construction & demolition (C&D) jobs .
Modeled costs : not modeled
Modeled diversion: not modeled
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Strategy 3 -2. Create a refundable C&D deposit system based on square footage of project
(or comparable criterion) , with total deposit to be refunded upon certification that
appropriate level of recycling was accomplished.
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $30 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 12% (46,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , four years
Strategy 3 -3 . In the absence of appropriate private-sector facilities necessary for accepting
C&D waste, ultimately create a City sponsored drop-off site.
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $ 12 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 10. 6% (41 ,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2011 , four years
Subgoal 4: Divert more of the waste generated by the commercial sector.
Strategy 4- 1 . Offer 3 months recycling free to businesses (City-funded) .
Modeled costs : $20 / ton City, $20 / ton community
Modeled diversion: very low
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Strategy 4-2. City provides technical assistance / waste audits to businesses .
Modeled costs : $ 110 / ton City, $ . 50 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 0. 9% (3 ,400 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Strategy 4-3 . Adopt ordinance making it mandatory for businesses that dispose of more
than 10 yd3 of trash weekly to install a recycling bin.
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $ 12 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 2.0% (7 ,500 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Page 7 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Strategy 4-4. Actively urge smaller / non-recycling businesses to implement single-stream
recycling systems .
Modeled costs : $ . 50 / ton City, $7 / ton community
Modeled diversion: 0. 9% (3 ,300 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Strategy 4-5 . Assist with formation of recycling cooperatives for small businesses .
Modeled costs : $ 110 / ton City, $ . 50 ton / community
Modeled diversion : 0. 9% (3 ,300 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , four years
Strategy 4-6. Awards grants , zero-interest loans, and incentives to businesses for waste
prevention efforts .
Modeled costs : $210 / ton City, $ . 50 / ton community
Modeled diversion: 0. 7 % (2,700 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Strategy 4-7 . Adopt City procurement guidelines and/or incentives for recycled content.
Modeled costs : not modeled
Modeled diversion: not modeled
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Strategy 4- 8 . Strengthen the City organization' s recycling program; emphasize source
reduction.
Modeled costs : not modeled
Modeled diversion: not modeled
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Strategy 4-9 . Amend the City' s PAYT ordinance to include all commercial customers ;
require recycling fee to be embedded in rates and charge volume-based pricing.
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $70 / ton community
Modeled diversion: 16. 7 % (64,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , four years
Strategy 4- 10. Ultimately, make recycling mandatory for all businesses .
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $70 / ton commercial
Modeled diversion : 1 .7 % (6,600 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2015 , one year
Subgoal 5 : Divert more of the waste generated by residential sources.
Strategy 5 - 1 . Amend Fort Collins ' pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) residential trash rates
ordinance so that "rate design" further enhances waste reduction efforts .
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $30 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 3 . 3 % Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Page 8 of 9
Attachment 1
March 28, 2006
Council Study Session
Draft Strategic Plan for 50% Solid Waste Diversion
Strategy 5 -2. Implement ongoing curbside recycling program improvements , including
more designated materials and standard options for larger recycling containers , etc.
Modeled costs : not finalized
Modeled diversion : 0.4% ( 1 ,700 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Strategy 5 -3 . Encourage multifamily housing managers / residents to adopt single- stream
recycling systems .
Modeled costs : not finalized
Modeled diversion : 0. 1 (470 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Strategy 5 -4. Encourage private partnerships for constructing multiple community drop-
offs to collect more recyclables (paper, glass , etc. ) .
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $ . 50 ton / community
Modeled diversion : 0. 8 % (3 ,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , two years
Strategy 5 -5 . Prevent discarded computers from being placed in Fort Collins ' curbside
trash collection system.
Modeled costs : $ 14 / ton City, $ 120 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 0.4 % ( 1 ,700 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , one year
Strategy 5 -6. Adopt the requirement for service providers to collect single stream recycling
from residential customers as soon as market trends allow .
Modeled costs : $ 1 / ton City, $ . 50 / ton community
Modeled diversion : 2.0% (8 ,000 new tons)
Modeled start-date and ramp-up period: 2007 , three years
Subgoal 6. Create a dedicated city " waste diversion fee " that would be used to fund new
recycling opportunities, grants and zero-interest loans for waste diversion innovation, as
well as other new Strategic Plan activities.
Page 9 of 9
Appendix E
Appendix E
Waste Composition Data
• Table E - 1 ; Waste Disposal by Generator Sector
• Table E -2 ; Comparison of Top 10 Most Prevalent
Materials by Generator Sector
Appendix E
WASTE COMPOSITION DATA
Table E-1
WASTE DISPOSAL BY GENERATOR SECTOR
Residential Commercial Self-haul C&D Total
Tons Disposed % of Total Tons Disposed % of Total Tons Disposed % of Total Tons Disposed % of Total Tons Disposed % of Total
631624 41 % 55 ,211 36% 101211 7% 24516 16% 1531562 100%
Table E -2
COMPARISON OF TOP 10 MOST PREVALENT MATERIALS BY GENERATOR SECTOR
Residential Commercial Self-haul C&D
Rank
Material Type % of Total Material Type % of Total Material Type % of Total Material Type % of Total
1 Food Waste 17 .4% Food Waste 15. 9% Bulky Items 15.8% Drywall 15. 1 %
2 Yard Waste 8 .0% OCC/Kraft 13. 6% Yard Waste 9 .5% Asphalt Roofing 14. 7%
3 Non Recyc Paper 7 .7% Yard Waste 6. 3% Other Inorganics 9 . 1 % Carpet 11 .8%
4 Mixed Recyc Paper 6. 6% Non Recyc Paper 5. 5% Carpet 8 .0% Block/Brick/Stone 11 .2%
5 Newspaper 6. 5% Film/Bags 4. 5% Clean Wood 7 .7% Clean Wood 10.9%
6 OCC/Kraft 6. 0% Newspaper 4. 1 % Clean Wood/Block/ 5 .8% Other Wood 10. 3%
Brick/Stone
7 Diapers/Sanitary 4 .9% Mixed Recyc Paper 3. 6% OCC/Kraft 4 .4% Painted/Stained 6 0%
Products Wood
8 Film/Bags 4 .5% Clean Wood 3. 5% Mixed Recyc Paper 4 . 1 % Other Inorganics 5.4%
9 Other Rigid Plastic 3 .2% High Grade Paper 3. 5% Painted Stained 3 .7% Other/Broken Glass 3.9%
Wood
10 Fines 3 . 1 % Other Rigid Plastic 3.2% Asphalt Roofing 3 .6% Other Ferrous Metal 2.4%
Top 10 68.0% 63.9% 71 . 1 % 91 .8%
Recyclable Materials =
Compostable Materials =
Total =
Numbers may not add due to rounding
Source : Larimer County; Two-Season Waste Composition Study; Final Report, May 2007, Table 4-3
Appendix F
Appendix F
Residential Collection System Structure
Options
Appendix F
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION SYSTEM STRUCTURE OPTIONS
COMPARATIVE MATRIX
Collection System Summary
Structure Overview
Pros Cons
Limited City control ;
Current Open Limited City administrative Multiple trash collection service
Competition requirements ; impacts ;
Haulers are required to obtain a
1 ) System without any Customers free to choose hauler; More difficult to implement new
9 /
Chan es license to operate within the City No impact on existing haulers ; uniform programs and services
(Status Quo) No change to Status Quo than Districted Collection System
or City-wide Contract for Services
Provides many of the same
Open Competition benefits as Current Open
System with Haulers would be required to Competition System while also Many of the same issues as
2) Increased comply with additional licensing providing opportunity to reduce Current Open Competition System ;
requirements established by the Additional City administrative
Licensing City trash collection service impacts, requirements
Requirements increase diversion and establish
other desired hauler requirements
Represents significant change for
all parties ( residents, haulers,
City) ;
Lack of customer choice ;
3) Districted Existing haulers may lose market
Collection System share ;
Increased City administrative
The City would Issue a Request for requirements ;
Proposals ( RFP) to provide Provides effective mechanism Requires City billing system if
services within a district(s) / City- (district or city-wide contract) and uniform rates are to be established
wide ; process (competitive procurement)
Specific services , service through which the City can
standards and other terms and establish desired contract terms
conditions would be specified in and conditions at rates set by the
the district or City-wide contract;
Rates would be specified in marketplace Represents significant change for
proposal all parties (residents, haulers,
City) ;
4) City-wide Contract Lack of customer choice ;
for Services Existing haulers may lose market
share ;
Increased City administrative
requirements ;
1 of 5
Appendix F
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION SYSTEM STRUCTURE OPTIONS
COMPARATIVE MATRIX
Collection System Regulatory Reference Proposer Impact on Existing Trash Collection
Structure Mechanism Jurisdictions Pool Haulers Impacts
Current Open
Competition
1 ) System without any NA NA No change
Changes
(Status Quo)
Municipal Code
(Length can vary
depending on level of Fort Collins ;
requirements: Greeley; Windsor;
Broomfield, Golden 5 Many Others
pgs; Fort Collins 10
pgs; Calabasas, CA
46 pgs)
Open Competition Haulers would be Reduced impacts
System with required to adhere to relative to any new
2) Increased NA additional license associated licensing
Licensing requirements requirements
Requirements established by City established by City
Potential loss of some or
Districted Stand alone District None identified in all residential market
3) Collection System Contract Colorado share ;
(City of San Jose , CA) Potential for increased
market share Reduced impacts
relative to reduction in
number of trucks on
residential streets and
Any licensed number of vehicle miles
hauler traveled
(All other factors the
same) ;
Reduced impacts related
One hauler would be to any related contract
Stand alone City- awarded City-wide terms and conditions
wide Contract Commerce City ; contract;
City-wide Contract ( Lafayette, CO 13 Lafayette ; Evans ;
4) for Services pgs; Various CA Greenwood Village ; Existing haulers that are
Jurisdictions (+/- 100 Superior not awarded City-wide
contract would lose
pgs)) entire market share
2of5
Appendix F
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION SYSTEM STRUCTURE OPTIONS
COMPARATIVE MATRIX
Collection System Impact on Customers
Structure Ability to Choose Hauler Rate Impact Ease of Use Quality of Service
Current Open
Competition
1 ) System without any Customer may choose NA No change
any licensed hauler
Changes
(Status Quo)
Customer has ability to
choose another licensed
hauler if they have a
customer service or other
issue
Open Competition
System with None unless additional
2) Increased Customer may choose licensing requirements result No change
any licensed hauler in increased costs that are
Licensing passed along to residents
Requirements
Customers do not have
Potential for obtaining lower ability to switch haulers if
Districted rates customer service issues
3) Collection System (Operational efficiencies should arise ;
allow for lowering of rates - all City has ability to set
other factors the same) customer service
standards but no ability to
None change haulers during term
(Contracted hauler would Will require transition to of contract if customer
provide service to all a new hauler for some or issues arise unless they
customers in district / City- all customers rise to breach of contract
wide) status ;
Liquidated damages
