HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 11/26/2013 - COMPLETE AGENDACity of Fort Collins Page 1
Karen Weitkunat, President City Council Chambers
Gerry Horak, District 6, Vice President City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Gino Campana, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy
City Attorney
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
City Council Adjourned Meeting
November 26, 2013
5:30 PM
CALL MEETING TO ORDER.
ROLL CALL.
EXECUTIVE SESSION AUTHORIZED.
The meeting of November 19, 2013 was adjourned to this date and time to allow the Council to
consider adjourning into Executive Session to continue discussions relating to the annual
performance evaluations of the Municipal Judge, City Attorney and City Manager
OTHER BUSINESS.
ADJOURNMENT.
CITY COUNCIL
City of Fort Collins Page 1
Karen Weitkunat, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC)
Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Gino Campana, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy
City Attorney
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
City Council Work Session
November 26, 2013
6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER.
1. Road to Zero Waste. (staff: Susie Gordon; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this work session is to provide information about proposed new waste reduction
goals for Council’s consideration, now that the Fort Collins community has reached a 50% waste
diversion level. A report entitled “The Road to Zero Waste Plan” was prepared. The Plan
describes how the community’s values contributed to developing the proposal for a zero waste
goal and served as a base for 11 recommendations to help Fort Collins become independent of
traditional landfill systems to manage its discards.
2. Local Action Regarding Amendment 64. (staff: Ginny Sawyer, Don Vagge; 1 hour discussion)
The purpose of this work session is to provide Council options to consider regarding recreational
marijuana as allowed in Amendment 64.
Amendment 64 allows persons 21 years-of-age or older to legally possess up to one ounce of
marijuana without a doctor’s recommendation and to grow up to six marijuana plants. Local
jurisdictions have the option to define and regulate home growing and enact local prohibitions on
public consumption.
Under Amendment 64, Council also has three options in regard to retail operations: (1) adopt an
ordinance prohibiting retail marijuana businesses in Fort Collins; (2) refer a retail marijuana
prohibition question to the voters; or (3) allow retail marijuana businesses in Fort Collins and
impose local restrictions on the time, place, manner and number of retail marijuana operations.
CITY COUNCIL
City of Fort Collins Page 2
Following the July work session, staff was asked to return for a follow-up work session with more
detailed options for regulating recreational marijuana in Fort Collins. Staff was also asked to
conduct public outreach on the issue.
The City of Fort Collins currently has a ban on all retail marijuana activity through March 31,
2014.
OTHER BUSINESS.
ADJOURNMENT.
DATE: November 26, 2013
STAFF: Susie Gordon,Senior Environmental Planner
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Road to Zero Waste
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to provide information about proposed new waste reduction goals for
Council’s consideration, now that the Fort Collins community has reached a 50% waste diversion level. A
report entitled “The Road to Zero Waste Plan” was prepared. The Plan describes how the community’s
values contributed to developing the proposal for a zero waste goal and served as a base for 11
recommendations to help Fort Collins become independent of traditional landfill systems to manage its
discards.
The Plan focuses on areas for prioritization to achieve a forward-thinking new Zero Waste agenda. It
identifies three major facilities that are needed to fill gaps in the local/regional system and enable the
community to capture more of its discards, including: commercial composting for organics including food
scraps; construction and demolition (C&D) sorting yard; and re-use storage (clearinghouse). The
combined cost of $12-17M for these facilities is discussed as community and regionally-shared
investments that help avoid the need for building new landfills in the future (estimated at $20-85M per
site).
Social and economic benefits that result from Zero Waste practices include the potential to add local jobs
at recycling and reprocessing facilities; new revenue from the sales of materials that were previously
landfilled; recovery of more items that can be repurposed by thrifty residents; and, expediting distribution
of quality food that would have otherwise been discarded, to feed low-income residents.
Following six months of community involvement, a proposal has been drafted to aim for 75% waste
diversion by 2020, 90% by 2025, and “Zero Waste” by 2030. The term Zero Waste is used here as the
goal to reach for near-100% recovery of discarded materials, with the assumption that ultimately, a small
fraction of waste may still end up in landfills. By adopting a Zero Waste goal, all wastes are considered for
other purposes and a cycle of continuous improvement is assumed.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does the Council support the goal of Zero Waste by 2030 and per capita waste reductions (2.2
lb./day/person by 2025)?
2. Does Council support the interim targets of 75% waste diversion by 2020, and 90% by 2025?
3. Is the Council ready to have resolutions adopting these goals brought for its consideration on
December 17, 2013?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The City recently reached its goal of diverting half of the community’s waste stream from landfill disposal.
When the resolution was adopted in 1999, at best 24% of the trash was being recovered through
recycling, composting, or re-use efforts, and the City’s Pay-as-you-throw Ordinance was still fairly new.
Great credit is due to the Fort Collins community for arriving at this milestone. Day-to-day recycling and
waste reduction actions that people take, and the leadership of institutions such as Colorado State
University, Poudre School District, and the City of Fort Collins, along with local industries (Hewlett
Packard, Anheuser Busch, New Belgium Brewing, Intel, Woodard Governor, numerous business partners
1
Packet Pg. 3
November 26, 2013 Page 2
in the City’s ClimateWise program) have added up to an impressive accomplishment within 14 years.
Shifts in Local Attitudes about Generating Trash
Fort Collins’ 50% waste diversion achievement now sets it apart from most communities in the state. The
Rocky Mountain West is an arid landscape that provides optimal conditions for the landfill industry, and
also has an abundance of land on which to build landfills and operate them at low costs - reflected in
inexpensive local landfill fees averaging $18/ton. (Many other parts of the US approach $65-100/ton,
while disposal fees in European countries and Japan range from $100-200/ton).
Despite the relative cheapness and convenience for using conventional landfill technology in Northern
Colorado, a far-reaching set of policies was studied by City leaders in 1995. The subsequent passage of
a Pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) Ordinance signaled a new approach. Adjustments have fine-tuned the local
rules over the years and a steady drop in tons of trash has occurred; 140,000 tons of trash were sent
from Fort Collins in 2012 (compared to 240,000 tons in 2002) to be buried at either a private facility in
nearby Ault, or the Larimer County landfill on South Taft Hill Road.
By rewarding households with lowered trash bills, the Pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) Ordinance influenced
people to gradually take measures to shrink the size of their trash can. Currently, the large-trash-can (95-
gal.) service level is used by only 25% of trash companies’ customers, compared to 50% in 2006 and the
trend continues toward down-sizing. Now, 38% of Fort Collins residents currently subscribe to the
smallest (35-gal.) level of trash service. PAYT also incentivizes recycling; on average, 90% of haulers’
single-family residential customers take advantage of the convenience of curbside recycling at no
additional charge.
On average, citizens of Fort Collins generate about 5.2 pounds/day of trash while the average person
who lives in Colorado generates 7.2 pounds/ay (to clarify, business and industry waste, as well as
residential trash, gets entered into the per capita waste metric). The lowest reported by US states is from
Oregon, with 3.6 pounds/day. In Fort Collins, trash volumes have gone down, even as the population
grew.
Recycling Becomes the “New Normal”
During the past 14 years, recycling numbers climbed steadily in Fort Collins, as they did elsewhere in the
U.S. More recycling plants (material recovery facilities, or MRFs) have been built throughout the country
and international markets have grown for commodities like paper, newsprint, cardboard, and plastics (milk
jugs and liter pop bottles are a premium grade). Domestic scrap prices have sky-rocketed for anything
made of metal, which keeps the US steel industry well supplied. Another indicator comes from strong
textile markets, evidenced by scores of clothing/shoes collection boxes that have sprung up in parking
lots everywhere.
One important response from the industry to healthy market conditions was a switch to automated MRFs
that accept a commingled stream of recyclables - no more need to separate materials into multiple
containers. When “single-stream” recycling appeared in Fort Collins in 2007-08, an estimated 15-17%
increase occurred in the amount of material collected in curbside recycling. The convenience of single-
stream recycling was further enhanced with a PAYT amendment in 2009 requiring residential
trash/recycling companies to offer larger, wheeled carts to their customers, replacing the smaller open-
topped boxes.
Conditions were less robust for the recycling industry during the 2008 recession, when prices for
commodities dropped significantly, but for most people the market problems were not apparent and didn’t
impact the growing culture of recycling that seems to have now become ingrained in the Fort Collins
identity, or culture. A local trash/recycling company manager expressed it this way: “When we get a call
from a new customer in Fort Collins it’s not ‘if’ they want to receive recycling service anymore, it’s ‘how do
I get started’ with recycling.”
Issues that Effect Local Recycling
The global economy is a powerful influence in recycling. China, the world’s largest consumer of second-
hand commodities, has clamped down in the past year in response to unacceptable levels of
contaminants found in imported bales of recyclables. China’s so-called “Green Fence” embargo has
1
Packet Pg. 4
November 26, 2013 Page 3
resulted in serious back-ups at US warehouses and recycling plants. In Fort Collins, heightened
expectations for recyclables to be clean and free of contaminants is an even more important message to
communicate to the public than ever. For instance, the issue of plastic bags being placed in curbside
recycling is a constant source of complaints from MRF managers in Denver, where Fort Collins' materials
go to be processed. Yet changes are not easy to make in local recycling habits, as evidenced by peoples’
confusion and dismay when it came to light recently that shredded paper is not accepted in haulers’
curbside collection bins (the small sized pieces defy sorting attempts at MRFs and in the end are simply
dumped in the trash, having “taken a very expensive trip” from Fort Collins to the Denver MRF and then to
the landfill).
Communications are key to any recycling success story, including Fort Collins’. Clear guidelines and
good information must be constantly generated, updated, and vigorously distributed. Importantly,
participants must closely follow the guidelines for preparing materials for recycling. The City’s recycling
web-pages <fcgov.com/recycling/> are critical for providing information and new messages about what’s
going on in the recycling world. The era of social media gives educators many new tools, especially for
reaching out to young people for whom rapidly transmitted information - as well as recycling itself - is
second nature.
In Fort Collins, expectations are ever higher for more opportunities to recycle. Outreach to the community
during the planning project showed that many people assume the City will affirmatively respond to these
desires. The Road to Zero Waste opened up a torrent of requests, everything from giving multi-family
residents equal opportunity to recycle; staying involved with research and development programs at
Colorado State University for innovations in new waste conversion technologies; changing the PAYT
system by adding curbside yard trimmings for collection and composting; removing impediments to the
compost industry to allow food scraps to be recycled; and doing a better job of eliminating peoples’
confusion about what’s recyclable in Fort Collins.
Evolution of the “Road to Zero Waste” Plan
In 2012, equipped with data showing Fort Collins was nearing its goal of 50% waste diversion, Council
requested staff to evaluate options for future goals and decision-making. During the Budgeting for
Outcomes process, money was designated ($45,000) to reach out to the community for input to help
develop a new vision and goals. Assisted by the consulting firm Zero Waste Associates (ZWA), staff
conducted a comprehensive public involvement process to ensure that as many voices in the Fort Collins
community were heard as possible for developing a new vision and goals (Attachment 2).
A series of topics was outlined, including: composting; recycling; re-use; and, waste conversion
technology. For each topic, an open house event was organized, designed to engage attendees in a full
dialog, or “community conversation”. A fifth Community Conversation was held in October to discuss the
culmination of ideas that led to “core concepts” for the new plan. Each Community Conversation was
widely publicized and participation was robust. On average, 35-60 people attended who listened to a
presentation by the consultants before launching into questions and answers. Remarks were
documented on flip charts, with written transcripts posted to a special website (<fcgov.com/zerowaste/>).
The Conversations were also video-taped, linked on the website for viewing, and frequently broadcast on
the City’s cable TV channel throughout the summer and fall.
Written ideas, questions, and concerns were welcomed; a compiled list is provided in Attachment 3 that
came from the on-line comment form as well as from comment cards handed out during Community
Conversations.
The team of City staff and consultants made numerous site visits to businesses and organizations
throughout Larimer County that provide services, including commercial composters, recycling centers,
thrift and re-use stores, landfills and other treatment facilities. The depth of ZWA’s experience working
with communities like Austin TX and Oakland CA was apparent and the consultants Gary Liss and
Richard Anthony became familiar with local collection systems and gaps in the infrastructure needed to
divert materials from landfill disposal. In interviews with stakeholders and local officials they were able to
establish the ways in which Fort Collins is unique. They met with a Working Group of ten members of the
community who represented a cross-section of interests; these individuals helped the consultants
understand long-standing issues, belief systems, and “norms” for the way Fort Collins gets things done.
1
Packet Pg. 5
November 26, 2013 Page 4
Liss and Anthony invited representatives from local industries to speak at Community Conversations and
provide vignettes of the Zero Waste goals that have not only been adopted by their corporations, but are
practiced with great attention to the details necessary for shrinking waste. By hearing about tactics that
have now become Standard Operating Procedures for big businesses, including some in Fort Collins,
people clearly became more comfortable with the magnitude of the idea of striving to achieve Zero
Waste.