provision could be
Potential for obtaining lowest included in contract to
rates address service quality and
City-wide Contract other performance issues
4) for Services Operational efficiencies should that may arise and are not
allow for lowering of rates - all
other factors the same) resolved to the City's
satisfaction
3of5
Appendix F
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION SYSTEM STRUCTURE OPTIONS
COMPARATIVE MATRIX
Collection System Implementation Issues
Structure Ease Cost Lead Time Key Process Considerations
(if third party is enlisted )
Current Open
Competition
1 ) System without any NA NA NA NA
Changes
(Status Quo)
+/- 6 months
(City may wish to solicit
Open Competition Requires drafting $10 - $25K plus City Hauler input related to
System with additional licensing implementation costs additional licensing Need to draft additional licensing
2) Increased requirements and and ongoing requirements to assure that they result in requirements and amend Municipal
Licensing amending Municipal administrative meaningful benefits Code ;
Requirements Code expenses without being overly
burdensome on the
haulers)
Need to establish districts ( Requires
accurate account data and
determination of which account types to
be included (e .g . , HOAs? )) ;
—$505000 - $1505000 Draft District Contract and RFP ;
3) Districted plus City Conduct procurement process and
Collection System implementation costs finalize District Contract;
and ongoing 12 - 24 months Manage transition to new contracted
administrative (City may wish to solicit hauler(s) ;
City should anticipate
expenses Hauler input related to Establish City billing capabilities and
opposition from both (Can have successful District / City-wide ongoing interface with haulers to
residents and haulers ;
proposer(s) cover cost Contract terms and assure billing is accurate
Requires transition and recover through conditions to assure
period with rates over term of that they result in
appropriate City contract) meaningful benefits
oversight (Rate Impact > without being overly
$0 . 10/month/acct) burdensome on the
(Billing costs associated haulers) Need to : Draft City-wide Contract and
with Districted RFP ;
4) City-wide Contract Collection System if Conduct procurement process and
for Services uniform rate is to be finalize contract;
established ) Manage transition to new contracted
hauler
4of5
Appendix F
RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION SYSTEM STRUCTURE OPTIONS
COMPARATIVE MATRIX
Collection System Administrative Issues
Structure Requirements Ability to Control Service Rate Regulation
Current Open
Competition
1 ) System without any No change No change NA
(Market sets rates)
Changes
(Status Quo)
Open Competition Additional administrative
System with requirements to oversee City can establish higher level of
2) Increased additional licensing requirements control through additional NA
0 . 0 - 0 .25 FTE additional licensing (Market sets rates)
Licensing ( g requirements
q
Requirements administrative staff)
3) Districted
Collection System
City would regulate rates ;
Additional resources necessary Initial rates established based on
to provide ongoing contract City would establish desired competitive proposals ;
controls / requirements (services, Rate regulation mechanism
management; service levels , rate adjustment would be specified in District /
Annual rate adjustment process ; process, recordkeeping , City-wide Contract (e.g . , annual
Periodic procurement and/or insurance, indemnification) CPI increases) ;
negotiations required though District / City-wide City could establish profit
administrative staff)
( 0 .25 - FTE additional Contract terms and conditions incentives related to performance
administrative
(e.g . , sliding scale profit tied to
diversion rate)
4) City-wide Contract
for Services
5of5
Appendix G
Appendix G
Colorado Municipal League and Colorado
Recycles - Survey Results
• Trash Services
• Recycling Services
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities city July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
1 Denver 568,913 Denver X
2 Thornton 101 ,763 Adams - Weld X
3 ILongmont 80,612 Boulder - Weld X
4 Loveland 57,485 Larimer X
5 Grand Junction 48,141 Mesa X
6 Northglenn 35,612 Adams - Weld X
7 Durango 15,628 La Plata X
8 Montrose 15,351 Montrose X
9 Sterling 13,713 Logan X
10 Fort Morgan 11 ,119 Morgan X
11 Craig 9,178 Moffat X
12 Lamar 8,628 Prowers X
13 Fruita 8,507 Mesa X
14 Cortez 8,504 Montezuma X
15 Alamosa 8,419 Alamosa X
16 Delta 8,087 Delta X X
17 Rifle 7,760 Garfield X
18 La Junta 7,334 Otero X
19 Edgewater 5,351 Jefferson X X
20 Gunnison 5,318 Gunnison X
21 Brush 5,282 Morgan X
22 Gypsum 45944 Eagle X
23 Rocky Ford 4,182 Otero X
24 Eagle 3,816 Eagle X
25 Florence 3,795 Fremont X X
26 Yuma 3,362 Yuma X
27 Lochbuie 37091 Weld X
28 Las Animas 2,673 Bent X
29 Snowmass Village 2,317 Pitkin X
30 Wray 2,223 Yuma X
31 Limon 2,101 Lincoln X
32 Akron 1 ,8541 Washington X
33 Olathe 1 ,675 Montrose X
34 Paonia 1 ,639 Delta X
35 Julesburg 1 ,425 Sedgwick X
36 Holly 1 ,020 Prowers X
37 Haxtun 1 0081 Phillips X
38 Hugo 855 Lincoln X
39 Walsh 723 Baca X
40 Eads 702 Kiowa X
41 Swink 688 Otero X
42 Flagler 5991 Kit Carson X
43 Blanca 399 Costilla X X
44 Larkspur 245 Douglas X X
45 Cheraw 201 Otero X
46 Pritchett 130 Baca X
47 Black Hawk 112 Gilpin X
Subtotal 190769484
1 of 7
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities city July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
1 Commerce City 30,768 Adams X
2 Evans 16,280 Weld X
3 1 Greenwood Village 12,586 Arapahoe X
4 Lone Tree 7,436 Douglas X
5 Johnstown 6,122 Larimer - Weld X
6 Milliken 5,214 Weld X
7 Burlington 3,8381 Kit Carson X
8 Eaton 3,825 Weld X
9 Dacono 3,309 Weld X
10 New Castle 2,949 Garfield X
11 Platteville 2,576 Weld X
12 Telluride 2,335 San Miguel X X
13 Silt 2,184 Garfield X
14 La Salle 1 ,857 Weld X
15 Hayden 1 ,765 Routt X
16 Bayfield 11705 La Plata X
17 Kremmling 1 ,641 1 Grand X
18 Crested Butte 1 ,543 Gunnison X
19 Kersey 1 ,433 Weld X
20 Ault 1 ,421 Weld X
21 Parachute 1 ,338 Garfield X
22 Ordway 1 ,188 Crowley X
23 Columbine Valley 1 ,167 Arapahoe X
24 Gilcrest 1 ,161 Weld X
25 Mountain Village 1 ,137 San Miguel X X
26 Hotchkiss 1 ,024 Delta X
27 Oak Creek 9141 Routt X
28 Pierce 878 Weld X
29 Ridgway 812 Ouray X
30 Foxfield 765 Arapahoe X
31 Ignacio 754 La Plata X
32 Mountain View 549 Jefferson X
33 Nunn 520 Weld X
34 DeBeque 497 Mesa X
35 Wiley 463 Prowers X
36 Creede 422 Mineral X
37 Olney Springs 370 Crowley X
38 Ovid 333 Sedgwick X
39 Eckley 278 Yuma X
40 Peetz 236 Logan X
41 Crowley 177 Crowley X
42 Grover 154 Weld X
43 Ophir 124 San Miguel X
44 Branson 85 Las Animas X
45 Kim 73 Las Animas X
Subtotal 126,206
2of7
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities city July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
1 Colorado Springs 380,073 El Paso X
2 Aurora 295,775 Adams - Arapahoe - Douglas X
3 Lakewood 143,611 Jefferson X
4 Fort Collins 126,903 Larimer X
5 Westminster 105, 177 Adams - Jefferson X
6 Pueblo 104,031 Pueblo X
7 Arvada 103,004 Adams - Jefferson X
8 Centennial 101 ,049 Arapahoe X
9 Boulder 97,467 Boulder X
10 Greeley 85,887 Weld X
11 Broomfield 44,634 Broomfield X
12 Littleton 40,715 Arapahoe - Douglas - Jefferson X
13 Parker 37,093 Douglas X
14 Englewood 32,491 Arapahoe X
15 Castle Rock 32,261 Douglas X
16 Wheat Ridge 31 ,869 Jefferson X
17 Brighton 277131 Adams - Weld X
18 Lafayette 23,704 Boulder X
19 Fountain 18,334 El Paso X
20 Golden 17,731 Jefferson X
21 Windsor 12,711 Larimer - Weld X
22 Federal Heights 11 ,698 Adams X
23 Steamboat Springs 10,742 Routt X
24 Superior 10,267 Boulder - Jefferson X
25 Erie 10,216 Boulder - Weld X
26 Trinidad 9,344 Las Animas X
27 Glenwood Springs 8,517 Garfield X
28 Fort Lupton 7,111 Weld X
29 Woodland Park 7,081 Teller X
30 Avon 6,755 Eagle X
31 Aspen 6,368 Pitkin X
32 Cherry Hills Village 6,0891 Arapahoe X
33 Firestone 5,748 Weld X
34 Estes Park 5,707 Larimer X
35 Carbondale 5,689 Garfield X
36 Sheridan 5,457 Arapahoe X
37 Manitou Springs 57225 El Paso X
38 Berthoud 4,930 Larimer - Weld X
39 Vail 4,806 Eagle X
40 Glendale 4,796 Arapahoe X
41 Monte Vista 4,747 Rio Grande X
42 Monument 4,174 EI Paso X
43 Walsenburg 3,993 Huerfano X
44 Silverthorne 3,806 Summit X
45 Wellington 3,718 Larimer X
46 Breckenridge 3,296 Summit X
47 Orchard City 3,094 Delta X
48 Frisco 2,697 Summit X
49 Palmer Lake 2,355 El Paso X
3of7
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities city July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
50 Mead 2,331 Weld X
51 Bennett 2,330 Adams - Arapahoe X
52 Meeker 2,291 Rio Blanco X
53 Buena Vista 2,279 Chaffee X
54 Cedaredge 2,190 Delta X
55 Rangely 2,099 Rio Blanco X
56 Idaho Springs 1 8521 Clear Creek X
57 Granby 1 ,746 Grand X
58 Watkins 1 ,645 Adams - Arapahoe X
59 Pagosa Springs 1 ,620 Archuleta X
60 Lyons 1 ,599 Boulder X
61 Hudson 1 ,595 Weld X
62 Elizabeth 1 ,529 Elbert X
63 Springfield 1 ,472 Baca X
64 Nederland 1 ,368 Boulder X
65 Mancos 1 ,201 Montezuma X
66 Keenesburg 1 ,157 Weld X
67 Fowler 1 ,150 Otero X
68 Georgetown 1 ,111 Clear Creek X
69 Cripple Creek 1 ,082 Teller X
70 Manassa 1 ,017 Conejos X
71 Cheyenne Wells 985 Cheyenne X
72 Green Mountain Falls 907 El Paso - Teller X
73 La Veta 901 Huerfano X
74 Dolores 899 Montezuma X
75 Calhan 898 El Paso X
76 La Jars 8541 Conejos X
77 Antonito 840 Conejos X
78 Winter Park 830 Grand X
79 Dillon 819 Summit X
80 San Luis 755 Costilla X
81 Blue River 743 Summit X
82 Nucla 736 Montrose X
83 Walden 704 Jackson X
84 Williamsburg 690 Fremont X
85 Fairplay 689 Park X
86 South Fork 6661 Rio Grande X
87 Stratton 643 Kit Carson X
88 Collbran 637 Mesa X
89 Kiowa 618 Elbert X
90 Granada 613 Prowers X
91 Hot Sulphur Springs 597 Grand X
92 Saguache 577 Saguache X
93 Deer Trail 575 Arapahoe X
94 Aguilar 554 Las Animas X
95 Poncha Springs 552 Chaffee X
96 Otis 517 Washington X
97 Manzanola 505 Otero X
98 Central City 492 Clear Creek - Gilpin X
4of7
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities city July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
99 Grand Lake 482 Grand X
100 Westcliffe 463 Custer X
101 IFleming 445 Logan X
102 Victor 438 Teller X
103 Morrison 418 Jefferson X
104 Rockvale 411 Fremont X
105 Romeo 4031 Conejos X
106 Lake City 398 Hinsdale X
107 Crawford 397 Delta X
108 Empire 392 Clear Creek X
109 Coal Creek 380 Fremont X
110 Garden City 348 Weld X
111 Dinosaur 334 Moffat X
112 Red Cliff 307 Eagle X
113 Merino 291 Logan X
114 Jamestown 288 Boulder X
115 Kit Carson 242 Cheyenne X
116 Rico 231 Dolores X
117 Brookside 217 Fremont X
118 Genoa 203 Lincoln X
119 Silver Plume 203 Clear Creek X
120 Rye 196 Pueblo X
121 Seibert 176 Kit Carson X
122 Cokedale 146 Las Animas X
123 Crook 129 Logan X
124 Hooper 122 Alamosa X
125 Ramah 121 1 El Paso X
126 Moffat 113 Saguache X
127 Crestone 112 Saguache X
128 Vona 89 Kit Carson X
129 Sawpit 35 San Miguel X
130 Lakeside 201 Jefferson X
Subtotal 21093,087
5of7
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities city July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
1 Louisville 18,545 Boulder X
2 Canon City 15,683 Fremont X
3 Frederick 5,905 Weld X
4 Salida 5,720 Chaffee X
5 Basalt 3,051 Eagle - Pitkin X
6 Palisade 2,802 Mesa X
7 Leadville 2,782 Lake X
8 Center 2,382 Rio Grande - Saguache X
9 Holyoke 2,308 Phillips X
10 Del Norte 1 ,715 Rio Grande X
11 Severance 1 ,563 Weld X
12 Minturn 1 ,1 15 Eagle X
13 Log Lane Village 1 ,085 Morgan X
14 Fraser 1 ,020 Grand X
15 Wiggins 975 Morgan X
16 Ouray 842 Ouray X
17 Bow Mar 812 Arapahoe - Jefferson X
18 Sanford 781 Conejos X
19 Simla 753 Elbert X
20 Mt. Crested Butte 743 Gunnison X
21 Dove Creek 683 Dolores X
22 Naturita 6591 Montrose X
23 Silver Cliff 593 Custer X
24 Silverton 548 San Juan X
25 Norwood 483 San Miguel X
26 Yampa 475 Routt X
27 Boone 324 Pueblo X
28 Hillrose 296 Morgan X
29 Sugar City 266 Crowley X
30 Alma 234 Park X
31 Arriba 232 Lincoln X
32 Timnath 225 Larimer X
33 Iliff 221 Logan X
34 Bethune 214 Kit Carson X
35 Sedgwick 192 X
36 Ward 171 Boulder X
37 Campo 156 Baca X
38 Starkville 137 Las Animas X
39 Pitkin 117 Gunnison X
40 Hartman 107 Prowers X
41 Vilas 104 Baca X
42 Marble 103 Gunnison X
43 Raymer 97 Weld X
44 Haswell 80 Kiowa X
45 Two Buttes 63 Baca X
46 Sheridan Lake 62 Kiowa X
47 Paoli 51 Phillips X
48 Montezuma 46 Summit X
49 Bonanza City 14 Saguache X
6of7
Appendix G
TRASH SERVICES
Residential Residential Trash Svc. Residential Trash Svc.
Number of Population - Trash Svc. Is Is A City Svc. Provided Is a private sector svc.