Triple Bottom Line Considerations
Paramount to discussions about shrinking waste to nearly zero are the variety of benefits that are
anticipated to simultaneously occur. It is not simply a question of protecting the “planet” - Zero Waste
systems also have direct relationships with the other two elements of the Triple Bottom Line, “people” and
“profit”.
Community Well-being is served when more materials are successfully removed from the waste stream
and repurposed as products, goods, or sustenance. Examples used in the Road to Zero Waste Plan
include: the creation of more jobs that are associated with locally handling materials for recycling or re-
use, especially when compared to the far fewer number of jobs created by landfill activities(studies by the
Institute for Local Self-Reliance show that recycling materials generates ten times as many jobs and
reuse 100 times as many jobs as landfilling materials); lower-cost options for home remodeling projects
that are available when architectural salvage occurs; more local farming and home gardening projects
using compost as a soil amendment that are able to provide nutritious fruit and vegetables for
consumption; and, increased/more effective charitable donations of high quality food that help prevent
hunger in the Fort Collins community.
Economic Health is achieved by recovering more materials out of the waste stream. The Road to Zero
Waste Plan enumerates the tons of commodities that routinely “flow” into local landfills from Fort Collins
and establishes that nearly $6.5 M in value could potentially be recovered annually through various
measures, including composting (50% of the waste stream, or 70,000 tons/year of organics are
discarded), recycling, or re-use. New revenues from sales of commodities will stimulate the economy and
additional jobs will be created that provide local employment.
While there may be increased costs to customers in the provision of new collection services (such as
curbside yard debris recycling), the community’s investment to replace aging landfills will be postponed or
avoided through waste diversion efforts (estimated to range from $20-85M per site). The combined cost
to create new waste handling facilities that will fill gaps in the local infrastructure (composting, C&D
sorting, re-use warehouse) is estimated to cost $12-$17M.
Environmental Stewardship is a fundamental component of Zero Waste planning. The ability to recover
forest products, plastics, metals, and manufactured goods and put them to beneficial use dramatically
reduces “upstream” impacts caused by destructive mining and logging practices; drilling and resource
extraction; and, industrial production activities such as chemical treatment and smelting. Less energy
and water is necessary when remanufacturing occurs compared to using virgin materials, and less air and
water pollution occurs. Scarce forest and jungle ecosystems can be conserved when minerals and
elemental metals that have already been removed from the ground are introduced back into
manufacturing. By creating a local system for recycling organics such as food scraps, yard trimmings,
and wet or soiled paper, compost becomes more widely used as a soil supplement; landscaping and
gardening efforts are rewarded by increased water retention and lower irrigation needs, healthier plants,
and less reliance on chemical fertilizers. Of great significance to the Fort Collins community's concerns
regarding climate change, greenhouse gas emissions are avoided by taking a Zero Waste approach; it
reduces future landfill methane emissions, and reduces “embedded” carbon dioxide by saving energy
compared to using virgin materials for manufacturing purposes.
Implementation of the Road to Zero Waste Plan
The Road to Zero Waste Plan distills ideas from the community and blends them with practical “next
steps” for Fort Collins to reach new levels of waste diversion and ultimately become a zero-landfill
community. As a roadmap, it sets the direction for the next 10-20 years. It highlights the breakthroughs
needed for substantive change to occur, including three types of new facilities that would sort and
process large volumes of certain types of discards that are currently sent to landfills from Fort Collins:
1
Packet Pg. 6
November 26, 2013 Page 5
Composting facility ($7-9 M)
Construction, Deconstruction and Demolition sorting plant ($5-7 M)
Reuse clearinghouse and storage center ($500,000)
The total cost to invest in new infrastructure is estimated to range from $12.5 - $16.5 M. The plan
explains that initiatives to create these facilities could come from various directions, and it does not go in-
depth to describe how capital costs would be funded. An important premise in the plan is that the
competitive marketplace will result in the most efficient implementation of programs but it also
acknowledges that it may become apparent that the City’s financial involvement in taking the new path to
Zero Waste is required. At strategic junctures, new proposals will be developed and weighed through the
bi-annual budgeting for outcomes process, or, in policy decisions such as adoption of new codes or
amendments to the Pay-as-you-throw Ordinance.
The Plan recommends that the City consider raising money for local grants that would be provided to
start-up Zero Waste businesses, and to pay for new, expanded education and awareness programs. The
idea of charging a $1/month fee to households and businesses through the billing systems of
trash/recycling companies was introduced, along the lines of an environmental fee that the City of
Loveland charges residents to help pay for recycling and organics collection.
Anticipated Priorities for Plan Implementation
Recommendations in the plan are made for major areas of work and milestones for Zero Waste along
with the general sequence of events and timeframes suggested for implementing new strategies.
1. Culture change
a. Adopt education & reinvestment fund (2014)
b. Place more recycling bins in public areas over the next three years
c. Apply community-based social marketing starting in 2015
d. Develop public events guidelines, brochures for haulers’ customers (2015)
2. Reinvest resources
a. Establish Zero Waste grants and loans program (2014)
b. Expand integrated recycling facility to serve as Resource Recovery Park (2015)
3. Universal recycling ordinance
a. Add yard trimmings collection for single-family residents (2015)
b. Provide recycling to all multi-family residents (2016)
c. Provide recycling to all businesses (2019)
4. Prohibit materials from landfill disposal
a. Source-separated construction and demolition materials (2015)
b. Yard trimmings (2016)
c. Food scraps and food-soiled paper (2018)
5. Construction and demolition (C&D) recycling
a. Universal Building code amendments (2014)
b. Help develop mixed C&D sorting facility in region (2017)
6. Compost organics
a. Help develop food scraps composting and digestion facilities (2016)
7. Reduce and re-use
a. City purchasing policies to reduce waste (2015)
b. Re-use warehouse (2016)
8. Product stewardship
a. Develop glass sorting facility in region (2016)
b. Adopt restrictions on paper and plastic bags (2016)
9. Waste to clean energy
b. Develop hierarchy of highest & best use (2015)
c. Develop pilot programs for priority technologies (2017)
10. Regional cooperation
a. Pursue alternatives through regional Zero Waste Plan (2014-15)
Other Communities with Zero Waste Goals
1
Packet Pg. 7
November 26, 2013 Page 6
In Colorado, Boulder and Summit Counties and Telluride have adopted Zero Waste goals. In Texas, the
cities of Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio have taken the same, as have Seattle, Chicago, Carrboro, NC,
and Kaua’i, HI. Atlanta is in the process of adopting a Zero Waste goal. About 30 cities and counties in
California have set Zero Waste goals, including Del Norte, San Luis Obispo, Santa Cruz, San Francisco,
San Bernardino, San Diego, Marin, and Sonoma Counties, as well as the cities of Los Angeles, San Jose,
Sacramento, Burbank (population 104,391), Glendale (population 194,500), Oceanside (population
171,300) , Santa Monica (population 91,800), Alameda City, Culver City, Sunnyvale, Mountain View,
Oakland, San Francisco, Berkeley, San Diego, and Palo Alto.
Internationally, Italy has outstripped most countries; upwards of 125 cities representing 4.5 million in
population have adopted Zero Waste goals. Other examples include Asia (eight cities), the country of
South Africa, four cities in the United Kingdom; 2/3 of the communities in New Zealand, two states in
Australia, and nine cities and regional districts in Canada.
Summary
Fort Collins appears to be poised to “take the long view” and establish new goals for how to effectively
manage the stream of discards that are currently going to waste from the community. New waste
diversion opportunities lie on the City’s immediate horizons and the Road to Zero Waste Plan is intended
as a tool for helping to recognize - and seize- the next best opportunity as it comes along. As new
measures become feasible and timely, the plan will help the City reach decisions consistent with the
values and objectives of Fort Collins’ citizens.
Next Steps
City Council consideration of a resolution to establish the new goals for community waste diversion is
currently scheduled for December 17, 2013.
75% waste diversion by 2020
90% by 2025
Zero Waste by 2030
Achieve 3.5 pounds of waste landfilled per person per day by 2020 (32% below 2012)
Achieve 2.2 pounds of waste landfilled per person per day by 2025 (57% below 2012)
ATTACHMENTS
1. #: Road to Zero Waste Plan (PDF)
2. #: Public Involvement Process (PDF)
3. #: Citizen Comments (PDF)
4. #: Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
5. #: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (PDF)
1
Packet Pg. 8
1
Attachment 1
ROAD TO ZERO WASTE PLAN
November 2013
1.1
Packet Pg. 9
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 1
Current Waste Diversion ........................................................................................................ 5
Benefits of More Waste Diversion ........................................................................................... 6
Values and Principles ............................................................................................................. 8
Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................................. 9
Goal: Zero Waste ................................................................................................................ 9
Goal: Reduce Per Capita Waste Disposal Rate .................................................................. 9
Objective: Add Value to Local Economy ............................................................................10
Objective: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................11
Recommendations.................................................................................................................12
1. Culture Change ...........................................................................................................12
2. Reinvest Resources in Local Economy .......................................................................13
3. Universal Recycling ....................................................................................................15
4. Prohibited Materials ....................................................................................................17
5. Construction, Deconstruction and Demolition (C&D) ...................................................18
6. Composting Organic Materials ....................................................................................20
7. Reduce & Reuse .........................................................................................................21
8. Product Stewardship ...................................................................................................22
9. Waste to Clean Energy ...............................................................................................23
10. Funding ...................................................................................................................24
11. Regional Cooperation ..............................................................................................25
Diversion Potential.................................................................................................................25
Triple Bottom Line Impacts ....................................................................................................27
Economic Impacts ..............................................................................................................27
1.1
Packet Pg. 10
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Environmental Impact ........................................................................................................27
Social Impacts ...................................................................................................................28
Implementation ......................................................................................................................31
1.1
Packet Pg. 11
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 1
Executive Summary
This is a report about a long-term strategic proposal for the $6.5 million worth of valuable
resources that are thrown away every year in Fort Collins. In 1995, the Council adopted a
dramatic new direction for the City to take to provide incentives to get away from the throwaway
society and back to the values of American thriftiness and efficiency. A Pay-as-you-throw
Ordinance (PAYT) was added to the Municipal Code whereby trash haulers in Fort Collins must
charge customers based on the volume of waste generated as well as provide curbside
recycling at no extra charge. The system created a way for households to save money by
reducing their trash bills, and proved to be a good fit for Fort Collins. Those incentives were
improved a number of times through the past 18 years and the Council adopted a strategic goal
in 1999 to divert 50% of all discarded resources from landfills by 2010.
The City has now achieved that 50% goal, or close to it (depending on what is counted)1. It is
time for the City to decide what the new goal will be to guide its efforts and those of the
community over the next 10 to 20 years.
From May through October, 2013, an extensive planning process was conducted that included
direct outreach to stakeholders, meetings with six of the City’s Boards and Commissions, five
“Community Conversations” with more than 250 residents and businesses, input from a Working
Group representing a cross-section of community interests, and tours of many of the existing
reuse, recycling, composting, digesting, and landfill facilities in the Fort Collins area.
Through this planning process, it became clear that:
Fort Collins has made a significant culture change, particularly in the last five years. The
idea of recycling is now embraced by most residents and businesses. When there are
discussions between service providers and citizens now, the questions are not about
whether they should recycle, but how to do it.
Most residents and businesses participating in the planning process either strongly
supported the next goal for Fort Collins to be a Zero Waste community, or accepted that
as a worthy goal.
There are many benefits that will result from pursuing Zero Waste, including:
Reducing greenhouse gases that will address the urgency of climate change2
Providing local jobs, income and wealth creation from conserving and using
resources locally rather than landfilling them
Helping businesses and residents be more sustainable and efficient
1 By 2012, the City of Fort Collins had calculated that the level of waste diversion was 42% for all residential and commercially
generated waste. And, when the City includes the so-called industrial wastes (concrete and asphalt, aggregates and wood waste
from construction and demolition (C&D) projects, organics from breweries, biosolids, and waste from City operations), a “Community
Diversion rate” of 58% can be calculated for 2012.
2 “Rising global temperatures have been accompanied by changes in weather and climate including changes in rainfall, more
floods, droughts, or intensity of rain, as well as more frequent and severe heat waves. 2012 was the hottest year on record for the
contiguous United States and 2012 ranks as the warmest calendar year in the 124-year record for the Fort Collins, CO weather
station at CSU. Health care costs associated with extreme weather events in the U.S. between 2006 and 2009 exceeded $14 billion.
In the U.S., 2012 alone saw 11 weather disasters that cost a billion dollars or more. (NOAA).” Source: Fort Collins Climate Status
Report 2012, page 5, http://www.fcgov.com/airquality/pdf/FC2012ClimateStatusReportLowRes.pdf.
1.1
Packet Pg. 12
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 2
Promoting local food cultivation and consumption by putting valuable nutrients back
into the soil
Saving energy and producing local clean energy
Providing “green” marketing edge for local businesses and Colorado State University
Protecting health of residents
Decreasing irrigation water use by applying compost to soils
Improving air quality and reducing mobile-source emissions by local use of resources
Reducing use of toxic products
Protecting and restoring habitat, biodiversity and open space through increased use
of compost products and reducing the need for mining.
There are many City policies that already point the City in the direction of Zero Waste.
The City and its Boards and Commissions are already working to implement City Plan’s
vision of a truly sustainable city that values the Triple Bottom Line and would be
significantly supported by adopting the goal of Zero Waste.
This Plan provides a road map for the City, residents, businesses and visitors to get to Zero
Waste. It highlights the priorities that need to be implemented to get there:
Culture Change – providing new rules and more incentives, using Community Based
Social Marketing, social media, innovative technologies and software, and harnessing
creative talents in art, music, advertising and social change to reinforce and expand the
change that has already occurred.
Reduce and Reuse – concentrating on helping residents and businesses to live and
operate more efficiently and sustainably, creating more than 400 jobs in the process and
helping those in need to get quality food and goods donated or at very low prices.
Compostable Organics Out of Landfills – eliminating many of the fast-acting, climate
changing gases that are emitted when organics rot in landfills, and returning those as
nutrients to the soil for raising more food locally (after first donating all edible food to
people in need).
Construction, Deconstruction and Demolition – implementing new rules of the
International Building Code developed by the City’s Building Department.
There are three key types of facilities that will be needed in the Fort Collins area to fully meet
the proposed goals:
Commercial composting facility – to process food scraps, food-soiled paper and all
putrescibles and organic materials
Construction and demolition (C&D) materials recycling plant – to process mixed
materials from building and demolition projects
Reuse warehouse – to support the collection of a wide range of reusable products from
a variety of sources, and enable different businesses and nonprofit organizations to
obtain high quality materials to sell at very reasonable prices to residents and
businesses in Fort Collins.
All of these could be located in a single location as a Resource Recovery Park, or they could be
developed individually in different locations. These would be owned and operated by different
entrepreneurs, or the City could help develop one or more of these facilities as a public/private
partnership if needed.
1.1
Packet Pg. 13
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 3
The best locations for these facilities could be considered as part of the development of a
regional Zero Waste Plan that at least includes Larimer County and the City of Loveland, and
ideally includes all those jurisdictions that ship wastes into Larimer County and those
jurisdictions that receive wastes from Larimer County.
The capital costs for these facilities are estimated to be:
Composting - $7-9 million
C&D - $5-7 million
Reuse - $500,000
TOTAL $12.5 - $16.5 million
These investments, along with the rest of the policies and programs recommended in this Plan,
would contribute significantly to recovering the $6.5 million value of materials from the Fort
Collins community that gets buried in regional landfills every year.
The alternative to these investments would be spending $20-$80 million on a new landfill once
the Larimer County landfill closes in approximately 12 to 15 years.
Initial costs for the first several years after adopting the Zero Waste goal would likely be about
$1.00 per household and business per month. The majority of this funding would be for
programs to be conducted by the City to assist in culture change and reinvesting resources in
the local economy. Additional costs would be incurred over the following 10 years through new
rates charged for additional services (e.g., curbside composting) by service providers in the
open competitive marketplace, in response to new rules and incentives adopted by the City,
designed to provide clear direction and a level playing field for investments. The competitive
marketplace will result in the most efficient implementation of programs.
For the City’s future involvement in taking the new path to Zero Waste, new proposals will be
developed through bi-annual City budget processes. The “budgeting for outcomes” system
provides the framework for evaluating the costs and benefits of specific policies and proposals
as opportunities to introduce new measures become feasible and timely.
By investing in three key facilities to support Zero Waste, adopting new policies and
implementing innovative, culture changing programs, the City will dramatically decrease the
need for its own landfill, shifting from today’s focus on waste management to a system that
optimizes the use of discarded materials as resources to help the local economy. Key policies
and programs that are included in the Plan are:
Policies
Provide recycling universally to all residents and businesses
Prohibit recyclable and hazardous materials from landfilling (like was done for electronic
equipment and recyclable cardboard)
Get compostable organics out of landfills
Reuse and recycle construction, remodeling & demolition debris
1.1
Packet Pg. 14
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 4
Programs
Promote, incentivize and reinforce a Zero Waste culture by making reuse, recycling and
composting convenient at home, work or play and providing clear signs and instructions
that make it easy to participate
Reinvest resources in local economy with technical assistance, grants and loans to
entrepreneurs and service providers
Encourage manufacturers to takeback difficult-to-recycle products and packaging or add
fees to incentivize more sustainable products (e.g., fees on plastic bags)
Promote “Reduce and Reuse” as a priority
Provide multi-family dwellings the same recycling services as single-family
Collect yard trimmings from all residents
Collect food scraps from all residents and businesses once composting facility available
Evaluate and pilot clean waste to energy systems for targeted waste streams
Cooperate regionally to develop programs and facilities
As a road map, this Plan highlights that there are many ways to achieve Zero Waste. The
purpose of this road map is to show that there IS a way to build on our success. Over time, the
City will partner with service providers, residents and businesses to determine the most
desirable and effective ways to get to its destination.
Entrepreneurs and service providers will be assisted in moving down this road to Zero Waste
with the Council’s adoption of a new clear goal for the community, and by the establishment of
priorities to pursue for achieving Zero Waste.
1.1
Packet Pg. 15
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 5
Current Waste Diversion
One of the major purposes for preparing this Plan is to set new goals for the future of waste
reduction and recycling in Fort Collins. In 1999, the City Council adopted a community waste
diversion goal of 50% by 2010.
By 2012, the City of Fort Collins had calculated that the level of waste diversion was 42% for all
residential and commercially generated waste. And, when the City includes the so-called
industrial wastes (concrete and asphalt, aggregates and wood waste from construction and
demolition (C&D) projects, organics from breweries, biosolids, and waste from City operations),
a “Community Diversion rate” of 58% can be calculated for 2012.3
Of the total materials recycled by residential and commercial recycling programs, residential
programs (both curbside and all drop-off materials) recovered about 23% of the total amount of
recyclables. Commercial programs recycled the
remaining 77% of these materials.
Some major businesses in Fort Collins have
reported that they have diverted over 90% of
their discarded materials from landfills and
incinerators, including:
New Belgium Brewery
Hewlett-Packard
Woodward
Anheuser-Busch
Intel
The City’s 1999 50% goal has been
achieved, or close to it (depending on what is
counted).4 The City should celebrate this
important accomplishment and the city’s
residents, businesses and service providers
should all be commended for this achievement.
However, there is still plenty of room for
improvement.
3 Source: Fort Collins Climate Action Plan 2011, page 18-19.
http://www.fcgov.com/airquality/pdf/2011_CAPStatusReport_FINAL.pdf
4 The quality of data that is collected continues to improve from year to year, as well as the analysis of that data. However, as a
result, it is difficult to get a clear trend of some of the detailed information from year to year. Data is now collected from a variety of
required sources (e.g., all waste haulers) and many voluntary sources (e.g., collectors of scrap metals, yard trimmings, concrete,
asphalt, e-waste and textiles). Additional reporting from haulers (e.g., separating multi-family residential from commercial) and other
aspects of community waste diversion (e.g., reuse operations) is needed to track this information better.
Businesses that divert over 90% of their
wastes from landfills, incinerators and
the environment are considered Zero
Waste Businesses, according to the
principles of the Zero Waste
International Alliance (ZWIA) at
www.zwia.org/standards. There are
thousands of businesses that have
achieved Zero Waste all over the world,
and hundreds of communities have
adopted a Zero Waste goal. The
remaining 10% of discarded material
highlights that more work is still to be
done, and ZWIA calls for businesses to
continue to reduce wasting through a
minimum of 1% or better per year of
continuous improvement.
1.1
Packet Pg. 16
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 6
Benefits of More Waste Diversion
It’s clear that there is still much more that could be done to reduce wastefulness and increase
reuse, recycling and composting. Large businesses are leading the way to higher waste
diversion and “Zero Waste” in Fort Collins. Of particular significance is that the industrial
diversion rate was 70%, which contributes significantly to this overall higher community
diversion rate. The industrial diversion rate may be as high as it is because Zero Waste
businesses are able to show that they save money, reduce their liabilities, reduce their
greenhouse gases, and increase their efficiency and productivity. These are key drivers for
large businesses to have embraced Zero Waste in recent years.
Of particular significance is that the largest percentage decrease of all climate change
emissions between 2005 and 2012 in Fort Collins occurred in the waste sector, which reported
a 66.7% drop.5
Another benefit is extending the life of the Larimer County Landfill. Larimer County recently
reported that there are only 12 to 15 years of remaining life at the landfill, at current rates of use.
And each time there are major natural disasters in the area, such as catastrophic flooding that
occurred in September 2013, more materials are placed in the County landfill. The more
aggressive the waste reduction goals adopted by the City, the more the City and County will be
5 2012 Climate Status Report, page 8. http://www.fcgov.com/common/images/spotlight_image.php?id=1609&type=3
There are many other benefits to the community that could come from pursuing
higher waste diversion goals and helping both businesses and residents be
more sustainable and efficient, including:
Local jobs and economic development from conserving and using
resources locally rather than landfilling them
Promoting local food and nutrients back to soil
Protecting health of residents
Saving energy and producing clean energy – reducing, reusing and
recycling materials and products conserves 3-5 times the amount of
energy that could be produced by burning those materials. Once all
materials are reduced or recovered, there are different technologies
that could produce energy from remaining materials
Decreasing local water use by using compost
Improving local air quality and reducing mobile emissions through
more local use of resources
Reducing the use of toxic products
Protecting and restoring habitat, biodiversity and open space through
increased use of compost products and reducing the need for mining
Providing “green” marketing edge for local businesses and Colorado
State University
1.1
Packet Pg. 17
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 7
Zero Waste refers to taking a systems
approach to eliminating wasteful
practices, setting up reuse systems,
recycling and composting to
maximize the highest and best use of
resources that can then be reinvested
in the local economy to create more
income, wealth and jobs for residents.
able to extend the life of this landfill. A primary benefit is postponing the significant costs of
building a new landfill in the future, which could cost up to $80 million.6
Much more could be done by residents and smaller businesses to achieve higher waste
diversion. The success of major businesses shows what can be done when a significant
commitment is made. By applying “Triple Bottom Line” principles to develop and prioritize
implementation strategies, this Plan provides a road map to obtaining these benefits.
Throughout the course of the outreach for this plan, a “Road to Zero Waste” theme emerged. In
each of the Community Conversations, the following was highlighted as the only peer reviewed,
internationally accepted definition of Zero
Waste: “Zero Waste is a goal that is
ethical, economical, efficient and visionary,
to guide people in changing their lifestyles
and practices to emulate sustainable
natural cycles, where all discarded
materials are designed to become
resources for others to use. Zero Waste
means designing and managing products
and processes to systematically avoid and
eliminate the volume and toxicity of waste
and materials, conserve and recover all
resources, and not burn or bury them.
Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all
discharges to land, water or air that are a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health.”7
The goal of Zero Waste is to focus on new initiatives for eliminating wasteful practices and
economic inefficiencies and setting up expanded reuse systems, then recycling, composting,
digesting and redesigning remaining discarded materials. Many residents and businesses in
Fort Collins attending Community Conversations meetings or City Boards, Commissions and
stakeholder meetings expressed support for the idea of Zero Waste. What also became clear
through extensive outreach for this Plan is that there are many goals, objectives, values and
principles that should be adopted to achieve the many benefits from more waste reduction and
recycling that are reflected in this Plan.
6 For 180-acre site (same size of current operations) at $450,000 per acre.
7 Source: Zero Waste International Alliance, Standards, www.zwia.org/standards
1.1
Packet Pg. 18
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 8
Values and Principles
The following values and principles will contribute to achieving a Zero Waste economy. These
will help guide the community’s adoption and implementation of new policies, programs and
facilities that are needed.
Choice and Diversity - Fort Collins’ City Plan calls for identifying mutually beneficial actions to
support multiple principles and policies, foster new relationships, leverage funding and
maximize resources.8 The diversity of materials that are found in Fort Collins’ waste stream call
for diverse solutions - there isn’t only one solution for everything that is discarded. Instead, Fort
Collins will build upon its open competitive, market economy to foster more entrepreneurial
investments in new programs, facilities and services that help the City meet its goals. This will
also continue to provide residents and businesses with choices of how they discard or manage
materials.
Universal Opportunities – A key goal requested by different stakeholders was that the City
ensure equal opportunities are provided for all sectors to reduce waste and recycle more,
including residents who live in multi-family dwellings, industries, commercial
businesses, institutions, as well as visitors. More comprehensive and convenient access to
reuse, recycling and composting services will provide these services more universally to all
sectors, including those who self-haul materials.