Cities City July, 2004 County A Municipal through Contract with 1 Through private Did not Respond
Svc. or more haulers haulers
Subtotal 77,535
Total 31373,312
7of7
Appendix G
RECYCLING SERVICES
Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is DO = Drop off is
Number of Population - Res. Curbside is a Mun. Svc. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. available - X = no
Cities city July, 2004 County a Mun. Service Through Haulers under Haulers under Haulers to their drop off or
mun. mandate to mun. mandate to cust. As a bus. curbside
contract provide offer Decision available
1 Denver 568,913 Denver X DO
2 Thornton 101 ,763 Adams - Weld X DO
3 Longmont 80,612 Boulder - Weld X DO
4 ILoveland 57,485 Larimer X DO
5 Durango 15,628 La Plata X DO
6 Cortez 8,504 Montezuma X DO
7 Gunnison 5,318 Gunnison X DO
8 Snowmass Village 2,317 Pitkin X DO
Subtotal 8409540
1 Grand Junction 48,141 Mesa X DO
2 Evans 16,280 Weld X
3 Greenwood Village 12,586 Arapahoe X DO
4 Fruita 8,507 Mesa X
5 Lone Tree 7,436 Douglas X
6 Milliken 5,214 Weld X
7 Eaton 3,825 Weld X
8 Dacono 3,309 Weld X
9 New Castle 2,949 Garfield X DO
10 Telluride 2,335 San Miguel X X DO
11 Silt 2,184 Garfield X
12 Hayden 1 ,765 Routt X DO
13 Crested Butte 1 ,543 Gunnison X DO
14 Kersey 1 ,433 Weld X
15 Columbine Valley 1 ,167 Arapahoe X
16 Mountain Village 1 ,137 San Miguel X X
17 Holly 1 ,020 Prowers X DO
18 Oak Creek 914 Routt X X
19 Ridgway 812 Ouray X
20 Foxfield 765 Arapahoe X
21 Garden City 348 Weld X
Subtotal 123,670
1 Fort Collins 126,903 Larimer X DO
2 Arvada 103,004 Adams - Jefferson X DO
3 Boulder 97,467 Boulder X DO
4 Steamboat Springs 10,742 Routt X DO
5 Superior 10,267 Boulder - Jefferson X DO
6 Aspen 6,368 Pitkin X DO
7 Carbondale 5,689 Garfield X DO
Subtotal 36%440
1 Westminster 105, 177 Adams - Jefferson X DO
2 Golden 17,731 Jefferson X DO
3 Sheridan 5,457 Arapahoe X DO
Subtotal 128,365
1 Colorado Springs 380,073 El Paso X
2 Aurora 295,775 Adams - Arapahoe - Douglas X DO
3 Lakewood 143,611 Jefferson X
4 Pueblo 104,031 Pueblo X
5 Centennial 101 ,049 Arapahoe X DO
6 Greeley 85,887 Weld X DO
7 Broomfield 44,634 Broomfield X DO
8 Littleton 40,715 Arapahoe - Douglas - Jefferson X
9 Parker 37,093 Douglas X
10 Englewood 32,491 Arapahoe X
11 Castle Rock 32,261 Douglas X
12 Wheat Ridge 31 ,869 Jefferson X
13 Commerce City 30,768 Adams X
14 Brighton 27,131 Adams - Weld X
15 Lafayette 23,704 Boulder X
16 Fountain 187334 El Paso X
17 Montrose 15,351 Montrose X
18 Windsor 12,711 Larimer - Weld X
19 Federal Heights 11 ,698 Adams X
20 Erie 10,216 Boulder - Weld X
21 Glenwood Springs 8,517 Garfield X
22 La Junta 7,334 Otero X DO
23 Fort Lupton 71111 Weld X
24 Woodland Park 7,081 Teller X
25 Johnstown 6, 122 Larimer - Weld X DO
26 Cherry Hills Village 6,089 Arapahoe X
1 of 5
Appendix G
RECYCLING SERVICES
Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is DO = Drop off is
Number of Population - Res. Curbside is a Mun. Svc. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. available - X = no
Cities city July, 2004 County a Mun. Service Through Haulers under Haulers under Haulers to their drop off or
mun. mandate to mun. mandate to cust. As a bus. curbside
contract provide offer Decision available
27 Frederick 5,905 Weld X
28 Estes Park 5,707 Larimer X DO
29 Edgewater 5,351 Jefferson X DO
30 Manitou Springs 5,225 El Paso X DO
31 Berthoud 4,930 Larimer - Weld X
32 Vail 4,806 Eagle X DO
33 Silverthorne 3,806 Summit X DO
34 Wellington 3,718 Larimer X DO
35 Breckenridge 3,296 Summit X DO
36 Lochbuie 3,091 Weld X DO
37 Basalt 3,051 Eagle - Pitkin X DO
38 Frisco 2,697 Summit X DO
39 Elizabeth 1 ,529 Elbert X DO
40 Nederland 1 ,368 Boulder X DO
41 Fraser 1 ,020 Grand X DO
42 Dillon 819 Summit X DO
43 Blue River 743 Summit X DO
44 Mountain View 549 Jefferson X DO
45 Fleming 445 Logan X DO
46 Crawford 397 Delta X DO
47 Jamestown 288 Boulder X DO
48 Larkspur 245 Douglas X DO
49 Kit Carson 242 Cheyenne X DO
50 Brookside 217 Fremont X DO
51 Rye 196 Pueblo X DO
52 Ramah 121 El Paso X DO
53 Sawpit 35 San Miguel X DO
Subtotal 1 ,581 ,453
1 Northglenn 35,612 Adams - Weld DO
2 Louisville 18,545 Boulder DO
3 Canon City 15,683 Fremont DO
4 Fort Morgan 11 , 119 Morgan DO
5 Trinidad 9,344 Las Animas DO
6 Craig 9, 178 Moffat DO
7 Lamar 8,628 Prowers DO
8 Alamosa 8,419 Alamosa DO
9 Delta 8,087 Delta DO
10 Avon 6,755 Eagle DO
11 Salida 5,720 Chaffee DO
12 Gypsum 4,944 Eagle DO
13 Glendale 4,796 Arapahoe DO
14 Monte Vista 4,747 Rio Grande DO
15 Walsenburg 3,993 Huertano DO
16 Burlington 37838 Kit Carson DO
17 Eagle 3,816 Eagle DO
18 Leadville 2,782 Lake DO
19 Las Animas 2,673 Bent DO
20 Center 2,382 Rio Grande - Saguache DO
21 Bennett 2,330 Adams - Arapahoe DO
22 Holyoke 2,308 Phillips DO
23 Buena Vista 2,279 Chaffee DO
24 Limon 2, 101 Lincoln DO
25 La Salle 1 ,857 Weld DO
26 Akron 1 ,854 Washington DO
27 Idaho Springs 1 ,852 Clear Creek DO
28 Granby 1 ,746 Grand DO
29 Del Norte 1 ,715 Rio Grande DO
30 Bayfield 1 ,705 La Plata DO
31 Kremmling 1 ,641 Grand DO
32 Pagosa Springs 1 ,620 Archuleta DO
33 Lyons 1 ,599 Boulder DO
34 Ault 1 ,421 Weld DO
35 Parachute 1 ,338 Garfield DO
36 Ordway 1 , 188 Crowley DO
37 Minturn 1 , 115 Eagle DO
38 Georgetown 1 , 111 Clear Creek DO
39 Hotchkiss 1 ,024 Delta DO
40 Cheyenne Wells 985 Cheyenne DO
41 La Veta 901 Huertano DO
2of5
Appendix G
RECYCLING SERVICES
Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is DO = Drop off is
Number of Population - Res. Curbside is a Mun. Svc. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. available - X = no
Cities city July, 2004 County a Mun. Service Through Haulers under Haulers under Haulers to their drop off or
mun. mandate to mun. mandate to cust. As a bus. curbside
contract provide offer Decision available
42 Hugo 855 Lincoln DO
43 La Jara 854 Conejos DO
44 Antonito 840 Conejos DO
45 Simla 753 Elbert DO
46 Eads 702 Kiowa DO
47 Stratton 643 Kit Carson DO
48 Kiowa 618 Elbert DO
49 Flagler 599 Kit Carson DO
50 Hot Sulphur Springs 597 Grand DO
51 Saguache 577 Saguache DO
52 Manzanola 505 Otero DO
53 Central City 492 Clear Creek - Gilpin DO
54 Norwood 483 San Miguel DO
55 Grand Lake 482 Grand DO
56 Wiley 463 Prowers DO
57 Creede 422 Mineral DO
58 Empire 392 Clear Creek DO
59 Red Cliff 307 Eagle DO
60 Eckley 278 Yuma DO
61 Arriba 232 Lincoln DO
62 Bethune 214 Kit Carson DO
63 Seibert 176 Kit Carson DO
64 Ward 171 Boulder DO
65 Pritchett 130 Baca DO
66 Moffat 113 Saguache DO
67 Crestone 112 Saguache DO
68 Black Hawk 112 Gilpin DO
69 Branson 85 Las Animas DO
70 Haswell 80 Kiowa DO
71 Kim 73 Las Animas DO
Subtotal 217,111
1 Sterling 13,713 Logan X
2 Rifle 7,760 Garfield X
3 Firestone 5,748 Weld X
4 Brush 5,282 Morgan X
5 Rocky Ford 4,182 Otero X
6 Monument 47174 El Paso X
7 Florence 3,795 Fremont X
8 Yuma 3,362 Yuma X
9 Orchard City 3,094 Delta X
10 Palisade 2,802 Mesa X
11 Platteville 2,576 Weld X
12 Palmer Lake 27355 El Paso X
13 Mead 2,331 Weld X
14 Meeker 2,291 Rio Blanco X
15 Wray 2,223 Yuma X
16 Cedaredge 2,190 Delta X
17 Rangely 2,099 Rio Blanco X
18 Olathe 1 ,675 Montrose X
19 Watkins 1 ,645 Adams - Arapahoe X
20 Paonia 1 ,639 Delta X
21 Hudson 1 ,595 Weld X
22 Severance 1 ,563 Weld X
23 Springfield 1 ,472 Baca X
24 Julesburg 1 ,425 Sedgwick X
25 Mancos 1 ,201 Montezuma X
26 Gilcrest 1 , 161 Weld X
27 Keenesburg 1 , 157 Weld X
28 Fowler 1 , 150 Otero X
29 Log Lane Village 1 ,085 Morgan X
30 Cripple Creek 1 ,082 Teller X
31 Manassa 1 ,017 Conejos X
32 Haxtun 1 ,008 Phillips X
33 Wiggins 975 Morgan X
34 Green Mountain Falls 907 El Paso - Teller X
35 Dolores 899 Montezuma X
36 Calhan 898 El Paso X
37 Pierce 878 Weld X
38 Ouray 842 Ouray X
3of5
Appendix G
RECYCLING SERVICES
Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is DO = Drop off is
Number of Population - Res. Curbside is a Mun. Svc. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. available - X = no
Cities city July, 2004 County a Mun. Service Through Haulers under Haulers under Haulers to their drop off or
mun. mandate to mun. mandate to cust. As a bus. curbside
contract provide offer Decision available
39 Winter Park 830 Grand X
40 Sanford 781 Conejos X
41 San Luis 755 Costilla X
42 Ignacio 754 La Plata X
43 Mt. Crested Butte 743 Gunnison X
44 Nucla 736 Montrose X
45 Walsh 723 Baca X
46 Walden 704 Jackson X
47 Williamsburg 690 Fremont X
48 Fairplay 689 Park X
49 Swink 688 Otero X
50 Dove Creek 683 Dolores X
51 South Fork 666 Rio Grande X
52 Naturita 659 Montrose X
53 Collbran 637 Mesa X
54 Granada 613 Prowers X
55 Silver Cliff 593 Custer X
56 Deer Trail 575 Arapahoe X
57 Aguilar 554 Las Animas X
58 Poncha Springs 552 Chaffee X
59 Silverton 548 San Juan X
60 Nunn 520 Weld X
61 Otis 517 Washington X
62 DeBeque 497 Mesa X
63 Yampa 475 Routt X
64 Westcliffe 463 Custer X
65 Victor 438 Teller X
66 Morrison 418 Jefferson X
67 Rockvale 411 Fremont X
68 Romeo 403 Conejos X
69 Blanca 399 Costilla X
70 Lake City 398 Hinsdale X
71 Coal Creek 380 Fremont X
72 Olney Springs 370 Crowley X
73 Dinosaur 334 Moffat X
74 Ovid 333 Sedgwick X
75 Hillrose 296 Morgan X
76 Merino 291 Logan X
77 Sugar City 266 Crowley X
78 Peetz 236 Logan X
79 Alma 234 Park X
80 Rico 231 Dolores X
81 Timnath 225 Larimer X
82 Iliff 221 Logan X
83 Silver Plume 203 Clear Creek X
84 Genoa 203 Lincoln X
85 Cheraw 201 Otero X
86 Sedgwick 192 Sedgwick X
87 Crowley 177 Crowley X
88 Grover 154 Weld X
89 Cokedale 146 Las Animas X
90 Starkville 137 Las Animas X
91 Crook 129 Logan X
92 Ophir 124 San Miguel X
93 Hooper 122 Alamosa X
94 Pitkin 117 Gunnison X
95 Hartman 107 Prowers X
96 Vilas 104 Baca X
97 Marble 103 Gunnison X
98 Raymer 97 Weld X
99 Vona 89 Kit Carson X
100 Two Buttes 63 Baca X
101 Sheridan Lake 62 Kiowa X
102 Paoli 51 Phillips X
103 Montezuma 46 Summit X
104 Lakeside 20 Jefferson X
Subtotall 120,427
1 Bow Mar 812 Arapahoe - Jefferson
2 Boone 324 Pueblo
4of5
Appendix G
RECYCLING SERVICES
Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is Res. Curbside is DO = Drop off is
Number of Population - Res. Curbside is a Mun. Svc. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. provided by pvt. available - X = no
Cities city July, 2004 County a Mun. Service Through Haulers under Haulers under Haulers to their drop off or
mun. mandate to mun. mandate to cust. As a bus. curbside
contract provide offer Decision available
3 Campo 156 Baca
4 Bonanza City 14 Saguache
Subtotal 19306
39373,312
5of5
ATTACHMENT 4
City Manager's Office
City of City Hall
F6rt I LaPorte Ave.
POCOsPO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970,221 ,6505
970.224.6107 - fax
fcgov. com
MEMORANDUM
TO : City Council Members
FROM : Ann Turnquist, Policy and Projects Manager
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager
RE : Work Session Follow-up : Trash Services Study Update
DATE : September 6, 2008
Council asked for additional information about a number of questions.
1 . Explain in more detail the ESAL calculations for street wear caused by trash trucks.
• The analysis used to calculate the impacts of Refuse Vehicles (trash and recycling
vehicles) is based on common principals of pavement design and vehicle loading, which
are the same as those used by cities to determine the construction design specifications
for streets based on projected vehicle loadings .
• The relative impact associated with a specific vehicle type (e .g. , Refuse Vehicles) is
based on the axle weights (Equivalent Single Axle Load or ESAL) for that vehicle type
times the number of trips (passes) that vehicle type makes down a street segment.
• The analysis used axle load weight distribution profiles provided by the manufactures for
the types of residential vehicles the haulers are using to provide residential services in the
City of Fort Collins (i.e. , small rear loaders, fully-automated side loaders and front-
loaders with Curotto cans) .
• ESAL factors are based on information reported by the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) .
• Our base case analysis assumed an average of 4 trash and 4 recycling vehicle passes per
week per typical residential street for the current open competition system based on
estimates provided by the haulers and City staff.
2. How is a trip in each direction considered to cause twice as much wear as one trip?
Impacts are based on vehicle axle weights (ESALs) and the number vehicle passes . The
impact of any given vehicle is based on the associated ESALs times the number of passes
that vehicle makes down a street segment. Therefore a street segment experiences twice the
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 2
ESALs (impact) for a vehicle that makes two passes down that street than for that same
vehicle that makes only one pass .
3 . How do we analyze the difference between five trucks serving neighborhoods all over
the city versus 5 trucks that each work in their own area?
The analysis is based on the difference in the total number of trash truck miles traveled on
residential streets for the two scenarios. In the case of 5 trucks serving neighborhoods all
over the City you have more total miles traveled with a typical residential street segment
experiencing a higher average number of trash truck passes (and associated impacts) than
you would have with each truck working in their own area.
4. Review the COZ emissions calculations. Detail the impact of stops which are spread out
widely across the community versus routes which are clustered together.
CO2 and other emissions are related to the total number of trash and recycling truck vehicle
miles traveled, vehicle acceleration, and average travel speed. In general there would be more
emissions associated with increased miles traveled, longer periods of vehicle acceleration and
higher average travel speeds .
The Report projects that CO2 emissions would be reduced by half under a districted
collection system for the base case assumptions shown in Table 2 . This is consistent with the
assumed decrease in total vehicle miles traveled under a districted system for the base case
analysis presented in the Report (half that of the open competition system) .
In addition to vehicle miles traveled, vehicle acceleration and average travel speed should
also be considered, particularly the higher emissions that are generated when a trash truck
accelerates after collecting an account and begins to travel to the next account. The number
of accounts and the number of times a trash truck accelerates after collecting an account is
the same for a districted and open competition system. Therefore, all other factors the same,
emissions associated with accelerating from an account and traveling to the next account
would be the same for a districted and open competition system. However, all other factors
are not the same . Under a districted system the trash vehicle services every account in a
neighborhood. Accordingly, the period of time that vehicle accelerates and the average travel
speed between accounts is less than in an open competition system. In the case of an open
competition system, on average, the trash vehicle accelerates for a longer period of time to
higher average travel speed between accounts (which are on average spaced much further
apart) . Accordingly, the amount of time the trash vehicle is accelerating and the average
travel speed between accounts (and associated emissions) are higher under an open
competition system than under a districted collection system.