New Rules and Incentives – The City’s primary role in improving the local landscape for
recycling and waste reduction activities is to adopt clear goals and to facilitate, educate and
enforce the codes that are adopted. Updating the codes and incentives in the City’s Ordinances
will encourage more waste reduction and foster the collection of clean, source separated
materials, and optimize the quality of materials recovered so that they could be invested in the
local economy. These regulations can continue to build on the policies, incentives and approach
that the City has adopted over the past 20 years.
8See: http://www.fcgov.com/planfortcollins/
1.1
Packet Pg. 19
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 9
Goals and Objectives
The following goals and objectives are recommended for the Fort Collins community to adopt as
targets for the next 5 to 20 years (and beyond) in renewing its commitment to waste diversion
and resource optimization. The resulting benefits are directly in keeping with the goals listed in
Fort Collins’ comprehensive City Plan, including: reducing overall solid waste volumes;
increasing waste diversion from landfills; developing greater economic value and uses for
discarded materials; managing hazardous materials; and investing to meet the goals of the
climate action plan and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.9 These goals are proposed to serve
as primary performance measures for tracking how well the plan is implemented over the
course of time.
Goal: Zero Waste
The City increased its waste diversion rate from 24% in 1999 to 42-58% in 2012. Given the
urgency of climate change10 and the significant opportunity for job and local wealth creation,
which is detailed in following pages of this report, the City should adopt a new goal of
Zero Waste by 2030, with interim goals being:
75% diversion by 2020
90% diversion by 2025.
Goal: Reduce Per Capita Waste Disposal Rate
Establishing a goal for waste generation per Fort Collins citizen can be used to measure
progress as the City grows in population and industrial activities at the same time. This is
particularly important because of the amount of growth and new development projects currently
underway in the community. This metric also provides a good way to see how Fort Collins is
performing compared to other communities around the country (more and more communities
are adopting this metric). The per capita waste metric was included as part of the Urban
Environmental Accords11, which call for communities to reduce their per capita waste disposal to
landfills and incinerators by 20% from current levels within seven years of adoption. The current
per capita waste disposal rate in Fort Collins is 5.12 pounds per capita per day, based on
2012’s population of 148,700. New goals (even higher than those advocated by the Urban
Environmental Accords) are recommended to:
Reduce waste landfilled to 3.5 pounds per capita per day by 2020 (32% below 2012)
Reduce waste landfilled to 2.2 pounds per capita per day by 2025 (57% below 2012).
9 http://www.fcgov.com/planfortcollins/
10 ”Rising global temperatures have been accompanied by changes in weather and climate including changes in rainfall, more
floods, droughts, or intensity of rain, as well as more frequent and severe heat waves. 2012 was the hottest year on record for the
contiguous United States and 2012 ranks as the warmest calendar year in the 124 year record for063w the Fort Collins, CO weather
station on CSU campus. Health care costs associated with extreme weather events in the US between 2006 and 2009 exceeded
$14 Billion. In the U.S., 2012 alone saw eleven weather disasters that cost a billion dollars or more (NOAA). Source: Fort Collins
Climate Status Report 2012, page 5, http://www.fcgov.com/airquality/pdf/FC2012ClimateStatusReportLowRes.pdf.
11 The United Nations Urban Environmental Accords are a series of goals adopted by over 100 cities around the world to achieve
urban sustainability, promote healthy economies, advance social equity and protect the world’s ecosystems. Source:
http://greencitiescalifornia.org/pages/urban-environmental-accords.html
1.1
Packet Pg. 20
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 10
Objective: Add Value to Local Economy
Part of the message of Zero Waste is that many of the benefits that accrue are due to the value
of the materials recovered. The Commodities Analysis (see Table 1) shows the value of
materials being discarded in Fort Collins based on 2013 markets. Over a third of the value is in
reusables, from just 4% of the tons discarded and the value of recyclables increasing by 300%
since 1992.12 This highlights why it’s important to track more than just tons diverted from
landfill. By adopting new rules and incentives such as those proposed in this Plan, the
community will recover value from materials that are currently being discarded. A key indicator
will be the number of jobs created in new waste reduction and recycling services and
infrastructure, primarily in the private sector and nonprofit organizations.
To evaluate how strong waste reduction and recycling policies and programs will add value to
the local economy and the Triple Bottom Line, the Plan proposes that the City document the
number of jobs reported to the City by all aspects of the reuse, recycling, composting and
Table 1 – Commodities Analysis: Tons & Value of Materials Discarded in Fort Collins13
Estimated Annual Lost Value of 139,060 tons of Fort Collins Discards Buried in Landfills
Categories % Annual Tons $/ton
Annual
Revenues Lost
1. Reusables 4% 5,600 $400 $ 2,240,000
2. Textiles 6% 8,300 $80 $ 664,000
3. Polymers 14% 19,500 $100 $ 1,950,000
4. Metals 4% 5,600 $80 $ 448,000
5. Glass 2% 2,800 $20 $ 56,000
6. Paper 25% 34,800 $20 $ 696,000
7. Putrescibles 14% 19,500 $7 $ 136,500
8. Plant Debris 16% 22,200 $7 $ 155,400
9. Wood 5% 7,000 $8 $ 56,000
10. Soils 3% 4,200 $7 $ 29,400
11. Ceramics 6% 8,300 $4 $ 33,200
12. Chemicals 1% 1,400 $1 $ 1,400
100% 139,100 $ 6,465,900
waste hauling, processing and manufacturing industries. In addition, the City could qualitatively
identify the benefits to residents and businesses (e.g., providing lower cost, high quality
products to enable them to be more sustainable).14 This will be particularly important for reuse
12 Source: Jeffrey Morris, Sound Resource Management, http://www.zerowaste.com/pages/Recycling-Markets.htm and 10/31/13
email clarifications that $33 per ton were the prices in 1992-93, compared to recent prices in the $103-$110 per ton range. These
are all current dollars, not adjusted for inflation.
13 Sources: Composition Studies: Sloan Vasquez/Clements Environmental, January 2012 for Fort Collins, and Cascadia for Boulder
March 2012; Market Estimates by Richard Anthony Associates June 2013.
14 This would be a pioneering effort. This has only been done on a very limited basis by other communities. In California, the
Recycling Market Development Zones report to the State on the number of jobs created from their direct efforts (loans and technical
1.1
Packet Pg. 21
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 11
and recycled product manufacturing, as they generate far more jobs than recycling collection,
composting and landfilling. The CSU Regional Economics Institute should be engaged to help
develop the best way to obtain this data, which could then be integrated into the Institute’s
projections of future employment in Fort Collins. It is estimated more than 434 direct jobs could
potentially be created if 100% of the City’s discarded materials were recovered and used to
make new products.15 Proposed goals based on actual tons landfilled are:
Add 150 new jobs by 202016
Add 300 new jobs by 2025.
Objective: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Waste reduction and recycling contribute to the city’s Climate Action Plan and Colorado’s
statewide goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (80% below 2005 levels by 2050). Current
estimates of greenhouse gas production from the existing system (using the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency WARM Model17) show that the community could reduce greenhouse gases
by 187,389 MTCO2e per year if it were to achieve a new Zero Waste goal - the equivalent of
removing emissions of 39,071 cars from Fort Collins roadways each year. Proposed goals
based on actual tons of landfilled waste are:
Reduce annual emissions 60,000 MTCO2e by 2020
Reduce annual emissions 120,000 MTCO2e by 2025.
Because many of these greenhouse gas savings are from embodied energy in materials which
are not reported as part of the community’s GHG inventory according to new national reporting
protocols implemented in Fort Collins, the full reduction benefit will not be recognized in the
community’s GHG inventory. .
assistance). Ventura County is an example where those numbers are reported locally in management and budget documents (to be
confirmed).
15 See Table 4 on page 20 for calculation.
16 Assumes that 1/3 of total 434 jobs would be generated by 2020 and 2/3 by 2025
17 Source: http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/tools/warm/Warm_Form.html
1.1
Packet Pg. 22
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 12
Recommendations
Each of the recommendations is followed by language excerpted from City Plan, to highlight
how these recommendations are consistent with policy already adopted by the City.
1. Culture Change
Accomplishing a new culture and awareness of Zero Waste will require a change in the
culture of the community, not unlike the dramatic reversal of social norms for tobacco
smoking that has occurred in recent decades. That change has already begun. For
example, the 2012 Climate Status Report reported that 64% of people polled indicated that
they know about the connection among methane, composting and climate change
To reinforce this change that is underway, residents and businesses will expect the City to
lead by example. A good way to provide leadership is to place recycling bins in tandem with
all City-serviced public trash bins and ensure that comprehensive signage is posted about
what to recycle. Once “all compostable” organics recycling services are readily available,
the City should add composting bins in public areas where food is sold. The City could also
assist venues and events with developing on-site composting or digestion systems until city-
wide collection services are available.
The City should continue to provide strong, enhanced programs to educate residents,
businesses and visitors about how and where to reduce, reuse and recycle in Fort Collins.
Expand staffing or interns to contact all businesses to assist them in complying with new
rules regarding recycling as they are adopted. City staff should develop educational
materials for all haulers to distribute to all their customers on a regular basis to ensure
consistent messages about how and what to recycle in Fort Collins (rather than putting
responsibility on the haulers to create high-quality educational materials).The City should
also develop decals that can be placed on containers throughout the City to provide clear,
consistent messages about what can be recycled, using both graphics and multiple
languages (especially for larger decals).
Work with ClimateWise and the City’s Waste Reduction and Recycling Assistance Program
(WRAP) to conduct outreach to businesses and multi-family complexes about how to reduce
wasting and eliminate wasteful practices.
To accomplish culture change, the City needs a comprehensive, community-based social
marketing program that will address:
Awareness – making sure everyone knows that Zero Waste is a priority in Fort
Collins
Education – making sure residents, businesses and visitors know how to participate
in local Zero Waste programs
1.1
Packet Pg. 23
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 13
Training – teaching employees in Zero Waste businesses and nonprofits how to work
with residents, businesses and visitors to gain their support for local Zero Waste
programs
Reinforcement and Compliance – continuously meeting with residents and
businesses to highlight how Zero Waste policies and programs work, and helping
them comply with adopted City ordinances that guide the implementation of
programs. This approach elicits more positive responses than a heavy-handed
enforcement program.
The City should work with nonprofit organizations and students to help event organizers to
obtain volunteers on a regular basis; volunteers can assist in educating the public about
where to discard different materials/products at venues and special events. For events at all
City park venues with more than 1,000 attendees, the City should adopt requirements to
meet Zero Waste standards such as:18
Only allow exhibitors/vendors to give out products that are reusable, recyclable or
compostable
Require use of durable serving-ware (and dishwashing machines for the serving-
ware) if food services are in one central location where deposits can be charged for
durables to be returned
Require recycling bins next to all trash bins and composting bins in areas where food
is sold
Use prominent and comprehensive signage above bins with graphics and narrative
Encourage use of volunteers stationed at bins to assist attendees in making right
choices in discarding their resources.
The City should issue a challenge to residents, businesses and institutions to join as
partners in working towards Zero Waste, and recognize those who are leading the way to
Zero Waste.
2. Reinvest Resources in Local Economy
Part of the message of Zero Waste is that many of the benefits that accrue are due to the
value of the materials recovered. The Commodities Analysis in Table 1 shows the value of
materials being discarded in Fort Collins based on 2013 market prices. By adopting new
rules and incentives such as those proposed in this Plan, the community will recover much
18 See Vancouver for examples of good green event guidelines.
City Plan Consistency – Principle ENV 13: The City will provide Fort Collins
residents and the business community with information and education about
waste management including waste reduction, diversion, and proper disposal.
1.1
Packet Pg. 24
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 14
of the value that is being discarded. A key indicator of that will be the number of jobs
created in Zero Waste services and infrastructure.
Engage the City’s economic health staff in using financial tools to help develop local value-
added reuse, recycling and composting businesses. The priority for economic health should
be for reuse and manufacturing activities that create jobs using locally “sourced” materials
while at the same time reducing transportation costs and reducing greenhouse gases
associated with long-distance transportation.
Examples of the types of businesses that could be an initial focus for such efforts include:
Wood – Support mini-sawmill for manufacturing of wood flooring, cabinets and
architectural details from deconstructed lumber.
Food - Support food donations infrastructure for nutritious, good quality foods and
produce. Support development of local composting and digestion facilities for
expired food products.
Plastics –Support development of a local manufacturer that can use some or all of
#3-7 plastic containers and other currently non-recyclable plastics. Support initial
startup of takeback programs or efforts to redesign most difficult products.
Newspapers – Support development of local uses such as making insulation.