5. Can we provide more detailed data regarding the number of HOAs which participate in
consolidated trash service and the percentage of total household that this represents ?
Staff s rough estimate is that there are about 300 HOAs in Fort Collins, including condo
associations . A complete assessment of consolidated trash accounts in HOAs is probably not
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 3
feasible without obtaining information from the trash haulers . (We are told that this is
proprietary data for trash haulers that they are not willing to divulge to the City.) The
consultant asked the haulers for estimates on HOA participation in consolidated trash service
at the beginning of the project and was provided with various estimates. In all cases,
however, the haulers reported that a significant portion of the residential accounts are in
HOAs (i. e. , 50% or more) with many of those having consolidated trash service . Another
piece of information they were unable to tell us was the number of street miles which have
exclusive service, and where there are no "hold out" neighbors that do not participate in
either a formal or informal neighborhood agreement on consolidated trash service. In
neighborhoods where there are any individuals with a hauler other than the dominant hauler,
the impact of a second or third hauler in the neighborhood can exist, even if very few
accounts are being serviced.
While many HOA ' s pay professional property/HOA management companies to collect dues
and take care of landscaping contracts, etc . , there are also many that are run by volunteers
from the neighborhood associations, which makes it harder for City staff to have a direct
contact. We are investigating ways to work with HOA management companies and obtain
their cooperation in establishing a database of HOAs, including information about their trash
services . We will also continue to try to analyze and cross-reference other sources of
information that are at our disposal (e. g. , an Associations On-Line subscription data base; the
Colorado Secretary of State ' s list of non-profits) .
6. Provide more information about the average weight of trash trucks.
The analysis used manufactured vehicle weights and axle weight distribution data for
vehicles similar to those used by the haulers in the City. Average load weights were based on
information provided by the haulers (7 tons for trash; 4 tons for recyclables) with the analysis
based on vehicles that were half full.
7. Provide more emphasis on recycling and diversion rates. Better emphasize the benefits
of increased diversion. Why is it important? What is the impact on air and water
quality? What is the scientific basis for why diversion is good for the community?
Attached is a "white paper" that staff has previously developed on the subject of "Why
Recycle?" This information appears on the City' s website and is often used by City staff and
other interested parties as a concise analysis of why recycling efforts are important. (See
Attachment A)
In addition, Chapter 5 of the Climate Task Force report, "CTF Recommendations," includes
an analysis of the benefits of increased recycling on reducing Greenhouse gases (See page
27 , attached.)
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 4
8. Clarify how the 7 % total for hauler controlled curbside recycling fits into the overall
27 % community diversion rate.
Most of Fort Collins ' trash — 224,709 tons, by our calculations - gets handled by one of the
12 licensed trash companies (another very small fraction gets "self-hauled" to Larimer
County ' s landfill by citizens, and CSU campus trash trucks deliver about 1 ,775 tons/year) .
Local haulers also collect recyclable materials from their customers. That much smaller
number - 16, 120 tons - is then expressed as a percentage of the overall stream of discarded
material (trash plus recycling) handled by the haulers and reported as our "diversion rate".
The trash services study reported that only 7 . 1 % of the material collected by haulers from
both residential and commercial customers is recycled; when you separate the numbers by
types of customers, the study showed that for the residential sector, 13 . 3 % is recycled.
In addition to the 16, 120 tons of recyclable materials collected by trash haulers, City staff
have documented that at least 44, 125 more tons are collected by a variety of other recycling
entities that bypass the trash companies ' curbside collection systems. Natural Resources
staff goes out and seeks these numbers of additional tons of recyclables because there is no
mechanism for requiring it to be reported to the City.
Our Climate Wise partner businesses voluntarily give us data for their tons of recycling and
we survey a number of other businesses, such as Hageman' s Earthcycle, Aragon Metals, and
Colorado Iron & Metal, by phone and ask them to voluntarily provide us with information.
We also know recyclables are collected at drop-off sites and some is collected from
commercial customers by smaller, independent recycling companies like Waste-Not
Recycling or National Recycling, who do not collect trash. These companies have also been
willing to share data with the City.
Staff measures this broader amount of recycling occurring outside the curbside system at
44,468 tons . Added with the curbside volumes, this brings us to an overall 60 ,245 tons of
recyclables being collected in the community. More recyclables means we register a higher
calculated rate of diversion, especially when we add in a "placeholder" number that has been
suggested by the consultants SERA, Inc . for extra tons that are being avoided altogether by
citizens who practice waste reduction — or avoidance — measures in response to the City' s
pay-as-you-throw system.
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 5
9. Provide the analysis of diversion by method as a pie chart.
Diverted materials by destination / method
Total : 60 ,245 tons (2006)
(does not include destinations / methods <_ 1 % of total )
C&D
5% Rivendell Drop-Off
Other commercial 3%
16%
Scrap metal
31 %
Licensed hauler
22%
Hageman EarthGycle
23%
10. What is the value of the recyclable material which is currently ending up in the landfill?
According to a waste composition study done by Larimer County in 2007 , there are about
30 ,000 tons of recyclable paper materials (cardboard, newspaper, and other "mixed" paper)
being buried each year in the landfill . If we assume this amount of material were to be
separated properly so that it could be processed as recycling, and if we then assume that this
aggregated paper material has a minimum value of $5/ton and a maximum value of $25/ton,
the value would range from $ 150,000 - $750,000.
It is important to note that Larimer County charges at least $ 5 .21 per yard of material
accepted at the landfill to be buried, which comes out to approximately $ 13 . 85 per ton. The
avoided cost for recycling these 30,000 tons of paper material instead of land filling it is
$4151758 ,
11 . Are the current residential haulers asking for a fee or deposit for their recycling tubs ?
The City asks the haulers to provide this information each year in their Recycling Report.
Ram Waste has told the City that the fee they charge for recycling tubs "varies". GSI lists a
one-time fee of $ 16 . Waste Management reports that they charge a $20 deposit.
12. What recycling education do haulers currently provide to customers?
Attachment B includes a copy of the customer education materials provided by each of the
three residential trash haulers .
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 6
13 . Are haulers effectively complying with the pay-as-you-throw ordinance when they work
with HOAs ? Are they offering different size containers with different pricing?
Although the City amended its pay-as-you-throw ordinance in 2005 to ensure that residents
who live in HOAs are offered the same opportunities to have variable trash as the rest of Fort
Collins citizens, we have received a number of complaints and anecdotal comments to
suggest that there may be an inconsistent level of compliance among trash haulers .
City staff will be completing an information and outreach process with HOAs during August
and September, 2008 . The purpose of the campaign will be to remind the HOAs of their
responsibilities under the revised pay-as-you-throw ordinance and seek information about
how they are complying.
An audit of how well the PAYT system is being applied for haulers ' HOA customers is
planned during the fourth quarter of 2008 or the first quarter of 2009 , as early as staff
resources allow. The schedule of the City ' s sales tax staff, which is authorized to conduct
audits of trash haulers, will dictate when this work can be conducted. Since the Code also
requires compliance by property management companies and HOA governance boards that
sign consolidated trash collection contracts, the City will also be looking at these entities '
records to ensure that they have enabled residents to individually select levels of trash
service.
Staff has begun to explore the option of adding requirements of the trash haulers that could
require the haulers to provide an independent audit of their records which could be used to
verify compliance with licensing requirements .
14. What ideas would the haulers have for ways they can control increasing diversion
rates ?
Staff informally discussed this question with two of the residential haulers . Below are some
possible actions mentioned by these haulers. One hauler also suggested that staff hold a
brainstorming session with all the local haulers to further discuss these ideas.
• Enforce PAYT for all haulers
• Spend more time looking at the waste stream and use that information to determine what
can be done. This will help establish the true feasibility of getting to the 50% reduction
level - and whether that is even possible.
• Reward individuals, maybe reward parts of town, that are diverting a lot of material (not
unlike the Recycle-Bank approach) . One hauler wonders how many households are
perhaps already achieving 50% diversion in their own homes . A lower trash collection
fee (the outcome of PAYT) is a reward in itself, but people may not see it from that side.
• It would be good to get the City to help out with supplying customers with larger
recycling containers . For the average household, they should be able to recycle at least a
35 -gallon container' s worth of recycling every week.
• What about giving people a 95 -gallon recycling container and only collecting it every
other week - might even be able to do that with a 65 -gallon bin. The problem for some
companies is that they need to have the right kind of recycling truck to handle those
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 7
larger bins; although it can be done with a semi-automated or rear-loader truck, and
they 're trying to recondition some of their company ' s trucks to handle it.
• Provide more education on what kind of paper people can recycle and what can be put
out in the single-stream mix; one company has been putting information on the new
increase in plastics # 1 -7 in invoices .
• Discuss more diversion of yard waste from the residential stream by having people do
more mulching and "let it lie" practices for lawn clippings . Having a yard waste
collection program would allow people to manage that material separately — although it
could also add more trucks to the street, which would be counterproductive . Discuss
having drop-off centers for green waste where yard waste could be collected for
composting.
• Look at opportunities for capturing more construction and demolition debris ; is the City
recording all the concrete and asphalt that is being re-used and recycled?
• Rebate incentive to haulers for reaching volume goals .
• Institute an environmental fee charged to every household in FTC like Loveland's fee,
including apartment units . Use this fee to fund public awareness efforts and rebates to
haulers and residents taking advantage of recycling or using new methods of recycling
like, composting, Yard waste collection, clean energy, etc .
• Create more drop-off centers or allow haulers to create them without all the regulation,
i. e . must be contained behind a 6 foot fences . The reason for this is because when you
add so much cost to the site, you cannot make it up from the materials .
• Tax incentives to businesses/homeowners that recycle a certain amount
• Tax incentives to haulers who develop new ideas for ways to increase recycling.
• Standardize reporting procedures and process . Everyone makes a different determination
of how many TONS per YARD . The report asks for so many materials when no one is
able to break down reporting that way anymore since recycle center is all SINGLE
STREAM. So why not make it like Loveland's and ask for recycling vs . trash by
Residential and Commercial.
• The city can't be afraid of being the Bad guy. If council and city officials want better
recycling numbers, you have to be willing to say we are the ones pushing this and
citizens have to be responsible .
15. What are the costs of increased diversion, both to haulers and customers ?
The costs of increased diversion to residents, with respect to curbside recycling, is embedded
in their trash bill; trash haulers are understood to pass their costs for collecting recycling on
to customers just as they pass along the costs of collecting trash. The cost is expressed
indirectly, however, because City ordinance prohibits it from being charged as a separate line
item in trash bills; recycling costs are "bundled" into costs identified in the bill for trash, and
may also be in a monthly "flat fee" that haulers can elect to charge . (To counteract the costs
for the trash element of the bill, customers can easily take advantage of pay-as-you-throw
rates by practicing not just recycling, but waste reduction, re-use/recovery, and composting.
This, of course, can represent yet a further reduction in revenues haulers receive from their
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 8
residential customers — this rate structure may currently result in a disincentive to haulers to
fully explain the PAYT system to customers .)
Trash haulers have complained that the recycling part of their collections services is much
more expensive to handle and that they lose money on it. The City is not in a good position
to quantify or explain this economic disincentive to recycle, when the haulers are going from
and to the same customers to collect material, and they pay to throw the trash but get rebated
for the recycling. (At Larimer County' s facilities, it costs $ 13 . 85 per ton to dispose of trash;
the amount of "rebate" paid per ton of recyclables ranges between $ 5 -39 per ton.) City staff
is told there is a net cost for recycling and that the material sales revenues associated with
recyclables do not pay for the cost of collection and material processing. Recyclables can be,
but are not necessarily, more expensive to collect than trash depending on a variety of factors
including collection productivity (average number of accounts served per route) .
It may be that the haulers ' issue is not so much the specific cost of recycling but the fact that
they are operating in a competitive environment. As such, if a hauler is aggressively pursuing
recycling there is an additional associated cost that can put that hauler at a competitive
disadvantage relative to another hauler who is not aggressively pursuing recycling, not
incurring the associated costs and can therefore charge lower rates .
A concern City staff often hears expressed by haulers is the low value of the rebate they
receive for delivering mixed recyclables to the Larimer County recycling plant. Haulers may
use other plants or process the material themselves, and for commodities like paper and
cardboard, those alternatives are being used by at least one hauler. However, for the lower
grade single-stream, commingled recycling that is collected from curbside programs, there
are no other processors within a reasonable haul distance to Fort Collins . For haulers '
commercial customers, the composition of the recycling (often rich in cardboard and paper)
and the larger volumes that can be collected clearly represents a better opportunity for the
hauler to recover their collection costs, compared to residential curbside customers .
16. What models for trash collection are typical nationwide :' For cities similar in size to
Fort Collins ?
According to data provided by Skumatz Economic Research Associates (SERA),
communities utilize a variety of collection systems for municipal trash. The data includes the
100 largest cities in the country, a randomly selected sample of communities throughout the
US , and communities with populations between 50,000 to 120,000 .
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 9
Table 1 : Comparison of Muni ci al Garbage Collection S stems
100 Random Populations 50K-
Collection System Largest Sam le 120K
Municipal collection 77% 33 % 35 %
1 hauler, contract 12% 34 % 31 %
multi hauler, contract 3 % 2% 2%
1 hauler, franchise 1 % 12% 19%'
Multi hauler, franchise 3 % 3 % 2%
1 hauler, license/permit 0% < 1 % 0%
Multi hauler, license/permit 5% 6% 2%
One private hauler 0% < 1 % 0%
Multi hauler private 0% 5 %
competition 6%
No collection, drop off only 0% 5% 3 %
Figure 1 : Comparison of Municipal Garbage Collection Systems
90%
80%
70%
60%
50% E 100 Largest
40% ■ Random Sample
❑ Populations 50K- 120K
30%
20%
10%
0%
�r�� �rfs� r���o r���o�, �`�o e���o °4� !�a�e \\� a
ATTACHMENT 4
City Council Members
Re : Trash Services Study Session Follow-up
September 6, 2008
Page 10
17. Provide some information about the future of the Larimer County Landfill. Do we have
data regarding the number of trash trucks that go into the Landfill from the City?
Larimer County Landfill staff provided the following information:
• The Larimer County Landfill has a finite capacity.
• The landfill at current use rates has about 15 -20 years of life.
• Marc Engemoen will be hosting a " Summit on Solid Waste" in the near future. The
purpose of this summit is to find out from our stakeholders what solid waste will look
like in the future . Marc Engemoen has stated and Stephan Gillette (Landfill
Manager) agrees that the Solid Waste department will transition in the future to the
Resource Recovery department.
• Larimer County does not keep data on the number of trucks that come to the landfill
from City of Ft Collins. Most trash trucks have loads that are from both the city and
the county on board. Some companies may have dedicated routes in the city only but
not all of them. It is also important to note that not all trucks that pick up refuse in Ft
Collins come to the Larimer County landfill. Accurate tonnages for city
"trash" would only come from trucks that picked up city trash exclusively. This data
would need to come from a scale . This is something Larimer County could work
with the city on but the cost of redoing the Landfill ' s entrance area would be costly.
The gates would need to be moved further into the landfill as scales could take more
time .
18. How can we standardize the information from haulers to learn accurate weights for
the materials entering the landfill?
Without a scale at the Larimer County Landfill, it may not be possible to standardize the
data regarding the weights of various trucks hauling within Fort Collins . The hauler' s
estimates of their tonnage of materials vary because of the variety of equipment used and
the condition of compactors . If the City concludes that this information is essential for
decision making, the City could place a portable scale at landfill or require haulers to
weigh a certain number of trucks a day or a certain frequency of trucks over certified
scales somewhere else in the community.
19. What percentage of trucks operated by local haulers are already compliant with
2010 EPA standards ?
According to GSI, their company has 4 trucks that are able to be retrofitted to meet the
2010 emissions standards . GSI would like to upgrade more trucks as possible, but the
cost of steel recently has created problems for them to get replacement parts . Many truck
manufactures simply aren 't stocking parts anymore, so it takes time to get parts delivered.
Tracy Ochsner, the City ' s Fleet Manager, offered some comments when asked about
2010 standards . He points out that the manufacturers will only be able to sell 2010-
compliant vehicles starting 2010, and the haulers who are buying new vehicles will
gradually fall into compliance. In the meantime, they are likely to be running their older
trucks as long as possible to maximize their investment in the equipment.
Why recycle?: City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 6
Attachment A
Recycling
Physical Address: 215 N Mason St, Fort Collins, CO 80524
Mailing Address: PO Box 580, Ft. Collins, CO 80522-0580
Phone: (970) 221-6600
Fax: (970) 224-6177
Email: sgordon@fcgov.com
Normal Business Hours: 8AM-5PM M-F
Why Recycling Matters
There are numerous reasons why the City of Fort Collins encourages citizens and
businesses to recycle. They include a broad range of environmental stewardship
concerns, as well as practical interest in local economic opportunities and
development, including: cost savings, extended landfill lifespans, resource
conservation, energy conservation, economic development, pollution prevention,
greenhouse gas emissions reductions, and fostering a sense of community
involvement and responsibility.
1. Cost Savings
At a basic level that most people can relate to, recycling prevents materials that
have economic value from going to waste. We tend to think of the conventional list
of commodities, whose trade values are posted on the Chicago stock exchange;
steel, aluminum, paper goods, plastics #1 & 2, and glass. But increasingly, other
• materials are becoming economically attractive to salvagers: clothing fabric, shrink-
wrap, grease, and old computers, just to name a few.
Nationally, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates about 30% of the
waste stream gets diverted from landfill disposal (unfortunately, it's much lower in
Colorado), but there is still a lot that is not getting recycled - meaning money and
resources that are getting wasted - as illustrated in Table 1 (note il.
Table 1. The value of un-recycled commodities
Nat'! Un-recycled Value of un-
Material recycling pounds recycled pounds
rate
Aluminum 51.2% 1,446,843,750 $954,916,875
cans
Fiber 50.2% 99,699,203,185 $3,813,494,522
Glass 22.0% 75,730,909,091 $18,478,342
Bottles
HDPE
Plastic 24.2% 2,508,980,000 $577,065,400
Bottles
PET Plastic Bottles 19.6% 3,449,816,326 $931,450,408
• Steel Cans 62.0% 801,661,129 $43,089,286
TOTAL 1 1183,637,413,481 $6,338,494,833
Although the market for recyclables has historically been erratic, rapid industrial
http://fcgov.com/recycling/why_recycle.php 9/9/2008
Why recycle?: City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 6
development in nations like China has caused prices to improve for many
commodities. The market is so strong that in many cases, demand exceeds the
supply currently provided by the American public [note 21.
In Fort Collins, it saves money on household trash bills to recycle, especially with the
recent addition of cardboard and paperboard to curbside bins. By "right-sizing" their
trash container to best fit their households, residents who recycle are able to save
money in avoided trash charges through the city's "pay as you throw" system. And
businesses are learning the same lesson, that recycling and reducing waste can
improve their "bottom line" - thousands of U.S. companies have saved millions of
dollars through their voluntary recycling programs. Many businesses are not yet
recycling in Fort Collins, which represents a significant opportunity for improvement.
(Conducting waste assessments of a business' operations is a good first step; by
taking a close look at their waste management system, it's possible to decide what
could be changed or eliminated in an effort to reduce waste being produced by the
business.)
Well-run recycling programs cost less to operate than waste collection, landfilling,
and incinerations. Loveland has discovered that the municipal garbage utility's costs
to recycle are almost $40 per ton less than the cost to landfill trash, while Denver's
recycling programs saved about $200,000 in landfill costs in 2004 and brought in
nearly $1 million from the sale of recyclables. Unlike many public services, recycling
does function within the market economy, and quite successfully.
2. Extend Landfill Lifespans
Recycling's true value comes from preventing pollution and saving natural resources
and energy, not landfill space. Still, it's important to note that recycling is largely
responsible for averting a landfill crisis in many parts of the country. Recycling and
composting diverted nearly 70 million tons of material away from landfills and
incinerators in 2000, up from 34 million tons in 1990.
As regulations have become more rigorous, the number of permitted landfills in the
United States has dropped by 78% since 1988 [note 3]. New landfills are much larger
than in the past, and more controversial to build because few people are willing to
live in the vicinity of a mega-landfill.
While the Larimer County landfill currently is expected to last another 15-19 years
(or longer, depending on how successful we are at diverting waste), once it does
need to be replaced, a new one will cost taxpayers over $17 million to construct.
3. Conserve Resources
Recycling conserves natural resources, such as timber, water and mineral ores.
National statistics note 41 point to the environmental success of recovery levels for
some materials: paper and paperboard 48%; glass 19%; steel 36%; aluminum 21%.
(We have not been as successful at recovering others, for example plastics at 5%
and textiles at 14%).
Recovered paper currently accounts for 37 percent of the paper industry's fiber
needs [note 51. Without recycling, this material would come from trees; every ton of
newspaper is the equivalent of 12 trees, and every ton of office paper is the
equivalent of 24 trees. When one ton of steel is recycled, 2,500 pounds of iron ore,
1,400 pounds of coal, and 120 pounds of limestone are conserved. Recycling a ton of
paper saves 7,000 gallons of water.
Tree farms and reclaimed mines are not ecologically equivalent to natural forests and
ecosystems. Recycling prevents natural habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, and
http://fegov.com/recycling/why_recycle.php 9/9/2008
Why recycle?: City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 6
soil erosion associated with logging and mining.
• It is not an exaggeration to say that recycling helps ease demand for certain
resources that are being extracted in emerging nations under war-torn, repressive
governments. For example, a mineral called Tantalum - better known as"coltan" - is
used to produce capacitors in electronic devices, especially cell phones (from which it
can be recycled). Coltan mining is contributing to policitical tension between Congo
and Rwanda, as well as loss of habitat for the threatened Eastern Lowland Gorilla.
Smuggled coltan has been implicated as a major source of income for the military
occupation of Congo.
4. Conserve Energy
Supplying recycled materials to industry uses less energy than supplying virgin
materials that incur extra extraction and transportation costs. Additional energy
savings associated with recycling accrue in the manufacturing process itself, since
the materials have already undergone processing. And of course, by saving energy,
recycling helps the U.S. reduce its reliance on oil.
Recycling aluminum saves the nation 95 % of the energy that would have been
needed to make new aluminum from ore: one aluminum can saves enough electricity
to light a 100-watt bulb for 31/2 hours. It takes 60% less energy to recycle steel than
it does to make it from raw materials. Making recycled newspaper saves 40%,
recycled plastics 70%, and recycled glass 40%.
The EPA reported that in 2000, recycling resulted in an annual energy savings equal
to the amount of energy used in 6 million homes - over 660 trillion BTU's - and
• expected that to rise to 900 trillion BTUs in 2005.
S. Create Jobs / Economic Development
Recycling is a big industry, comparable in size to our auto and truck manufacturing
industry. In 2000, it employed over 1.1 million people and generated an annual
payroll of $37 billion, representing a significant force in the country's economy, job
creation and economic development [note e]. For comparison, incinerating 10,000
tons of waste creates one job and landfilling 10,000 tons of waste creates six jobs;
recycling 10,000 tons of waste creates 36 jobs [note 7].
The public sector's investment in local recycling programs pays great dividends by
creating private sector jobs. For every job collecting recyclables, there are 26 jobs in
processing the materials and manufacturing them into new products [note a].
As an example of how efficiently the salvage market functions, a recycled aluminum
beverage can returns to the grocer's shelf as a new, filled can in as few as 60 days
after collection. The steel industry recycles nearly 19 billion cans into new products
each year, or about 600 cans per second.
6. Prevent Pollution
Manufacturing with recycled materials, with very few exceptions, produces less air
and water pollution than manufacturing with virgin materials. It results in a net
reduction for ten major categories of air pollutants (such as nitrogen oxide,
particulates, and sulfur oxides) and eight major categories of water pollutants [note
9].
• In the U.S., processing minerals contributes almost half of all reported toxic
emissions from industry, sending 1.5 million tons of pollution into the air and water
each year. Recycling can significantly reduce these emissions [note io].
http://fcgov.com/recycling/why_recycle.php 9/9/2008
Why recycle?: City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 6
Landfills can be major sources of groundwater pollution if watery "leachate" escapes
through underlying clay or plastic linings. Leachate from municipal landfills is similar
in composition to that of hazardous waste landfills and in fact, 20% of the sites on
the Superfund list (the nation's most hazardous sites) are solid waste landfills.
Consumer electronics are creating a growing source of pollution, constituting 40% of
the lead found in landfills. The National Safety Council predicts that in the U.S.
between as many as 680 million computers will become obsolete within the next few
years; in addition to 1 billion pounds of lead, this waste will contain more than 4
billion pounds of plastic, 1.9 million pounds of cadmium, 1.2 million pounds of
chromium, and nearly 400,000 pounds of mercury [notell].
7. Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Methane is a major greenhouse gas that is 20 to 30 times more potent in its global
warming effects than carbon dioxide [note 121, and municipal solid waste (MSW)
landfills are the largest source of human-related methane emissions in the United
States, accounting for about 34% of these emissions.
For every 6 tons of recycled container glass used, 1 ton of carbon dioxide, a
greenhouse gas, is reduced. Recycling one ton of aluminum is equivalent to not
releasing 13 tons of carbon dioxide into the air [note 13].
S. Engender a Sense of Community Involvement and Responsibility
For two decades, public opinion polls have routinely reported that seven out of ten
Americans view recycling as an important solution to some of the planet's
environmental problems [note 141. According to Resource Recycling Magazine, more
people recycle than vote. A recent survey of Fort Collins residents [note 153 found
there continues to be strong support for recycling: 98 % of respondents believe that
recycling is "good for the city of Fort Collins."
Recycling is so popular because the American public wants to do it, and they expect
to be able to do it. Perhaps it is because of the curriculum about the value of
recycling that has been taught to children, or has to do with people's awareness of
their relationship to others and their responsibilities to them. Regardless, recycling is
an important way that mainstream America expresses commitment to the
environment, through minor adjustments to its daily trash disposal habits, shopping
choices, and product consumption.
Notes
Note 1: Curbside Value Partnership: www.recyclecurbside.oro
Note 2: National Recycling Coalition 2005 "tip sheet"
Note 3: Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Generation,
Recycling, and Disposal in the U.S.: Facts and Figures for 2003
www.epa.govZmswZmsw99.htm
Note 4: Environmental Protection Agency, Municipal Solid Waste Generation,
Recycling, and Disposal in the U.S.: Facts and Figures for 2003
www.ei)a.gov/msw/msw99.htm
Note 5: American Forest and Paper Association, 2002
http://fcgov.com/recycling/why_recycle.php 9/9/2008
Why recycle?: City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 6
Note 6: National Recycling Coalition, "US Recycling Economic Information Study,
• Final Report," prepared by R.W. Beck Inc., July 2001 www.nrc-
recvcle.org/resources/rei/docs/fuIIrei report.pdf.
Note 7: EPA, "Resource Conservation Challenge: Campaigning Against Waste,"
EPA 530-F-02-033, 2002.
Note 8: NRC's "US Recycling Economic Information Study, Final Report,"
prepared by R.W. Beck Inc., July 2001
Note 9: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency...
Note 10: World Watch Institute...
Note 11: Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, "Fourth Annual Computer Report Card,"
January 9, 2003 www.svtc.org/cleancc/pubsL2002report.htm
Note 12: EPA, 1996 www.nrdc.org/cities/recycling/recyc/chap2.asp
Note 13: Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, "Rethinking Recycling: An
Oregon Waste Reduction Curriculum," 2001
www.deq.state.or.us/wmc/solwaste/rethinkrecyg rethinkrecyc.htmI
Note 14: "Waste of a Sort," Wall Street Journal, January 19, 1995.
• Note 15: Fort Collins, CO Garbage and Recycling Survey, December 2005 by
Corona Research, available at
www.fcgov.com/talkingtrash/pdf/ft Collins garbage recycling survey 2005-
1222 final.pdf
•
http://fegov.com/recycling/why_recycle.php 9/9/2008
C h ,�,4 e Task -P;,c¢
Repo,-4
Push Towards 50%Waste Diversion Goal, Help form recycling cooperatives for small
businesses.
Many successes and improvements to recycling
have occurred in recent years. Yet only 25-30% All Customers
of Fort Collins' waste stream is being diverted • Enhance short-term education around new
from landfill disposal. measures.
• In absence of appropriate private sector
In 2006 the Fort Collins Draft Solid Waste facilities, create City-sponsored construction
Strategic Plan was completed to analyze and and demolition (C&D) drop-off site.
recommend strategies to help Fort Collins meet
its 2010 goal of 50% waste diversion. Several
strategies were selected from the long list as . Government
having special value for also advancing climate Establish contact preferences to encourage
protection efforts. Based on modeled costs, recycling and waste reduction for City C&D
benefits and practical considerations, 13 jobs.
strategies were selected from this list of 20 as • The City would encourage private
the optimal approach for advancing waste partnerships for constructing multiple
diversion and greenhouse gas reduction. These community drop-offs to collect more
strategies include: recyclables (paper, glass, etc.).