Glass – Support development of regional processing capacity for glass collected in
single-stream recycling programs, as well as local uses for non-container glass such
as windows.
Construction and demolition debris – Support development of a local recycling
facility.
Durable goods, mattresses, carpet, batteries and paint – Support startup of take-
back programs.
Soils and gypsum – Support use by local nurseries and/or include collection through
a local resource recovery park. Develop different blends of soils targeted to different
soil conditions and plant needs.
Consider adding more services to the future Integrated Recycling Facility (scheduled for
construction in 2014) to collect all 12 Market Categories of materials in Fort Collins.
Consider renaming it as the City’s first Resource Recovery Park.
Work with Colorado State University and other local academic institutions to research and
develop innovative technologies for reuse, recycling, and composting, behavioral science
research, and unique local markets or uses for recycled products. Work with the Business
Alliance for Local Living Economies (http://bealocalist.org/) and Institute for Local Self-
Reliance (www.ilsr.org) to identify potential manufacturers and resources.
The City should increase its commitment to purchase locally manufactured products that
contain reused, recycled, or composted materials. Assist local manufacturers in being listed
1.1
Packet Pg. 25
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 15
as suppliers with the Purchasing Department, especially for public works and urban
redevelopment projects.
Work with social service organizations to train and refer individuals as prospective
employees in reuse, recycling or composting operations. Pursue funding from U.S.
Department of Labor to assist with this and work with community colleges to implement.
3. Universal Recycling
Update, expand, educate and effectively implement the City’s Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT)
Ordinance, and consider renaming it the “Universal Recycling Ordinance”.
Residential
Phase in a requirement over the next two years for all haulers to collect compostable yard
trimmings and trash on a weekly basis from all customers.
Initially, weekly compostables collection will solely be for the collection of yard trimmings, for
no less than six months of the year.
Allow haulers to charge an additional fee to cover the costs of collecting glass of higher
quality from curbside and/or through a system of drop-off containers around the City.
Require all haulers to offer every other week non-putrescible trash service - at a lower cost
than weekly service – as an option once weekly compostables collection systems are in
place and being utilized that include food scraps and food soiled paper. The universal
collection of compostables is likely to double the amount of materials that will be able to be
diverted from the residential sector.
Once this system is implemented, haulers will be able to provide more Zero Waste services
with the same number of trucks as they use today. One truck could collect all compostables
(including yard trimmings, food scraps and food soiled paper) on a weekly basis, and a
City Plan Consistency - Principle ENV 15: The City will recognize that
discarded materials, such as recyclable commodities, reusable products, and
organics, can be economic resources for the community.
Policy ENV 15.3 – Establish Incentives for Waste Processors. Support the use
of incentives (e.g., tax increment financing system or enterprise zones for
resource recovery industries) to create sustainable means of repurposing,
recycling, or composting as an economic alternative to Colorado’s low-cost
landfills.
Policy ENV 15.4 – Enhance the Economy. Consider potential and existing
recycling and waste recovery activities as opportunities to enhance local
revenue generation and create jobs.
1.1
Packet Pg. 26
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 16
second truck could alternate collection of rubbish one week, and recyclables the next
week.19
Require haulers to deliver educational materials developed by the City to all their customers,
in order to implement changes smoothly and provide a more consistent message to
residents and businesses regarding what can be included in each collection container.
Multi-Family
Include all multi-family dwellings20 under the Universal Recycling Ordinance within two
years. Require haulers to provide in-apartment recyclables and compostables collection
containers (could be reusable bags or rigid containers) and educational programs (including
distribution of educational materials developed by the City). Multi-family dwellings that meet
recycling standards detailed by the City should be publicly recognized annually by the City
and provided some type of financial incentive by their hauler (financial incentives could be a
donation to a homeowners association for a celebration or charity of their choice, or some
reduction in fees charged for services the following year).
Commercial
Include all businesses under the Universal Recycling Ordinance within three years.
Haulers must provide at least an equal amount of recycling services as the amount of trash
services they provide to their business and commercial customers. Haulers must provide at
least one container for composting services for each business that generates more than five
gallons per week of compostable materials (e.g., food scraps, food soiled paper, and/or yard
trimmings).
Allow haulers to offer shared locking recycling and composting containers for businesses to
share where space is limited in designated locations. Allow haulers to place additional
recycling and composting containers in no more than two parking spaces, if needed, with
agreement of property owner, and amend land use codes if necessary to allow use of a
parking space for extra recycling. Allow haulers more flexibility in setting rates to
accommodate additional services proposed.
19This approach was highlighted as an opportunity in a report funded by USEPA Region 9, Beyond Recycling, Composting Food
Scraps and Soiled Paper, Peter Anderson and Gary Liss, 2009. www.beyondrecycling.org.
20 Including long-term care facilities, mobile home parks and any other residential facility that is not currently classified as a single-
family dwelling
1.1
Packet Pg. 27
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 17
4. Prohibited Materials
Section 15-414 of Article XV of Chapter 15 of the City Municipal Code identifies materials
that are prohibited from being placed in the community’s waste stream. In addition to the
materials currently prohibited (electronic equipment, recyclable cardboard and household
hazardous materials), the City should phase out of landfilling the following materials as soon
as markets or uses for the materials are available within 20 miles of Fort Collins’ City Hall
with capacity for the full residential sector:
a. Conventional types of recyclables (e.g., paper, glass and plastic bottles, and metal
cans)
b. Yard trimmings
c. Construction debris
d. Demolition debris
e. White goods (large household appliances)
f. Food scraps and food soiled paper
Disposal prohibitions for a new list of materials build on the successful implementation of
prohibitions already adopted in Fort Collins for recyclable cardboard and electronic
equipment. (This approach could follow the lead of the State of Massachusetts, which has
used prohibitions from disposal and/or transfer for disposal for a large variety of materials,
including: asphalt pavement, brick & concrete; clean gypsum wallboard, ferrous & non-
ferrous metals; leaves & yard waste; treated & untreated wood; and whole tires.21)
21 Source: http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/recycle/solid/massachusetts-waste-disposal-bans.html
City Plan Consistency – Principle ENV 17: The City will act as a steward of the
environment and public health by using its regulatory authority.
Policy ENV 17.1 – Update Regulations. Regularly update codes to include effective
environmental and resource conservation provisions to promote waste reduction,
efficient resource use, and recycling.
1.1
Packet Pg. 28
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 18
5. Construction, Deconstruction and Demolition (C&D)
Expand International Building Code recycling requirements in Fort Collins from construction-
only to also include remodeling, deconstruction, and demolition projects in all sectors that
measure more than 2,500 square feet. For new buildings, additions and remodels, require a
construction waste management plan acceptable to the Building Official that includes
recycling of concrete and masonry, wood, metals and cardboard. The construction waste
management plan should be required to be submitted at the time of application for a building
permit. The construction waste management plan should be implemented and
conspicuously posted on the construction site. Compliance should be certified by the hauler
through receipts and signed affidavits. Substantive changes to the plan should be subject to
prior approval by the City’s Chief Building Official.
As additional recycling services are developed for mixed construction and demolition debris
(C&D) recycling, expand Building Code recycling requirements to add more types of
materials, and require the reuse or recycling of all mixed C&D materials.
Require contractors and builders to provide a deposit to the City to ensure that they will
meet the City recycling goals at the outset of a project.22 The City should define what a
“qualified recycling facility” for C&D processing entails, to enable deposits to be refunded in
full. The City then could allow contractors to use the established “recycling rate” for certified
qualified recycling facilities rather than having to track every load individually through the
facility to determine its residue rate. If the building permit is submitted with material going to
a certified qualified recycling facility, permit will be reviewed within a specified number of
days of submission, going to the “head of the line” in permit reviews.
22 In other communities that do this, the deposit is usually charged at the rate of the current tipping fee x the number of tons of C&D
debris that are estimated in their plans to be generated. The current tipping fee in Fort Collins is $18/ton.
City Plan Consistency – Principle ENV 17: The City will act as a steward of the
environment and public health by using its regulatory authority.
Policy ENV 17.1 – Update Regulations. Regularly update codes to include effective
environmental and resource conservation provisions to promote waste reduction,
efficient resource use, and recycling. Policy ENV 17.2 – Manage Hazardous
Materials and Waste Promote pollution prevention-based management (and practice
these measures in municipal operations) and commit to acting as a resource to assist
the community in preventing pollution and minimizing hazardous chemical usage,
motivating citizens to practice appropriate disposal techniques, and enforcing
environmental regulations, including the City’s ban of electronics in the waste stream.
1.1
Packet Pg. 29
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 19
The City should develop training programs for contractors, builders, and service providers
on requirements, and opportunities for reuse, recycling, composting and deconstruction.
On-line resources should be developed for builders and small businesses who may not be
able to attend training programs.
The City should adopt new Building Code deconstruction goals that require a “soft strip” for
deconstruction of all projects (to take out all items that are portable and detachable for which
there are markets or uses within 20 miles of Fort Collins City Hall). Buildings or portions of
buildings that are removed should be processed first to safely remove all asbestos and lead
paint contaminants. Then all remaining products should be reused (such as doors, windows,
cabinets, and fixtures). After all reusables are taken out, all remaining materials should be
recycled from the building shell, including: concrete and masonry, wood, metals, and
cardboard. Compliance should be certified by the hauler through receipts and signed
affidavits.
At the time of application for a building permit, contractors should provide information to the
Chief Building Official to publicly notify interested deconstruction firms electronically and/or
through the local newspaper of all buildings slated to be demolished, to enable such
deconstruction firms to pursue salvaging whatever they can while final permits are being
authorized. The City should promote existing deconstruction services and used building
materials stores, and assist deconstruction companies and nonprofits to store and grade
materials from deconstruction projects.
Another recommendation would be to support the City requiring fire sprinklers in all multi-
family dwellings to prevent as much damage to such facilities as possible. Sprinklered
properties have about 10% of the damage as those without sprinklers.23
Also, the City could assist industry to develop recycling facilities for construction,
deconstruction and demolition materials locally that can meet City recycling goals, possibly
through public/private partnerships and/or economic development assistance.
City staff should also work with the City’s Emergency Manager to create Disaster
Preparedness Plans for Fort Collins and articulate strategies for how to recycle as much
debris that results from disasters as possible and sign memorandum of understandings with
disaster response agencies. In addition, the City could work with neighboring communities
affected by flooding in 2013 to obtain financial support from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) to develop mixed C&D recycling facilities in the Front Range
to recycle as much of the disaster debris as possible.
23 Source: Michael Gebo, Fort Collins Chief Building Official
1.1
Packet Pg. 30
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 20
6. Composting Organic Materials
Adopt a City goal to phase out the disposal of compostable organic materials in landfills by
2018.
Require all waste haulers to collect and compost yard trimmings weekly for at least six
months per year from residents, businesses and institutions requesting that service. A
negative check-off system should be used to verify if/when a hauler’s customer specifically
requests not to receive composting services (e.g., if they don’t generate any yard trimmings
because they xeriscape and/or have their own backyard composting).
Support the development of one or more composting facilities for all compostable organics
(including food scraps and food-soiled paper), using windrow, in-vessel, and/or anaerobic
digestion technology that meet the U.S. Composting Council’s Seal of Assurance for quality
compost. Work with others interested in composting to help develop facilities, such as
Colorado State University, Poudre School District, City of Loveland and Larimer County.
Encourage larger generators of compostables to consider developing small-scale
composters on their own sites or nearby sites for multiple generators to share (like Earth
Tub currently serving some downtown restaurants).
Assist private businesses to develop a composting facility or compost transfer station within
20 miles of Fort Collins’ City Hall using economic development tools; identify potential public
and private sites, and facilitate commitment for the supply of organic materials necessary to
operate a facility. If private businesses are not successful in this effort within two years (by
2016), consider developing a publicly sponsored facility.
Once a composting facility or transfer station that is permitted to collect or process all
compostable organics is available within 20 miles of Fort Collins, require all waste haulers to
collect and compost all compostable organics weekly year-round from all residents,
businesses and institutions.
Until city-wide composting services are available for all compostables, develop more pilot
programs to compost or digest all compostable organics, particularly with schools and
institutions. For example, work with the Larimer County Food Bank to develop a composter
on their site or nearby together with other local food scrap generators, with “curing” of the
compost done off-site in partnership with a larger composting operation. Also, provide use of
city open space for gardening, farming and composting, partnering with the Food Bank, to
City Plan Consistency – Policy ENV 17.4: Construction Waste Reduction.
Encourage activities that help divert debris from construction-related activities.
Explore the feasibility of requiring any City-subsidized projects to employ reduction
and solid waste diversion practices that reduce the volume of material sent from city
construction sites to landfills for disposal.
1.1
Packet Pg. 31
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 21
provide opportunities for large scale community composting and utilizing that waste to
ultimately feed people again by growing vegetables.