Residential Customers The CTF recommends that the 2015 level of
• Adopt a requirement for service providers to implementation modeled for the Fort Collins
collect single-stream recycling from Draft Solid Waste Strategic Plan
residential customers as soon as market be achieved by 2011.
trends allow.
• Implement on-going curbside recycling Greenhouse Gas Benefits
226,000 Annual Tons CO2e avoided in 2012
program improvements, including more 34.6% 2012 Short-Term New Measures
designated materials and standard options 1,740,000 Cumulative Tons CO2e avoided in 2020
for larger recycling containers. $33/ton Net Cost-Effectiveness
• Amend Fort Collins Pay-As-You-Throw Increase Energy Efficiency Programs Above
residential trash rates ordinance so that rate Existing Levels
design further enhances waste reduction
efforts. The City of Fort Collins' Electric Energy Supply
• Start by providing a residential yard waste Policy currently has a goal to reduce per capita
drop-off site. Provide customers, upon electricity use 10% below the 2002 levels by
request to their trash haulers, with optional 2012. Electricity users are assessed a 1% fee on
curbside yard waste collection service on a their bill to pay for energy conservation
weekly basis. Ultimately, ban yard waste programs to achieve that goal. Existing 2007
from Fort Collins curbside collection. energy conservation programs implemented by
Fort Collins Utilities are expected to reduce 0.6%
Commercial Customers of total electricity usage, on a trajectory to
• Amend Fort Collins PAYT ordinance to meet the existing goal.
include all commercial customers.
This measure proposes to increase energy
27
F 0 R T C 0 L L I N S C L I M A T E T A S K F 0 R C E R E P O R T
efficiency and consumption reduction above the If the City wishes to pursue this strategy, the
existing policy by increasing conservation Fort Collins Utilities will develop a residential
programs to achieve a 1% reduction of total rate structure proposal. Commercial and
electricity load. One percent load reduction is industrial electricity customers were not
an industry best practice, and it results in a net considered in this analysis because they already
savings to program participants- are charged according to their electricity use.
Greenhouse Gas Benefit Greenhouse Gas Benefit
17,000 Annual Tons CO2e avoided in 2012 18,000 Annual Tons CO2e avoided in 2012
2.6% Percent of Tbta(`new Measures 2.8% Percent of Short-Term New Measures
307,000 Cumulative Tons CO2e avoided in 2020 235,000 Cumulative Tons CO2e avoided in 2020
($1/ton) Net Cost-Effectiveness-SAVINGS $3/ton Net Cost-Effectiveness
Relationship to Other Programs Relationship to Other Programs
The Colorado Climate Action Panel recommends The Colorado Climate Action Panel (2007)
ramping up electricity and natural gas demand recommendations call for tiered electric rates
side management (DSM) programs as a cost- for all customers, starting in 2010 to promote
effective strategy to reduce emissions, but does conservation and provide revenue for DSM
not identify a funding approach. programs. The Denver Climate Plan (2007) also
proposes tiered electric rates for at[ customers,
to encourage conservation and provide revenue
for DSM programs.
• In 2007 48% of community wide greenhouse gas ') MIWNWAWNW
emissions came from electricity use, making it
the largest source of local greenhouse gas The Fort Collins Utilities currently offers free
emissions. The residential sector alone uses energy assessments to local businesses. This
485,000 MWh of electricity and produces 24% of measure would offer low cost energy assessment
the community wide greenhouse gas emissions for residences. As analyzed, the cost of the
inventory. This recommendation works in home energy assessment would be split 50:50
concert with three other residential between homeowner and the Fort Collins
conservation strategies that are designed to Utilities.
promote energy conservation in homes and save
homeowners money. If 600 homes each year received assessments
and upgrades, 7,200 homes would be upgraded
This strategy proposes to revise the residential by 2020, or 13%of the residences in 2020. This
electricity rate to promote conservation and measure would result in a net participant
potentially raise revenue, with provisions to be savings of $19,000,000 in 2020. Analysis is based
developed for low-income households and all- on results from Boulder's pilot residential
electric homes- Initially the CTF explored a assessment program.
revenue neutral tiered electricity rate structure
with low-income provisions. However, when Greenhouse Gas Benefits
they moved to support a program to install 15,000 Annual Tons CO2e avoided in 2012
smart meters in homes, they felt this opened up 2.3% Percent of Short-Term New Measures
324,000 Cumulative Tons CO2e avoided in 2020
• a larger range of rate structures than solely ($59/ton) Net Cost-Effectiveness- SAVINGS
revenue neutral tiered rates.
__..........__................._. ........._...._.........................._.................. _............_..._.._......_.................__..._.._.._............_...........................
.....
28 CHAPTER 5-CTF RECOMMENDATIONS
• Attachment B
Fort Collins Residential Trash Hauler
Customer Education Materials
Ram Waste
Gallegos Sanitation Inc.
Waste Management, Inc.
2008
RAM
WASTE SYSTEMS,INC. LOCALLY OND
(970)226-3396 QUALEIT'DRENDABLE'SERVICE
*HOW TO PREPARE YOUR RECYCLABLES•
NER'SPAPER I MAGAZINES/JUNKMAIL/CATALOGS/PHONEBOOKS/OFFICE
PAPER:
Clean and dry. Please place in grocery bags and keep inside recycle bin.
CORRUGATED CARDBOARD/PAPERBOARD:
• Ordinary boxes,cereal, food,gift,beverage,shoe and pizza boxes
• Should be clean and dry and not to exceed 2'X2' in size per item
• Boxes must be broken down alone the folds—DO NOT SMASH FLAT
• Items must be placed inside the recycle bin or in a box equal to or smaller in size than the bin itself
• Remove all materials or packaging from inside boxes
GLASS JARS AND BOTTLES:
Clear,green and brown food and beverage glass accepted.Rinse thoroughly and remove lids. Labels can
stay on. NO plate glass,drinking glasses,cookware,light bulbs,or ceramic products.
ALUMINUM AND STEEL:
Aluminum and steel (tin-coated) food and beverage cans,aluminum foil,and empty aerosol cans.
PLASTIC BOTTLES AND CONTAINERS:
Milk, water,juice,soda, laundry, fabric softener,soap and lotion bottles, small food containers- Rinse
thoroughly-
SORRY, BUT THE CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM CANNOT ACCEPT:
• Styrofoam • Hard plastics • Containers with • Wire
• Soiled cardboard • Planters Leftover Product • Plastic Pipe
and paper • Hard cover Books
PLEASE NOTE:
• To assure pickup, have recycling out by 7:00 a.m. and placed in a visible location.
FORT COLLINS RESIDENTS ONLY: VOLUME BASED RATES/PAY-AS-YOU-THROW
In 1996,the City of Fort Collins modified the City Code requiring waste haulers to charge rates
for residential trash collection based on the volume of trash generated by each individual resident.
This means the more you throw away,the more it will cost.;thus the term,pay-as-you-throw. In
addition,the code requires haulers to structure their rates based on 30-33 gallon container size
increments.The following sizes are available for regular weekly pickup. 1-95 gallon Kart,
2-32 gallon cansibags, 1-32 gallon can/bag. All haulers are mandated to charge for extra trash set
out in addition to the selected service level. The Fort Collins City Code also requires waste
haulers to offer curbside recycling service to all residential customers.
Service is provided weekly and the following materials are collected:newspaper/magazine/junk
mail,cardboard/paperboard,glass bottles and jars,aluminum and steel cans,trays,foil,plastic
bottles and containers.
SerT , o� y �
• ceage�co�
.sa�vsr.�rso�f
2/15/2008
«NAME»
eADDRESS1 b Account#: «ACCT»
«ADDRESS2 >r HOA: aSERVNAME»
aADDRESS4 »
RE. Annual PAYT Notification for HOAs
Dear«CONTACT»,
The purpose of this letter is to remind you of the PAY-AS-YOU-THROW (PAYT) program requirements for
waste collection in Fort Collins and Loveland, as well as service options we make available to your
neighborhoods under this program. In April of 2004, group accounts became subject to the PAYT ordinance.
City codes currently state that haulers are required to charge residents PAYT rates and to apply additional
fees for all waste in excess of the selected service level. All group accounts are required to be set up under a
3-tiered PAYT rate structure including charges for extra trash (January 2006) and abide by a formula for
pricing stipulated in the Code.
City Code requirements also include an obligation on the part of the Management company or HOA
• representative to notify all neighborhood residents of their individual Pay-As-You-Throw options
annually.
Please make special note that no group accounts within Ft Collins city limits are allowed to utilize a single
container service for all residents. Each household must be allowed to choose from 35/65/95 gallons per
week(or similar volume)service options.
To help you budget sufficiently for the PAYT requirements and ensure rate compliance as required by law,we
have put together a few options that are working already in many area HOAs. We offer the following
Services:
Tier 1 - One 33-gallon customer-owned container or bag OR one 35-gallon GSI Cart
Tier 2 - Two 33-gallon customer-owned containers or bag OR one 65-gallon GSI Cart
Tier 3- Three 33-gallon customer-owned containers or bag OR one 95-gallon GSI Cart
Additional Option -Prepaid GSI BAG Service includes monthly base fee +cost of package of 20 bags
ALL options include Unlimited Recycling service(Recycle Container costs may apply)
EXTRA TRASH
We currently provide three options for customers to choose from for handling their extra trash. First,
customers can elect to be billed quarterly for their extra trash Second, they can purchase a package of GSI
Teal bags. Third, they have the option of purchasing sets (5 per set) of Orange Tags to customers for extra
trash. Customers can pay for any of the above methods by check or credit card and will soon have access to
our online payment options.
The best way for customers to save on the cost of their extra waste is by using the GSI Bag or Tag Service
options. These methods are offered at a discount rate from the quarterly billing option. These methods
ensure that we receive payment for the extra waste we collect and eliminate the record-keeping
• requirements We frequently have residents that dispute these charges since so much time can pass
between when they had the extra waste to when we bill for it. In addition, some residents do not understand
v�
GALLE+GOS
YCl1P0 / ll: u
that the Neighborhood Association only pays for the standard service container, and that they are individually
responsible for their extra trash charges or for higher service levels-
There is a $2.00 billing charge for extra trash billed to individual households using their own containers who
do not prepay for their extra waste. This billing will include a description of the Pay-As-You-Throw program
requirements for residents living within Larimer County and information on their three billing options for extra
trash. We hope this billing fee will encourage individuals to use either the prepaid Bag or Tag options,
making it easier for you by standardizing your billing and helping us cover the additional cost that goes into
recording and billing extra charges. This fee will also keep the cost of service down for those households
who stay at or below their selected service levels. This fee is applicable to any group account customer that
we must send a bill to for the collection of EXTRA TRASH. If the customer already receives a bill for
Yardwaste,they should not receive this fee on any bill where the full yardwaste service charge is present.
We need your support and help at this time to assist us with maintaining our compliance with city PAYT
requirements. You can help support our efforts by ensuring all residents are notified of their service options
and by encouraging residents to use the BagJTag Options, prepaying for extras or moving to a service level
that best fits their household's needs.
I have included a copy of the description of all PAYT options available to Larimer County residents that is sent
to group account customers with the extra trash billing. 1 have also included the City of Fort Collins group
account letter for your review and you can find more complete information on the city websites. If you have
questions and would like to further discuss this letter or PAYT, please call me at your earliest convenience @
(970)498-4083,
Thank You,
Levi Gallegos
Dept- Direct Line
(970)498-4085
City PAYT Websites.
http7//fcqov.com/recycline/ordinances.ph
http//www ci loveland co us/citvclerks/municipal%20code%20word°/a20docs/titleO7.doc
(Look under Section 7.16) _
TBE RECYCLER
®*0
0� VOLUME r
Electronics Waste Banned Comes to Fort Collins
orlief this year. Fort Collins City Council adopted a new
ordinance that bons the collection of electronic waste from _
residential households within city limits. The law will be _
implemented over the coming months, with many details yet to
be decided. The new ordinance will be similar to the existing state r -
low that bons e-waste disposed of by businesses. schools,
government and other industry. State law prohibits the disposal
of any items that include a circuit board with the objective of _
keeping computers, monitors. TVs, and cell phones out of state
landfills. In recent years we hove seen the need for proper disposal
of these items grow astronomically. Estimates for 2005 disposal of
personal computers alone soar around 60 million units! ��71
The ban is an important part of protecting the local environment
and improving recycling efforts. Computers and monitors contain
several materials that are considered HAZARDOUS by EPA
standards,including lead,cadmium,mercury,chromium and other
flame retardants. If these items are simply disposed of in the local
landfill.there is the danger of groundwater and soil contamination
which can lead to serious illnesses.
Before discarding any electronic devices into the trash,please consider your options.especially if the device is still
in working condition. Recycling these items can be accomplished in a number of ways. First, whether it is your
old cell phone, computer, monitor. VCR, or televisions, try to find it o new home. Working devices may be
donated to a charity or handler that will ensure they get to someone who can still use them- If it no longer works.
it may be turned over to a reputable e-waste recyceer who can ensure that it is disassembled properly and
materials, such as metals & plastics, are sent to be recycled to make new products. In most of these cases.
working parts are sent back to manufacturers or others to create refurbished products-
As a GSI customer, it is very impor tont to recognize that these items can no longer be disposed of at curbside with
your regular household trash. Please call ahead to make special pickup arrangements with us for electronic
items. We can odd the cost of the collection to your current bill or you may pay separately for collection. We are
working on details of how to best handle this special customer disposal need, but for the time being, we will
continue to collect These items through SPECIAL PICKUP arrangements for larger items including televisions.
computers&monitors and items of similar size and larger. For small
- - ---- items such as calculators, cell phones, and rechargeable batteries.
Cartridges for Kids other local walk-in services ore available. We are considering special
One great way to start recycling events through neighborhood groups and HOA's as a part of our
your e waste and similar items is to Neighborhood Clean-up Services where we would have someone
donate them to a local school of onsite collecting these items(fora fee TBD)during your neighborhood
your choice through the local clean-up event. Visit the sites listed for more information on e-waste
recycling.area rec clers and more:
y� Cartridges for Kids Program. You y g Y
can recycle your emptyprinter www_fcaov.com/recycling/computer-recvC�oho
cartridges, cell phones, lopiops. www.cdohesfote.co.us/hm/electronics/index.htm
PDAs. Pods and more. Contact www areenerchoices.oro elecironicsrecycling/el home.cim
WendvGConfrogesfork as�..cc_m or
call direct of 215-9026 for more If you are interested in finding out more about these clean-ups,
information on how you can arrange o special pickup.or have suggestions for how we can meet
participate. Recycle todoyand be !�� the challenges of this new ordinance, please email us of
part of o school's future' Ij CustServiceaQicllegosSanitofion.eom. We really want to hear from
— you!
S�[t'rorJ y3
NO t07 IW9 AZ�OYCLER
VOLUME 10 ISSUE 2
A Service to Fit Your Needs Don't You Love Lemonade?
Do you have the right service to fit your household's It is once again time to mow lawns. trim trees and
needs? You may want to consider your options. At hedges, weed gardens and more. So. what do you
Gallegos Sanitation, you always hove a choice! We do with this increased waste? Some mulch their gross:
offer the widest range of service options in the area. some have their compost piles: but over a thousand
For your home or business, we have a service we can GSI customers use our curbside yordwaste collection
tailor to your specific needs. As a Pay-As-You-Throw program! From May-October,these customers don't
community, managing your trash helps you manage worry about the odor from composting or tracking
your pocketbook too! As service volumes increase,so minced gross clippings that cling to feet and shoes
does the cost. At the some time if your container is Throughout their homes. They simply go about their
too small and every week you are setting out additional yard work,rolling their special 65-gallon yordwoste cart
items, the extra charges may add to more than the around the yard to where they need if,filling it as they
next larger service level. As you can see,you may want go. They don't have to struggle loading their gross
to take a step up or down! Just look at some of the into plastic bags or worry about slipping a disk houting
services we offer: them to the curb on trash day, let alone deal with it
when they break! Have you ever smelled the stuff? If
GSI Cart Services - our 35(limited), 65. 95-gollon size really stinks when you get that stuff on your hands:
carts are clean and most convenient to use especially when it's several days old.
Your Can Services-You may elect to use your own Come collection day, all Yordwaste customers have
30-33 Gallon trash cans or bags in service level to do is wheel the cart to the curb, set out what ever
increments of 1-Can.2-Cans or 3-Cons per week doesn't fit in the cart(up to on extra 35-gollons worth,
like a bundle of branches), and sip on their cool glass
GSI BAG or TAG Services -You can elect to pay a of lemonade...
small base fee& purchase Teal GSI bags from us for a It's never too late to start service, but why wait? Call
fee that includes The service. You set out as many or us Today!We'll supply the cart and the service-We hope
as few as you need, when you need. Tag service is you won't mind getting your own lemonade.
i similar but we provide you with a sticker that you must
fix To your own bags or around the handle of your own
trash con. If you hardly have any waste,these are the HOLIDAY
services for you!
Remember Fort Collins&Loveland residents can sign
up for unlimited recycling service for no additional Area Landfills are closed every year on the following holidays:
charge to further reduce disposal costs.We now offer New Years Day-Memorial Day-Independence Day -Labor
recycling in nearly all of Lorimer and Western Weld Day-Thanksgiving Day-Christmas Day
County at a small fee based on participation and the
area. Contact us today for more details!
For 2007.it your pickup day falls ON or AFTER the following
Spring Clean-up Services holiday during the regular work week,your normal pickup will
be delayed by one day:
Getting ready to cleanup the old homestead for the
summer? You have probably set aside the coming Memorial Day Monday,May 281h
weekends to do the work. but have you thought of Independence Day Wednesday.July 41^
the extra waste you will generate through your cleaning Labor Day Monday,September 3"'
efforts? Give us o call We have a service to meet Thanksgiving Day Thursday.November 22"
your needs. From One-Time pickups to Small TemporaryCNew Yea Day Tuesday,December 11
New Year's Day Tuesday,January 1"
dumpster rentals to large Neighborhood Cleon-ups.
we will take care of it.
Do you hove an organized neighborhood group or 1941 Heath Parkway 02
HOA? Whynot contact them and arrange a Pod Collins,co
g Phone: (970)484-5556
Neighborhood Clean-up this spring? It is an excellent fox: (970)484-0662
way to meet neighbors,get rid of unwanted junk and comments?Moil to:
debris. and get more volunteers involved in cleaning GALLEGOS P.O.Box 1986
up neighborhood common areas too! Contact us to SAJV/TAT/ON Fort Collins.Co 80522
make the right arrangements today! ° ° Visit us @ www.Gailegosswitation.com
r r r r r r r r
�1RECYCLER
4607 VOLUMtlo itsiut
How Severe Weather Affects Waste Collection
Weather is an element we cannot live without, whether it is the , _
spring rains that bring in much needed moisture,or the warm
sunlight that helps crops to grow. Most weather conditions,
even when severe,do not have a major affect on our ability to service our `--
customers. We regularly work in extreme heal throughout the summer,or
heavy rains during the spring. However, there are two major weather
conditions that can adversely affect your trash collection:wind and snow. _
The severe snow storms of late December served as a real eye opener for
many city officials,business owners and especially waste haulers. While '"+'
we have encountered many such storms through the decades,few were
as crippling-
SNOWY DAYS ""�
In March of 2003,our area was hit with a storm that left 24 inches of snow.
The December 2006 storm left us with almost 30 inches of snow. Storms _
of this magnitude greatly affect how we pick up trash for several reasons.
Visibility and icy road conditions greatly increase the amount of time that
is spent on route since drivers must operate their vehicles with a much
•J greater measure of caution. Collection vehicles are extremely heavy and slide easily as speed increases- Safety is an
extremely important issue to our company and recidess driving under any condition is not tolerated.
Snow removal efforts are mainly directed towards the major thoroughfares in our area. Residential streets are often plowed
several days after the storm or not plowed at all. When these streets are left unplowed,collection vehicles may sink into the
snow and become stuck,since they must stop and start on each street numerous times. Drivers often must try to maneuver
around abnormal obstacles,including cars that are stuck in the streets and large snow drifts.
When there is a major snowstorm,there is only a limited amount of space to pile up the snow around commercial businesses,
especially since retailers value every parking space. Under these circumstances,snow is often plowed in front of the trash
dumpster or enclosure.When this happens,it becomes nearly impossible to remove the dumpster from the enclosure or move
the dumpster to the truck,since even the smallest dumpsters we service weigh nearly 400lbs empty. The addition of snow or
ice, especially it it has had the opportunity to thaw and refreeze,increases the possibility of injury to personnel and further
decreases container mobility.
WINDY DAYS
All state regulated landfills are mandated to close when sustaining winds reach 30 miles per hour.These landfills try to provide
the trash haulers with as much advance notice as possible as to when the landfill will close. At limes,though,that could be as
little as fifteen minutes notice.When the landfills close,trash collectors can only continue to operate until they fill all of their
collection vehicles. If the windy conditions continue into the next day, the landfills remain closed and our collection efforts
remain on hold until we are able to dump our trucks. Gallegos Sanitation has been known to transport trash to other landfills
or transfer stations within the state in an effort to continue operating.Still,landfill closures are beyond our control.
During the December 2006 snowstorm, Gallegos Sanitation made every feasible attempt to service everyone reasonably
accessible.High winds lead to the closure of area landfills the first few days of the storm. Only about 25%of Friday, 12/23/06
routes were completed. Weekend customers were notified and,where access was available,services were completed both
Saturday and Sunday.Recycling collections were postponed for the week following the storms and trash collection resumed
Tuesday following Christmas and was caught up in all urban areas by the end of the week before the New Year's holiday. Many
areas still remained at least partially obstructed in the days that followed.
• Please understand that due to these extreme conditions. trash collection becomes nearly impossible. When it becomes
unsafe for us and when we cause safety issues for others, we will cease operations until conditions allow. We are firmly
committed to completing our routes every day so we assure you that we will make every possible attempt to make it happen.
TER
I-Wir► I • ►
Recyclable Items for 2007 Just a Few Reminders
The fo:lowing test are 'ems designated as Recyclable 4 Are you a Yardwaste Recycle(? Why not try our seasonal
materials through our residential curbside collection curbside Yardwaste Collection Program? Service starts the
program for this year. Please note proper preparation first week of May and runs through October. This past
instructions. You car download an updated recycle November these participating customers receiveda free Leaf
guide from our webs,le. Drop-oft. We provide a 65-gallon cart but you can recycle up
Acceptable Curbside Recyclables to 100 gallons per week for one small fee! All GSI customers
living within Fort Collins or Windsor are eligible to participate.
Type I and 2 plastics(milk jugs. pop bottles) Signup now to ensure equipment availability.
Green,Amber.Clear Glass
Aluminum&oiner Metal Cons(Aerosol Cons 4 Please be aware of the danger created by snow and
okay) ice left on your sidewalk or driveway. Be sure to remove
Office Paper&Newsprint including inserts snow and ice from the sidewalks around your trash pickup
Junk Mail.Magazines&Catalogs area on your service day. Secure lids to trash containers,
Cardboard&Paperboard including pizza. cereal. and secure recyclable materials throughout the fall and
shoe and beer boxes,egg cartons,popertowet/ winter,since we frequently encounter high winds- During
toilet paper rolls extreme weather conditions including high winds,you may
want to hold your recyclables an extra week to ensure they
Be sure to remove a� pumps, sprayers, lids or caps are not carried away. Place trash and recycle containers
from bottles and rinse inem ihoroughly. Do not include in an area that is highly visible from the street, and avoid
plastic tubs or plastic grocery bogs. tissues, lightbulbs, using white trashbags on snowy days.
window or plate glass. or cookware.
4 Remember to put your services on hold if you are
Aerosol cans should be completely empty of oil con planning a vacation that lasts more than a week.
tents. Remove any promotional stickers,credit cards,
membership cards or other non-paper items from junk 4 Would you like to let our customers know about your
mail. locally-owned business? We are considering including a
company profile of a different locally-owned business
Please be sure to break down boxes along the folds customer each quarter in this newsletter. It you are
and place them in your recycle bin or in a box next to interested in learning more,contact our office.
and no larger than you recycle bin. Do not 'smash'
them flat Cardboord boxes should NOT EXCEED 2'x2' 4 Are you recycling at work? Your employer may not be
but may be cut down to meet size requirements- Do aware of these optional services. Whether your needs are
not include any packaging materials such as Styrofoam. large or small,we provide services tailored to tit the exact
plastic, or packing paper. needs of your business- Contact our commercial sales
department for more information or to set up services today!1
Do not include any containers for food storage, fast
food. pesticides or herbicides. solvents. paints or
adhesives. medical supplies, flower pots or garden HOLIDAY
plastics, or toys.
REMEMBER: ITEMS THAT DO NOT FIT THE
PREPARATION STANDARDS MAYBE LEFT OR Area Landlills are closed every year on the following holidays:
COLLECTED BY THE TRASH CREW AT AN New Years Day-Memorial Day-Independence Day-Labor
ADDITIONAL FEE. Day-Thanksgiving Day-Christmas Day
For 2007,it your pickup day falls ON or AFTER the following
�® a � (y ♦ ~• �r♦ holiday during the regular work week,your normal pickup will
be delayed by one day:
1941 Heath Parkway 02
Fod Collins,CO Memorial Day Monday.May 28M
Phone: (970)484-5556 Independence Day Wednesday.July 4-
Fox (970)484-0662 Labor Day Monday,September 3'^
v v Comments?Mod to: Thanksgiving Day Thursday.November 22-
GALLE4170S P O-Box 1986 Christmas Day Tuesday,December 25M
SAJV/TAT/O/V Fort Collins,CO 80522 New Year's Day Tuesday,January V
. . . c a r • a r r Visit us @ www.Galiegos5anitation.com
/rtherift ColoradoSince-1950
-
RECYCLING GUIDELINES
FOR RESIDENTIAL SERVICE CUSTOMERS
' INC-0RPORATCD
IJCTS
& PAPEMBOAMD 11Et45PAPEMS A11D ALL I11SEM7;5 MAGAAIIIES &t 'GELEPHO11E S,001%,S
ker boxes,gift/shirt shoe boxes FW Glossy Inserts are okay No glue`h)�ndings more than'h inch thick
cartons&paper tubes,soap/tissue boxes Keep all paper products dry No paperback,or hard-.covered books
Iders&boxes,EMPTY pizza boxes �`+ '� Help reduce litter caused by high winds by
and envelopes;paper bags placing your papers In a separate paper bag.
!, packaging paper.
owels/plates/cups/tissues/napkins OFFICE PAPER & DullITMAII, NOT ACCEPTED' P�ttcbagss(Ving or wire
!! ated milk cartons White paper,colored paper-pastels only, paperback orhard?tavarg`d oolisr j<Nckes,decals,etc.
Carbon less paper,envelopes-includes those No neons�oi degp tones rJoc rbnn'pdper. No self-adheslve
.r .
with plastic windows, labels,and nataoh o'rtp`sRPPPer envelopes,
3' Coated paper,tax,g lossy brochures(staples okay) No plasticcodtedpaperssurh as ream wrappers,pet food
the folds,pieces must be cut to 2'x2'max advertisements. File folders-manila or pastel. orcharcodltiaysfglh'llaed boxes;waxed paper or photos.
D ITEMS
GLASS BOTOI.ES & 'JARS P1*A8'8IC COIYGAIIIEMS n?UGAI, CA113
' Beerb'otties,IpodJars,spirit&wine bottles ,Remove lids and rinse Steel and aluminum cans such as
1 - Type a1 PETE and s2 HOPE coffee,deodorant,beverage,hair spray
} t. Remdve lids and rinse. Narrow-necked bottles ONLY. and food cans
Paperlabels can stay on Please rinse thoroughly
Remove metal lids-and place,inside
oftheempry can to'contaln,sharpedges
Labels can stayon
� S�' Empty aeropol cans are okay,but please
q NOT ACCEPTED Plastic bag;,no wide;mou(h
plastic contalaerssuch as yogurt ormaigarinetubS. �1� ��� remove the cap
NopesticidebottI s.^No plate glass,drinking glasses,oven Include your plastic milk jugs and soda bottles
^ cookware,light bulbs,or ceramics. of various sizes and similar containers that are
type At and s2 ONLY
V1VY
WASTE MANAGEMEW
ix
Think Green, Think Waste Management
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF NORTHERN COLORADO
500 E VINE DR, FORT COLLINS CO 80521
970-482-6319 or 866-482-6319
2007 CURBSIDE RECYCLING PROGRAM
Curbside recycling is available to customers who have WM's refuse collection service
Acceptable Recycled Items
All items must fit inside your W,bl 18-gallon recycle bin and be out at the curb by 7a.m.on your designated
service day
Properly preparing your recyclables for collection plays an important role in a successful recycling
program. To avoid contamination,please follow these easy instructions before placing your recyclables in
the collection bin.