Explore the possibility of digesting discarded food scraps separately from wastewater solids
at wastewater treatment plant. Encourage haulers to offer low-cost backyard and on-site
composting bin sales to foster backyard and on-site composting as a way to keep materials
from even becoming waste.
7. Reduce & Reuse
In the hierarchy of waste diversion actions, the City should promote “reduce and reuse” as
first-line actions, followed by “recycle, compost or redesign the rest”. Encourage residents,
businesses and institutions to eliminate wastefulness, to obtain the largest economic
benefits of Zero Waste. Work with ClimateWise and the City’s Waste Reduction and
Recycling Assistance Program (WRAP) to use City financial incentives and technical
assistance for businesses and multi-family complexes to reduce wasting and eliminate
wasteful practices. The City organization should lead by example by evaluating its
purchasing practices and develop guidelines that will highlight opportunities for all City
departments to reduce wastes. Encourage major institutional and corporate buyers to follow
City source reduction purchasing practices.
Promote reusable shipping containers and returnable pallets as a top priority for businesses.
Work with Colorado State University and apartments that have high turnover rates to
provide a more robust program for reuse and recycling of furniture, appliances, floor
coverings and equipment during move-ins and move-outs. Help develop a reuse
warehouse, like a food bank system, working with local thrift stores (a central place that all
thrift stores would have equal access to for sorting through incoming products and for bulk
sales to public). Promote reducing the wasting of food in cafeterias through trayless
City Plan Consistency – Policy ENV 14.2: Lower Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Recognize the critical role of successful solid waste diversion and recycling in
significantly lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and place priority on
employing strategies that will enable the community to meet its adopted goals for
reducing GHG emissions and the risks of climate change.
Policy ENV 15.1 – Encourage Composting Divert organic material from landfill
disposal and put it to a beneficial secondary use as compost, which increases
water conservation, adds nutritional value, and provides carbon dioxide storage
capacity (carbon sink) when applied to soil, or for generating alternative sources of
energy. Principle SW 3: The City will encourage and support local food production
to improve the availability and accessibility of healthy foods, and to provide other
educational, economic, and social benefits.
1.1
Packet Pg. 32
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 22
cafeterias and portion controls. Promote Federal Good Samaritan Law that eliminates
liability for donation of food and address similar liability for thrift stores with “as is” waivers.
Help local thrift stores prevent illegal dumping from occurring on their property through
increased penalties and code enforcement.
Assist the Larimer County Food Bank in diverting a higher percentage of its existing food
waste from the landfill with the addition of another truck and driver, food-safe tins and lids
and staff time for donor relations. This would enable them to provide timely and regular
donation pickup for new donors, especially from lower-volume donors such as farms,
restaurants, manufacturers, and minimal processing facilities, Another way to help reduce
wasting of food would be providing a truck to the Food Bank for mobile food pantry
distributions twice a week and the other 3 days a week to help the Food Rescue program.
Require multifamily developments and neighborhood community centers to include a secure
location for reusable items to be easily accessed for move-ins and move-outs, including
used furniture, appliances, clothing and books. Promote “leave it behind” system for
reusables for off-campus students and the community. Adopt a used clothing collection bin
ordinance to ensure quality services are provided and bins don’t become a nuisance or
create a public safety issue.
Support “adaptive reuse” in International Building Code for residential and commercial
construction, which encourages the remodeling or repurposing of buildings that are still
functional.
8. Product Stewardship
Adopt fees on products or packaging sold in Fort Collins that are hard to reuse, recycle or
compost. For example, enact a litter fee on single-use paper or plastic bags and fee or ban
on expanded polystyrene take-out containers. Fees could be invested in a Recycling
Education and Investment Fund (see recommendation #10 below).
Ask businesses that sell products in glass bottles in the Front Range and local governments
in the area to help develop a commingled glass recycling sorting system to remove debris
from single-stream glass so it can be made into new glass products. Explore options for
City Plan Consistency – Principle ENV 14: The City will apply the US Environmental
Protection Agency’s integrated “hierarchy” of waste management to help protect all
environmental resources including air, soil, and water using source reduction as the
primary approach, followed in order by reuse, recycling/composting energy recovery
using emerging pollution-free technology, and landfill disposal (where methane gas
capture is employed) as a final resort.
1.1
Packet Pg. 33
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 23
more collection of glass separately for reuse and/or recycling into glass bottles. Work with
CSU to ban plastic bottled water on campus. Before any products are banned, develop a
plan to ensure the public has clear options that are convenient for them. Work with larger
“fast food” restaurants to use reusable plates, bowls, cups and flatware for dine-in
customers instead of single-use products. Provide info on takeback programs on City’s
website and set up a notification group like the Leaf Exchange for takebacks.
9. Waste to Clean Energy
Develop and adopt a Hierarchy of Highest and Best Use to assist in evaluation of
technology proposals and use of particular feedstocks that would otherwise be sent to
landfills for disposal. Prioritize what energy technologies and feedstocks the City would like
to focus on in the next five years after adoption of a Hierarchy of Highest and Best Use.
Encourage Colorado State University to research and pilot innovative technologies for
different applications.
In 2013, the City started a pilot program of waste to energy working with Colorado State
University; pulped food scraps from the university’s cafeterias are taken to be “digested” at
the Drake Water Reclamation Facility (DWRF). The digested food scraps generate methane
gas in a controlled environment, which is then burned to generate energy that heats the
plant during cold weather. The City should continue to work on new programs to digest food
scraps from residents, businesses, and/or institutions, delivered via truck or sewers to the
DWRF.
The City should continue to investigate diverse solutions for converting materials that
contain embedded energy, with the recognition that it could be imprudent to commit
resources (feedstocks) on a long-term basis to one single technology before more options
can be pursued.
City Plan Consistency – Policy ENV 17.3 – Encourage Producer Responsibility.
Support state and federal efforts to establish producer responsibility systems,
which encourage manufacturers to invest in ways to reduce the lifecycle impacts of
their products or to create options for “taking back” items such as electronics, paint,
and household cleaning items that impact public health and the environment.
1.1
Packet Pg. 34
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 24
10. Funding
Adopt recycling investment fees on waste hauling services or waste shipped for landfilling to
generate revenue needed to fund new City initiatives. Initially require haulers to collect a
City Recycling Education and Investment Fee of $1.00 per household or business per
month. Part of the proceeds would go to the City for outreach and education materials and
staffing, support for expanding the Integrated Recycling Facility into a Resource Recovery
Park, as well as economic development grants and loans for reuse, recycling and
composting investments.
Other proceeds could be used by haulers to help implement their programs. Over time, look
at whether to increase the fee to generate revenue to fund other economic/business
development for Zero Waste related projects. Focus investments on one-time costs, not
operating expenses, as a waste-based fee will decrease over time and should only be used
to assist in the transition to a Zero Waste economy, and not continue once the basic
infrastructure has been established.
City Plan Consistency – Policy ENV 15.2 – Generate Energy. After recyclable,
compostable, and reusable marketable materials have been removed, utilize
the remainder of the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream as a feedstock for
energy production using newly emerging, ultra-low polluting transformation
technology.
Policy ENV 15.5 – Systems-Based Approach. Apply a systems-based approach
to managing materials that flow into the community (e.g., inventories, tracking
systems), as well as their post-consumer destinations, in order to analyze
opportunities for alternatives to landfill disposal.
City Plan Consistency – Policy ENV 15.3: Establish Incentives for Waste Processors.
Support the use of incentives (e.g., tax increment financing system or enterprise zones
for resource recovery industries) to create sustainable means of repurposing,
recycling, or composting as an economic alternative to Colorado’s low-cost landfills.
Policy ENV 16.2 – Consider Financial Investment. Consider investments in energy
generation or other kinds of facilities that are designed to collect and process materials
that cannot be recycled or reused.
1.1
Packet Pg. 35
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 25
11. Regional Cooperation
Develop public/private and intergovernmental partnerships (Larimer County, City of
Loveland, Colorado State University and Poudre School District) to help identify locations
and develop needed facilities (e.g., composting, C&D debris recycling, and possibly
additional Resource Recovery Parks). Encourage collaboration and not duplication of
infrastructure. Identify what services are best done locally and what initiatives could
leverage economies of scale on a larger regional basis.
Work with Larimer County and City of Loveland to work on regional options. Before a new
landfill is built by the public, it will be critical to identify where materials will come from.
C&D facilities require an economy of scale and more collaboration on a larger regional basis
than historically has been done. The City should explore which other communities in the
Front Range are interested in developing this capacity (e.g., Boulder), and how to pursue it
further, working through organizations like the Colorado Association for Recycling (CAFR).
The best locations for facilities identified in this Plan could be considered as part of the
development of a regional Zero Waste Plan that at least includes Larimer County and the
City of Loveland, and ideally includes all those jurisdictions that ship wastes into Larimer
County and those jurisdictions that receive wastes from Larimer County. Develop
comparative cost of trash and recycling in neighboring communities and landfills.
Diversion Potential
Diversion estimates were prepared to identify the waste reduction potential of each policy and
program identified in this Plan. The diversion estimates are based on comparable policies and
programs implemented in other jurisdictions, research, and educated estimates by Zero Waste
Associates, the consulting firm for this Plan. Table 2 below shows the projected diversion rate,
and summarizes the diversion potential for new proposed Zero Waste policies and programs.
City Plan Consistency – Principle ENV 16: The City will collaborate with other
organizations to develop infrastructure that will accommodate larger quantities of
discarded materials, such as recyclable commodities, organics, and hazardous
waste, for appropriate processing and that will reduce shipping distances.
Policy ENV 16.1 – Coordinate with Others Coordinate with private businesses, non-
profit groups, CSU, Poudre School District, and other government agencies to
increase local infrastructure and improve market conditions for recycling, composting
and reuse industries and educate the public about source reduction and recycling.
1.1
Packet Pg. 36
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 26
Based on this analysis, it is estimated the City can divert an additional 90 percent of materials
currently going to landfills in 2013. The City is projected to achieve a total of 96 percent
diversion, through continuation of existing programs and implementation of new policies and
programs.
Table 3 - Existing Landfill Waste Generation and Projected Diversion
Current (2012) New Programs Total Projected
Diverted Tons 190,000 125,000 315,000
Disposal Tons 139,000 14,000
Total Tons Generated 329,000 329,000
Diversion Rate 58% 96%
The diversion rates are presented as a snapshot in time, assuming full implementation of all
initiatives. More realistically, policies and programs will be developed over time accompanied by
additional research, testing, and pilot programs before all new programs are fully implemented.
Several initiatives will require new ordinances and regulations which will require City Council
action and time to implement. Other initiatives will require investment in new infrastructure.
Zero Waste is a design framework for reducing generation of waste and maximizing diversion,
not a strict tonnage goal. By implementing the proposed policies and programs, the City will be
striving towards Zero Waste, even though there will still be some residual wastes that will be
disposed.
Table 2 - Estimated Diversion Potential for Recommended Initiatives
Options Diversion Tons
Diversion Percentage (of
Existing Tons Landfilled)
1. Universal Recycling 35,000 25%
2. Designated Materials 9,000 6%
3. Construction & Demolition Debris 18,000 13%
4. Composting Organics 13,000 9%
5. Reduce & Reuse 5,000 4%
6. Waste to Energy - -
7. Culture Change 45,000 32%
8. Reinvest Resources in Local Economy - -
9. Product Stewardship 1,000 1%
10. Funding - -
11. Regional Cooperation - -
Total 125,000 90%
1.1
Packet Pg. 37
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 27
Triple Bottom Line Impacts
Economic Impacts
To carry out this Plan, new staff or contractor resources will be needed to provide a variety of
support functions and activities including: Zero Waste outreach; technical assistance to
residential and commercial generators and City departments; technical assistance for creating
composting infrastructure; and, development of new Zero Waste policy initiatives and programs.
Development of new programs will also require investment in new processing capacity for
reuse, organics and C&D debris. The capital costs for these facilities are estimated to be:
Composting - $7-9 million
C&D - $5-7 million
Reuse - $500,000
TOTAL $12.5 - $16.5 million
These investments, along with the rest of the policies and programs recommended in this Plan,
would contribute significantly to recovering the $6.5 million value of materials from the Fort
Collins community that gets buried in regional landfills every year.
The alternative to these investments would be spending $20-$80 million on a new landfill once
the Larimer County landfill closes in approximately 12-15 years.
Initial costs for the first several years after adopting the Zero Waste goal would likely be about
$1.00 per household and business per month for the Recycling Education and Reinvestment
Fee. The majority of this funding would be for programs to be conducted by the City to assist in
culture change and reinvesting resources in the local economy. Additional costs would be
incurred over the following 10 years through new rates charged for additional services (e.g.,
curbside composting) by service providers in the open competitive marketplace, in response to
new rules and incentives adopted by the City, designed to provide clear direction and a level
playing field for investments. The competitive marketplace will result in the most efficient
implementation of programs.