❑ Aluminum and Steel: Aluminum and steel(tin-coated)food and beverage cans and
empty aerosol cans. Metal jar lids and metal bottle caps. Please rinse all items.
❑ Glass Bottles and Jars of any color. Rinse and remove all caps. Please avoid breaking
glass. No window glass, mirrors, light bulbs or dishware
❑ Plastic Containers: All plastic bottles and jars with a smaller opening than the widest part
of the base. Rinse,remove caps and flatten. No plastic bags, toys, hazardous waste,
yogurt or margarine tubs.
❑ Newspaper(Including all inserts),Magazines,Catalogs,Office paper, Phone books and
Junk mail.
❑ Corrugated Cardboard,Paperboard(aka Chipboard)and brown Paper Bags. Flatten all
pieces and place inside paper bag or cardboard box equivalent to size of 18-gallon bin.
***New for 2007***Electronic Waste(e-waste)such as computers,monitors,cell phones,TV's
and other electronics will not be accepted with your normal curbside service. Please contact our
local office at 482-6319 to arrange a separate removal for those items and for pricing***
Recycling Bin Purchase
Waste Management sells their recycle bins for a non-refundable$20.00. Recycle bin is then property of the
customer.
City of Fort Collins Customers: In compliance with the"Pay as you throw"ordinance
for your trash service,please call our Customer Service Center at 970-482-6319 for
various service level options and associated variable rates.
i
WASTE MANAGEMENT
�3
wi
1bc fi�llawing 6miC
in(a'rnatiou will
hoip yer, understand — -.
the sorviccs that
ifiASTE MANAGEMENT WASTE MANAGEMENT
Thank you for selecting Waste Management of
provides' Northern Colorado to provide your residential
refuse collection. It is our,goal to provide you with
quality service. 1( at any time you have any
quesuons or Concerns, please• Call wn' office
between 8:00 ain. and 5:00 p.m.. Monday - 1'6day,
Wo arc happy to assist you.
w'
Nlift fl lKlUlC4LORALO ;2hi+.411'/,L319
NOfi'I'IiF AST l(71.4pAfh 1 R00.S?1.itN I
f.* fs 1 -.r•;nt;- i;n :ef..s�In
RESIDENTIAL SERVICES BILLING HOW TO PROPERLY PREPARE
n wnl t,• pi,,vided the use of a "FREE"Waste Individual residential billing is quarterly(3 months)in YOUR RECYCLABLES
i L++•.•,:, +,,(!,+ 31. 66 cn 96 gallon polycart, advance. Your first invoke may reflect a"pro-rated Properly preparing your recyclables for culleruoi, I,Iay•.
"I ...:,cJnc iho property of WM.) amount'deperxling on your service start date. Our an important role in a successful recycle program. 'to
credit policy requires payment of your invoice,upon avoid contamination, please follow these easy
,J,JiC,n, ;,,t,l,ibit use of personal receipt, to insure uninterrupted service, instructions before placing your recyciables in the
.+c• tnnu•,,,,cro euodurg 32 gal.,and must not weigh collection bin.
S+i Ib,. You can now pay your bill by Credit Card -We proudly
accept Mastercard and Visa. Newspaper,Catalegt✓Magazines&.Junk Mail
,•....,,•r•.nu„L bo it ,:urbside by 7!00 a.m. on Place in recycle bin for adlcetion
trash (NO bmks,Cardboard,pl uocbunks,cic.+
II ,.+ , +,!.,y it ,I +.r.„++st r ,� ash within 4 rt. or HOLIDAYS
We observe six holidays a year: New Year's Day, Aluminum and Metal Cans - Rinse.
Memorial Day,July 4th,Labor Day,Thanksgiving and
,,,b•,i:6. •,,•ivice i, (oi normal household waste. (No Christmas. You may experience a delay in your service Glass Bottles and Jars- Rinse and remove all :rips.
,•+,c+, t,•, dirt. sod,dead animals, automotive oil, car the week of these holidays.Holiday weeks are the only (No window glass, mirrors, light bulbs,or dtshwaro+
+,:,tt,•r,,..s, pint, sh.,rp,, and tires). time we will provide Saturday pickups. If a Holiday falls
on a Saturday or a Sunday,all routes will run on normal Plastic Containers-Only #I and#2 narrow,nerk
,.,,,:.nos na,s+ be cut it,4'lengths and bundled. Boxes schedule the following week. bottles such as milk jugs, laundry bottles,soda bottles.
nmst b,• broke+,down and buntilerl. Rinse and place in collection bin.
STOP SERVICE For furlhernnfmnnGbon on our cryclitg program,
.Cl,pl•,n,;, nnra he placed in bags and must not Moving or No Longer Need Service? Contact us to avidly autmne+ ,Print rrprrecnrowes
J,+u•,n•,.!"m ',0 Its. transfer your service to your new residence or get your
service and billing stopped promptly: RECYCLING BIN DEPOSIT
..,p ,t, :r, a,r,xc,.,of your contracted service level will Waste Management will provide you with a recycle bum.
pd it,our:.`per b,tg' fee. Going on Vacation?Call us to have service put on for a refundable$15 deposit. Recyle bin rematm Lhr
"hold"...we'll credit you for the pickups you don't need, property of WM. Resident is responsiblefor koep+ng
.. , .i_ '�c.i�'c•IC.['.:� the bin clean and damage free. In order to recetvo.a
, r ,;nos iLirr,u„rr, applianrns, ate.)may be RECYCLING refund of$15 bin deposit,arrangements can be marl!
,c,tP, ad,•.wced notice, for an additional fee. Curbside recycling Is available to customers who have for removal or you may return the bin to our office.
i, to ncdac arrangements for a "Bull(Pickup" 2 WM's refuse collection service.
pr�,a Lo y„ it tcheduled service day. OTHEK SERVICES WE PROVIDE
We provide you with a recycle bin to fill with 3 yard and 30 yard Construction Dumpsters
• „-•,,,v,d by YVM, ics,dent must have newspaper,aluminum,steel cans,glass,and Special Event Port-O-Lets
• �4,,.n•,n i.,4.,! I by a cum tified appliance plastic containers. Permanent Commercial Containers
6 (2 yard to 40 yard Sizes)
Place recycle bin at the curb by 7:00 am, on your
recycle collection day. - Its that easy! We appreciate your business aixf look Im w rrrl •o
serving your waste removal and recycling ri(:;r
ninny years to come!
Y • 1K-
via I
Please pert only the following listed materials Into the recycling collection container
ALL -PA. PER CARDBOARD GLASS METALS PLASTICS
Magazines Corrugated Boxes Juice, Pop & Soda Tin Food Cans Plastic Bottles
Junk Mail Paper Tubes Water Bottles Aluminum used for Milk,
Envelopes Wrapping Paper Beverage Cans Juice, Soap and
Newspaper Cereal Boxes Beer &Wine Bottles Aluminum Foll Soft Drinks
Flyers File Folders Metal Utensils
Brochures Poster Board Food Jars Wire
Writing,Typing and Copper and Brass Preparation:
Computer Paper •Rinse containers to
Books remove residue.
Cancelled Checks Preparation: Preparation: Preparation:
•Flatten Boxes •Remove lids. •Empty and rinse cans
•Remove plastic or •Rinse to remove to remove all food
Preparation: waxed paper liners residue. residue. items Not Accepted:
•Just put clean, dry and all styrofoam •Do not break glass •Remove labels from •Containers used for
paper Into the bin. packing material. tin cans. chemicals or auto-
motive products
(oil,antifreeze,etc.)
•Rubber products.
Items Not Accepted. Items Not Accepted: Items Not Accepted: Items Not Accepted: •Styrofoam cups and
•Wet, waxed or soiled •Wet,soiled or waxed •Light bulbs. •Cans used for packing material.
paper. cardboard. •Window glass, chemicals or paints. •Photographic film
•Used paper towels •Wax coated beverage drinking glasses or •Aerosol spray cans. •Plastic bags.
and plates. containers. mirrors. •Appliances, power •Polyvinyl sheeting
•Carbon paper. toots or batteries. •Heat shrink wrapping.
,B ' •
'
SCREEN(MAPHIC6 FT.LAUC..FL. 1.800.216-420 IN 0525-A 60no
Single Stream Recycle Container Sticker
ATTACHMENT 5
7/29/2008 3:25 PM
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
The Natural Resources Board considered Solid Waste Management issues at our last
meeting. We passed two resolutions: one concerning residential solid waste, and the
other commercial solid waste.
The Natural Resources Board asks that Council implement Trash Districting.
The board feels that this is the most effective way to:
-Improve air quality
-Reduce damage to city streets, that is costing at least $350,000 per year, and
-Reduce neighborhood noise pollution.
This resolution passed -5-0.
Other concerns the Natural Resources Board feels staff and council should consider
are:
-Providing mandatory yard waste recycling
-Providing diversion/recycling incentives and disincentives for trash haulers so that our
50% diversion goal can be met
-Implementing a true pay as you throw system that better rewards recycling and
penalizes waste.
The Natural Resources Board also asks that council aggressively pursue commercial
waste diversion because commercial waste is actually the majority of the community's
waste stream. Commercial recycling options are crucial to achieving 50% diversion.
Research has demonstrated that commercial recycling can greatly reduce the cost of
trash disposal for businesses. The Climate Wise program has also demonstrated this
savings.
In addition we ask that council ask staff to look at potential incentives and disincentives
for the commercial sector including: 1) prohibiting the disposal of cardboard, 2) requiring
the provision of bundled commercial recycling, 3) providing incentives to haulers who
divert significant amounts of trash by enhancing recycling. We feel, since there is 98%
community support for additional recycling opportunities, it is very important to provide
this opportunity for citizens in their workplace. The potential savings on carbon
emissions is enormous as the Climate Task Force Report has mentioned. Addressing
G:WEETINGIWS 20081092YTra h.atl 5.doc
ATTACHMENT 5
the commercial waste stream is an important climate goal. This resolution also passed
5-0.
Thank You in advance for your consideration.
Alan Apt
Chair of the Natural Resources Board
G:IMEETINGIWS2008109231Trash.att 5.dac
ATTACHMENT 6
StudyTrash Services
Work Session
Ann Turnquist
Policy and Project Man
September 11 :
Of
•rp:clrt •
ON
2008 Policy Planning Relationships
Environmental Policies
CO2 — the Common Thread
Transportation
Land Use • Master Plan
Planning � • Roundabouts
Climate Action Plan • Transit Plan
• Bicycle Plan
CO2
Emissions
Trash Services Electric Energy
Study Policy
1
ATTACHMENT 6
Climate Task Force Strategies
, , , , , ,
. _
29001000 - Business As Usual
298009000
Solid Waste Reduction
Cq „ „ i
276001000
--- Existing
• 25009000
, , , intent
„ „ i
„ , , ,
2012
Year
{
Questions for Council
• Are Council ' s highest priorities for solid waste
increasing recycling rates and improving the
effectiveness of the City' s licensing and hauling
requirements?
• Which of the options outlined below will best meet
Council ' s goals?
• Should staff pursue one or more options and
eliminate other alternatives from further
consideration ?
ATTACHMENT •
Trash Issues
• Cost of street wear by multiple trash
trucks
• Neighborhood Aesthetics
• Air Quality "' '� � �" '� i
• Truck Noise � ` �
• Recycling ,
diversion --=� `
Key Findings—Street Wear
.R.�y,.�. Trash and Recycling Vehicles
• 1
. Three haulers in residential
Y . areas
•' • {. ..• ' ,� Average 8 trips per week
}
• Current Cost to City =
' �� $354,000 per year
�J
Key Findings—Air Quality
• More trucks lead to more vehicle emissions in
neighborhoods
• Limited standards for vehicle emissions
• Diesel vehicles with 2 . 8 Miles Per Gallon fuel
efficiency
• 271 tons CO2 Emissions + other impacts
Key Findings—Diversion Rates
• City' s goal : increase diversion from 27 % to 50 %
• Curbside residential captures 13 % of community' s
residential waste stream
• Opportunities to significantly increase diversion
ATTACHMENT 6
Community Outreach Process
• Boards and Commissions
• Community meetings
• City News Article
• On -line feedback
• Media : Newspaper, Radio , Studio 14
• League of Women Voters Crosscurrents
Alternatives U r Consideration
1 . City-wide Contract for Service or Districted
Trash Service
2 . Additional Requirements for Haulers
3 . Implement Recycling Strategies
4 . Additional Requirements and Implement
Recycling Strategies
5 . No Legislative Changes
Staff Analysis
• Detailed review of pros and cons
• Cost / Benefit Analysis
Option 1 : City-Wide or Districted Trash
Service
• City awards trash service contracts thru competitive
process
• Multi -year contracts
• All single-family residences in districted system
• Additional conditions for haulers , such as :
• Minimum diversion rates for recyclables
• Continue residential single-stream curbside recycling
• Other requirements (e .g . 65 gallon containers , yard waste ,
etc)
• Possible City billing for residential trash service
Option 2 : Increased Requirements for Haulers
• Incremental approach
• Focus on :
— Hauler reporting requirements
— Format for customer education
— Staff training for haulers and customer service reps
re : PAYT pricing
— Vehicle loads auditing and monitoring
• Protects choice and current hauler' s interests
ATTACHMENT 6
• No improvement in vehicle miles traveled or number
of trucks in neighborhoods
Option 3 : Implement Recycling Strategies
• Single stream roll-out recycling containers
• Allow alternate week recycling
• Enhanced Pay as You Throw ordinance
• Haulers must offer yard waste service
• Establish minimum diversion standards for haulers as condition
of license
• Explore options for Construction and Demolition waste and
prohibiting cardboard in the waste stream
• Increase hauler licensing fee to pay costs of recycling programs ,
providing incentives , auditing and/or administration
Option 4 : Increased Requirements and
Recycling Strategies
• Combination of options 2 and 3
Option 5 : No Legislative Changes
• Focus on additional enforcement of existing
ordinances
• Continue existing programs for recycling
• Protects choice and current hauler' s interests
ATTACHMENT 6
15
• No improvement in vehicle miles traveled or number
of trucks in neighborhoods
Fit_f
Staff Recommendation
• City-wide Contract for Service or Districted Trash
System achieves most goals ; most controversial and
disruptive
• Option 4 : Requirements and Implementing Diversion
ATTACHMENT 6
Strategies achieves many goals ; does not address
impact of trucks on streets and neighborhoods
• Option 4 also lays groundwork for future changes if
circumstances change
Questions for Council
• Are Council ' s highest priorities for solid waste
increasing recycling rates and improving the
effectiveness of the City' s licensing and hauling
requirements?
• Which of the options outlined below will best meet
Council ' s goals?
• Should staff pursue one or more options and
eliminate other alternatives from further
consideration ?