For the City’s future involvement in taking the new path to Zero Waste, new proposals will be
developed through bi-annual City budget processes. The “budgeting for outcomes” system
provides the framework for evaluating the costs and benefits of specific policies and proposals
as opportunities to introduce new measures become feasible and timely.
Environmental Impact
Using data for tons of materials from Fort Collins that are taken to landfills for disposal in Table
1, the following highlights the amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) that are either emitted or
eliminated by landfilling and/or recycling. The results are derived from the U.S. Environmental
1.1
Packet Pg. 38
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 28
Protection Agency’s Waste Reduction Model (WARM), which is the standard in the industry for
evaluating such impacts.24 This analysis uses the assumption that the city will ultimately achieve
Zero Waste, whereby 96% or more of the materials that are currently landfilled will be diverted
through reduction strategies, reuse, recycling, composting, or waste conversion (to energy).
According to its website, EPA created WARM to help solid waste planners and organizations
track and voluntarily report GHG emissions reductions from several different waste
management practices. WARM calculates and totals GHG emissions for baseline and
alternative waste management practices - source reduction, recycling, combustion, composting,
and landfilling. The model calculates emissions in metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE),
metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTC02e), and energy units (million BTU) across a wide
range of material types commonly found in municipal solid waste. WARM now recognizes 40
material types, and their emission factors are available for viewing in units of MTC02e and MTCe.
The WARM Model shows that by diverting nearly all of its waste (96% or more) from landfilling,
Fort Collins could reduce greenhouse gases by 187,389 MTCO2e per year, the equivalent of
removing emissions from 39,071 cars from Fort Collins roadways each year.
Implementing this Plan will result in reductions in annual greenhouse gas emissions that are
equivalent to:
Eliminating 39,071 passenger vehicles from the road;
Eliminating the consumption of 436,137 barrels of oil;
Eliminating the CO2 emissions from the electricity use of 28,075 houses per year; or
Eliminating the CO2 emissions from the burning of coal from 806 rail cars per year.
Because many of these greenhouse gas savings are from embodied energy in materials which
are not reported as part of the community’s GHG inventory according to new national reporting
protocols implemented in Fort Collins, the full reduction benefit will not be recognized in the
community’s GHG inventory.
Social Impacts
Reuse, recycling, composting, and source reduction offer direct, and substantial, development
opportunities for communities. Discarded materials are a resource that can increase local
revenues, create jobs, lead to the formation of new business, and stimulate the overall local
economic base. On a per-ton basis, sorting and processing recyclables alone sustains eleven
times more jobs than landfilling or incineration. However, reuse of products and making new
products out of the old offer the largest economic pay-offs in the recycling loop. New recycling-
based manufacturers and reuse of high value products employs more people at higher wages
than sorting recyclables does. In order to compare jobs created through recycling with disposal-
related jobs, the Institute for Local Self Reliance (ILSR) developed job-to-ton ratios for specific
material streams based on direct interviews with operating facilities.25
24 WARM Model online: http://epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/calculators/Warm_home.html
25 ILSR, “Salvaging the Future: Waste-Based Production”, www.ilsr.org
1.1
Packet Pg. 39
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 29
Applying the ILSR job-to-ton ratios to Fort Collins’ current volume and type of discards26
indicates that 434 direct jobs could potentially be created if 100% of the City’s discarded
materials were recovered and used to make new products (see Table 4). The potential could be
higher depending on actual businesses recruited.
Table 4 - Job Potential in Fort Collins Based on Near-100% Recovery Rate of 139,000
Annual Tons of Reusables/Recyclables Currently taken to Landfills for Disposal
Categories of Recyclable Materials Number of Potential Jobs
Reuse 42
Paper 96
Organics 4
Wood 8
Ceramics 2
Metals 38
Glass 16
Polymers 194
Textiles 34
Chemicals N/A
Total 434
In addition to these economic health benefits, there are other social benefits that accrue from
pursuing a Zero Waste approach. Many reduce and reuse programs in particular benefit those
who are having a rough time making ends meet. Reuse programs can offer high quality goods
at low prices that help peoples’ finances. Waste reduction programs such as donating food to
people is an important example of how these efforts contribute to those who need it.
The Larimer County Food Bank distributed 6.5 million meals and 8 million pounds of donated
food and other products to the community in 2011.Their direct service pantry program, Food
Share, was a source of food for nearly 80 Larimer County non-profit member agencies that
serve the hungry, which saved these agencies nearly $2.2 million on food expenses in 2012.
The Food Bank supports food pantries, kitchens, shelters and snack programs that serve low-
income populations such as single-parent families, the working poor, older adults, youth,
individuals in crises, childcare and residential programs, centers for the disabled, and homeless
shelters.27
26 Plant debris, putrescibles and soils combined as organics.
27 Source: Fact Sheet 2013, Food Bank for Larimer County,
http://www.foodbanklarimer.org/AboutUs/~/media/COFtCollins137/Files/Fact%20Sheets/2013%20FACT%20SHEET_LONG%20FIN
AL.ashx
1.1
Packet Pg. 40
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 30
The latest “Map the Meal Gap Study” of Feeding America28, found that 14% of residents in
Larimer County (1 in 7) were food insecure – they did not know where they will find their next
meal.29 Nationally, the rate is even higher – 16.1% (almost 1 in 6 people) that are food insecure
– nearly 49 million people.
This clearly is a challenge and an opportunity for a community that embraces Zero Waste.
Recent reports highlight that over 40% of all food in America is wasted:
“Food is simply too good to waste. Even the most sustainably farmed food does us
no good if the food is never eaten. Getting food to our tables eats up 10 percent of
the total U.S. energy budget, uses 50 percent of U.S. land, and swallows 80 percent
of freshwater consumed in the United States. Yet, 40 percent of food in the United
States today goes uneaten. That is more than 20 pounds of food per person every
month. Not only does this mean that Americans are throwing out the equivalent of
$165 billion each year, but also 25 percent of all freshwater and huge amounts of
unnecessary chemicals, energy, and land. Moreover, almost all of that uneaten food
ends up rotting in landfills where it accounts for almost 25 percent of U.S. methane
emissions.”30
Very similar opportunities exist for other areas of reuse, from used building materials, to
appliances, to clothes and books. As Fort Collins fulfills its commitment to the Triple
Bottom Line, placing a higher priority on reducing and reusing will lead to many social
benefits. Services provided should also be handicapped accessible.
28 Feeding America is the largest hunger-relief organization in America. http://feedingamerica.org/
29 Source: ‘Food Insecurity’ remains an issue in Larimer County, April 27, 2012, Northern Colorado Business Report,
http://www.ncbr.com/article/20120427/NEWS/120429869
30 Source: “Wasted: How America Is Losing Up to 40 Percent of Its Food from Farm to Fork to Landfill,” Natural Resources
Defense Council, http://www.nrdc.org/food/wasted-food.asp
1.1
Packet Pg. 41
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 31
Implementation
This Plan provides a road map for the City, residents, businesses and visitors to get to Zero
Waste. It highlights the priorities that need to be adopted to get there:
Culture Change – providing new rules and more incentives, using Community Based
Social Marketing, social media, innovative technologies and software, and harnessing
creative talents in art, music, advertising and social change to reinforce and expand the
change that has already occurred.
Reduce and Reuse – concentrating on helping residents and businesses to live and
operate more efficiently and sustainably, creating over 400 jobs in the process and
helping those in need to get quality food and goods donated or at very low prices.
Compostable Organics Out of Landfills – eliminating many of the fast-acting, climate
changing gases that are emitted when organics rot in landfills, and returning those as
nutrients to the soil for raising more food locally (after first donating all edible food to
people in need).
Construction, Deconstruction and Demolition – implementing new rules of the
International Building Code developed concurrently with this Plan by the City’s Building
Department.
Three key types of facilities that will be needed in the Fort Collins area to fully implement this
plan are:
Commercial composting facility – to process food scraps, food-soiled paper and all
putrescibles and organic materials
Construction and demolition (C&D) recycling plant – to process mixed materials
from building and demolition projects
Reuse warehouse – to support the collection of a wide range of reusable products from
a variety of sources, and enable different businesses and nonprofit organizations to
obtain high quality materials to sell at very reasonable prices to residents and
businesses in Fort Collins.
All of these could be located in a single location as a Resource Recovery Park, or they could be
developed individually in different locations. These could be owned and operated by different
entrepreneurs, and the City could help develop one or more of these facilities as a public/private
partnership if needed.
Priorities and general timelines for implementing policies, programs and facilities are
summarized here:
1. Culture change
a. Adopt education & reinvestment fund (2014)
b. Place more recycling bins in public areas over the next three years
c. Apply community based social marketing starting in 2015
d. Develop public events guidelines, brochures for haulers customers (2015)
2. Reinvest resources
1.1
Packet Pg. 42
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
Draft Road to Zero Waste Plan, November 2013 – Page 32
a. Establish Zero Waste grants and loans program (2014)
b. Expand integrated recycling facility to serve as Resource Recovery Park (2015)
3. Universal recycling ordinance
a. Add yard trimmings collection for single-family residents (2015)
b. Provide recycling to all multi-family residents (2016)
c. Provide recycling to all businesses (2019)
4. Prohibit materials from landfill disposal
a. Source separated C&D materials (2015)
b. Yard trimmings (2016)
c. Food scraps and food-soiled paper (2018)
5. Construction and demolition recycling
a. Universal Building code amendments (2014)
b. Help develop mixed C&D sorting facility in region (2017)
6. Compost organics
a. Help develop food scraps composting and digestion facilities (2016)
7. Reduce and re-use
a. City purchasing policies to reduce waste (2015)
b. Reuse warehouse (2016)
8. Product stewardship
a. Develop glass sorting facility in region (2016)
b. Adopt restrictions on paper and plastic bags (2016)
9. Waste to clean energy
a. Develop hierarchy of highest & best use (2015)
b. Develop pilot programs for priority technologies (2017)
10. Regional cooperation
a. Pursue alternatives through regional Zero Waste Plan (2014-15)
Many partnerships will be required to implement this Plan. Sustainability staff will need to work
with:
Economic health and social sustainability staff, entrepreneurs and nonprofit
organizations to reinvest reusables, recyclables and compostables in the local economy
and create jobs, income and wealth from these discarded materials and help those in
need obtain high quality goods at low costs.
Planning and Building staff, contractors and developers to implement the C&D
recommendations.
A wide range of public and private interests to implement the organics
recommendations.
By investing in the three key Zero Waste facilities, adopting new policies and implementing
innovative, culture changing programs, the community will dramatically decrease the need for its
own landfill, shifting from today’s focus on waste management to a system that optimizes the
use of discarded materials as resources to help the local economy.
1.1
Packet Pg. 43
#1.1: Road to Zero Waste Plan (Road to Zero Waste)
1
Attachment 2 – Public Involvement in Development of a Road to Zero Waste Plan
The consulting firm Zero Waste Associates
(ZWA) was contracted in 2013 to help
develop new goals for Fort Collins and a
plan for how to reach them. Drawing on
experience from working with other U.S.
cities as well as international clients, ZWA
followed a “Road to Zero Waste” theme that
helped inspire and stimulate thinking
“outside the box.”
City staff applied a comprehensive process
to involve the public in discussions about
new goals for the Fort Collins community,
and to obtain public input.
Community Conversations
Five open house events were held on focus
areas of the plan that featured presentations
by ZWA, which were then followed by
vigorous discussions with the audience.
1. Reduce and Reuse (June 11)
2. Recycling (June 12)
3. Composting (July 16)
4. Waste to Clean Energy (July 27)
5. Core Concepts - Road to Zero Waste Plan
(October 15)
More than 250 people attended at least one
Community Conversation over the six-month
outreach and involvement period. Extensive
flip-chart notes were transcribed from each of
the meetings to document comments; attendees
were also invited to fill out comment cards.
Each of the five Community Conversations were
videotaped and frequently rebroadcast on the
City’s cable television channel 14 throughout
the summer and fall of 2013.
Staff posted invitations to Twitter and Facebook for the Community Conversations
(2,300 views on Facebook), distributed posters, and placed ads in the Coloradoan,
Northern Colorado Business Report, CSU Life and the Collegian. Articles in CityNews
and press releases to the media kept the community informed about the planning process.
The Fort Collins Coloradoan wrote two articles about the Road to Zero Waste project.
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 44
#1.2: Public Involvement Process (Road to Zero Waste)
2
Dedicated Website
The City created a website (www.fcgov.com/zerowaste) where information was available
about the planning process and updates were posted as ideas began to take shape for new
approaches for the City to apply to waste reduction and recycling. The website provided
links to the Community Conversations videotapes as well as online comment forms.
Presentations to City Boards and Commissions
City staff and consultants met with key boards to discuss the Road to Zero Waste project,
including the Natural Resources Advisory Board (twice), Air Quality Advisory Board,
Energy Board, Economic Advisory Commission, and the Council Futures Committee.
Stakeholder Meetings
Numerous interviews with stakeholders and site visits were conducted, including: Fort
Collins’ licensed residential waste haulers; Clean Air Composting; ClimateWise Partners;
Chamber of Commerce Legislative Affairs and Environmental Committees; Northern
Colorado Rental Housing Association; Larimer County Food Bank; Fort Collins
Sustainability Group; Fort Collins Sustainable Living Association; Colorado State
University, including student Eco Leaders, the Live Green Team, and the Sustainability,
Energy and Environmental Advisory Committee; the Fort Collins Board of Realtors;
North College Business Association; Poudre School District; Larimer County Public
Works staff; City of Loveland staff; Drake Wastewater Treatment Plant staff; the City’s
Chief Building Official; and City Sustainability Services staff.
As a special training opportunity, ZWA held a workshop in October for ClimateWise
partners to discuss innovations in the business sector for reducing waste.
The consulting team also toured many reuse, recycling, composting, waste-to-energy and
landfill facilities in the area, including: Larimer County Landfill and Material Recovery
Facility and Household Hazardous Waste Facility; Waste Management of Northern
Colorado Landfill; Drake Water Reclamation Facility; the CSU Earth Flow composting
operation, CSU’s surplus property reuse operation, and several “tray-less” cafeterias on
the campus; the City Earth Tub composting pilot project; A-1 Organics Composting in
Eaton; Hageman’s Earth Cycle Composting; Rocky Mountain Battery and Recycling;
Fort Collins ReSource store (architectural salvage and reuse); Waste-Not Recycling;
Uncle Benny’s Building Supplies; Habitat for Humanity; Colorado Iron and Metal;
Loveland’s recycling drop-off center; the City’s Recycling Drop-off Center at Rivendell
School; and the Streets Department’s Hoffman Mill Road Crushing Facility.
Road to Zero Waste Working Group
The City invited an informal Working Group to provide input throughout the process.
The group, representing a cross-section of different stakeholders, invested many hours in
thoughtful discussion to help familiarize the consultants with conditions that are unique
to Colorado’s landfill and recycling infrastructure along the Northern Front Range, and
other local issues to consider when recommending new directions and strategies. The
City of Fort Collins is very grateful for the knowledgeable input contributed by the
1.2
Packet Pg. 45
#1.2: Public Involvement Process (Road to Zero Waste)
3
following colleagues, business associates, and citizens who participated on the Working
Group:
Marty Garvin, Colorado Iron and Metal
Art Gallegos and Matt Gallegos, Gallegos Sanitation, Inc.
Dean Hoag, Rocky Mt. Battery and Recycling
Robert Mann, Natural Resources Advisory Board
Tyler Bandemer, City of Loveland
Stephen Gillette, Larimer County Solid Waste Department
Stacey Baumgarn, CSU Facilities Management
Mary Smith, interested member of the community
1.2
Packet Pg. 46
#1.2: Public Involvement Process (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
1
June 11, 2013 Community Conversation – Reduce, Reuse– comment from cards at meeting
John Anderson The economic model is what got us into this environmental mess – that is the problem.
Stacey
Baumgarn
Perhaps we should just be collecting questions, comments, feedback, and not try to answer/respond
to each on the spot. It seems more defensive and less than a “listening” session. To the degree we
are responding, we are NOT listening and planning. Not sure how to do this – Diversion/Reuse
idea/suggestion:
CSU residence halls and surplus do an annual “leave it behind” project/program. Can the City help or
create a “leave it behind” for off-campus students or any community member? Isn’t August 1 a huge
fruit basket upset of leases and moving, etc. Ask me for more information. Thanks. CSU Center for
Public Deliberation (as facilitators).
How does reuse create so many jobs? As recycling industry creates new jobs, does it drive all costs
(or products) up? If so, does this create some resistance?
Caitlan May City requires waste companies to provide free recycling to all residential properties but doesn’t for
apartment/condo/commercial businesses. The reason I have been told is due to lack of responsibility
to recycle proper items. How does the City plan to address the issue and to get these organizations
and groups engaged in recycling? If this truly is the reason, what studies have been done that show
the increase of waste in recycling containers in apartment/condos and businesses?
I would like to see the City require waste companies to provide recycling services as a free or
mandatory program to all residential and commercial businesses.
Public usage areas should have a recycling container next to all trash bins and the signage needs to
be clear and precise so it is easy to know what to recycle.
Becca
Walkinshaw
Community-wide signage (haulers, schools, city, county) same guidelines - look, symbols, etc. This
helps people to better understand. Also, yard waste is low-hanging fruit to look at - very minimal
portion of our community recycles yard waste. They say they don't create enough for a cart or don't
want to pay additional costs. In Fort Collins we have tipping fees for wood - about the same cost or
more to recycle.
Since Fort Collins implemented green building codes, higher contamination happening with wood, so
contamination fees are frustrating customers.
Education - in schools at early age on 3 R's super important - Start at early age so recycling becomes
second nature for kids and they expect such systems in the future.
Kurt Buss – City
of Loveland
Thanks for keeping the conversation going. Great gathering.
Nancy Agnew Need to help people think out of the box to repurpose - have more drop off points.
Kendal
Gustafson
Deconstruction plan needs to be mandated for all construction jobs. If they have to make a plan they
will realize that diverting material will save them money.
Jack Herrick Renew Hughes Stadium - Great meeting - Look forward to future sessions.
Kelsey Carkeek Have you considered having a forum run through the Center of Public Deliberation (CPD) run by
Martin Carcasson at CSU? I am a part of the CPD and we are always looking to help out with forums
in the community. I also think banning plastic bags would be VERY easy to do in this community. As
a student seeing the perspectives of CSU and Fort Collins as a whole, there are so many people who
would work with the City to ban plastic bags. The biggest way to get this all done is communication
and marketing. Americans want to do go and care BUT they are too LAZY to drop trash off at three
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 47
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
2
locations instead of one. If there were people offering to pick up things that don't belong in the
landfill, people would jump on board.
Tony Cooper Ban particle board - Big problem is planned obsolescence and consumerist society.
Vara Vissa Governmental problems - traffic to landfill - too many trucks - top soil being dug up to cover trash
(50% of which is divertible - This should be stopped.
Michael
Abramovich
Many aged in our senior apartments have difficulties walking to a collection facility.
Anika Consider 100% resource recovery
June 11, 2013 – on line comments
Sally Dowiatt Through composting, recycling and reusing plastic bags, our family of 4 (and now 2) doesn’t have
trash service because we have so little trash (about 6 small barrels a year). It would be nice to have
an option for a trash service that just picks up recycling once a month, or a neighborhood dumpster
or recycling bin.
Brian Maltais The biggest single factor to producing less waste is simply to consume less. Though residents
consuming less may be contradictory to a municipality's desire for constant economic growth, the
idea of "don't buy it if you don't need it" should be encouraged. The strategy of living lean and
efficient should be glorified in lieu of "keeping up with the Jones'" and amassing a garage full of toys.
Also, perhaps some kind of partnership between the City of Fort Collins and the Habitat for Humanity
Resource Centers could raise awareness of the option to donate refuse building materials instead of
disposal in landfills, while also encouraging people to use re-purposed materials instead of
purchasing new materials from hardware stores. Furthermore, tons of branches and woody yard
waste needlessly ends up in landfills, when they can be recycled into mulch and wood chips.
Awareness could be raised for recycling options such as Hageman's earth Cycle.
Coleen
Barricklow
Let me start by saying I am the owner of Green Logic which focuses exclusively on education and
access to products that reduce environmental footprint of daily living and I commend the city on
undertaking an effort to go zero waste. I am in a position of seeing, hearing and knowing too much
when it comes to this subject and have many ideas and inputs that might be valuable here. For
example last year I spent weeks putting together pricing structure and tracking down biodegradable
and recyclable food service options for New West Fest vendors only to be told in the end that it was
too much effort and that vendors were complaining about pricing of products in comparison to the
dirt cheap Styrofoam goods that they are used to using. That was particularly frustrating
Because most of the vendors and many visitors to NWF come from out of town but the huge volume
of waste produced remains in our landfill forever. This is just one of many events that the city in part
hosts.
In my opinion one of the biggest obstacles to a zero waste program is the use of disposable
Styrofoam products that is so prevalent here. Being a business owner I fully understand and
appreciate the bottom line but when we step back and look at the larger picture the cost of building
a new landfill and the appreciate the bottom line but when we step back and look at the larger
picture the cost of building a new landfill and the environmental impact Styrofoam has, its cost is
much greater. Disposable Styrofoam to go containers and cups often have a very short life span
before heading to the landfill, where by volume they account for a tremendous amount space used.
It also is a toxic material that takes hundreds of years to break down and is a huge problem for
contamination of water, soil and animal diets.
Over 180 cities across the country have implemented Styrofoam to-go ware bans some as far back as
the 1980's. Even fast food chains have been aware of the environmental impact of Styrofoam for
1.3
Packet Pg. 48
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
3
decades and utilize cardboard and paper instead, which at least will biodegrade in landfills. Banning
Styrofoam in Fort Collins should be one of the first things you guys are looking at. Although I am sure
businesses will grumble and complain, I think the vast number of their customers will appreciate the
effort, as well as not having to eat food from toxic containers. Businesses that we have worked with
in the past have had excellent success by explaining to the customers why they are switching and
implementing minimal charges for to go containers to cover the added cost. This has a secondary
effect of discouraging mindless use of to-go ware in general.
Over the years we have worked with many of the cities different departments to switch to
biodegradable options for events and everyday use. It has always been frustrating to me that the city
doesn't have a way to mandate all departments to use environmentally friendly options and then
bulk buy for them. If the city were to bulk buy and distribute to the various departments under its
management the pricing on this stuff comes way down. A cooperative for businesses to bulk buy
together could be an excellent way to reduce cost as well. Unfortunately that is usually the driving
factor for most. Some food
June 17, 2013 – on line comments
Kathy The recycling center on Riverside is busy night and day. It is a great convenience that this facility is
accessible at all hours. I would like to see this facility expanded to have extra bins that could accept
more pre-landfill waste - maybe wood or metals for example. Based on the traffic at this location it is
obvious to me that people generally want to do their part in our goal of zero waste. The easier and
more convenient you can make it for them to do their part the better chance we will all have of
achieving this goal.
More frequent e-waste collections around town would also be very helpful. Again, people want to do
the right thing but it has to be easy and convenient - at least to get started. Once started, it becomes
painful for them to do anything else but recycle what they know they can!
Leslie Aaeng As a fifth grade teacher, I am interested to know if your group is planning educational programs or
compiling leveled materials for kids in PSD to help with you efforts. As a huge recycler, I know how
important it has been to start at the "bottom" as we have instilled this in our own kids. (and yes, I
would help!)
Pat Young Any business that sells water bottles/soda cans should be required to recycle them. Also, businesses
and people who are moving pay big bucks for packing materials and residents throw them away.
Maybe the city could sponsor a once-a-month trading event.
Lynne Barnes I’m curious about the Coloradoan article that says we can't put glass into curbside bins?? or shredded
paper? This is the first I’ve heard of this rule....the city and garbage collectors need to do a much
better job of correctly informing the public...we all want to help but need information!! We've been
told for several years now to throw it all.....bottles, plastic, newspaper, recyclable paper...into the
same container. Help!
June 22, 2013 – on line comments
Lauren Ogden I was out of town during your community presentations/meetings June 11 and 12. So I hope you
don't mind me taking the liberty of emailing you because I want to have a bit of input. I am all in
favor of aiming high, and if zero waste is possible, we should go for it. However at this point Fort
Collins is still way behind with the yard waste situation. Many towns and cities have free municipal
composting centers. I have to haul my yard waste to Hageman’s or Weitzel’s and pay, and fill my
truck to make it worth the trip.
I have half an acre of gardens and found that composting on site did not work here, due to several
factors: the large size of the garden, proximity of neighbors, the amount of waste it creates at certain
1.3
Packet Pg. 49
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
4
times of the year, and problems with raccoons and skunks. My trash collector, Gallegos, offers a $10
per month bin during the growing season for yard waste. The bin is way too small to serve my
purposes, and most of my waste is created in Feb and March when they don't offer this service at all
and I am cutting the old season's growth back to prepare the garden for spring.
I wind up putting mainly yard waste into my 90 gal trash can many weeks of the year when I'm not
making enough to fill my truck, this is not ideal but right now it's my best option. I have a 90 gal
recycling bin that I use religiously, and I create very little household waste and could easily go to the
smallest trash bin size, but it is not efficient at this point to give up the flexibility of putting extra yard
waste into the trash because my other options require filling a truck, and cost me extra time and
money (and create pollution by my having to drive). I am sure there are some ways to solve this as
you move forward with plans for zero waste. I just wanted the voice of gardeners to be heard.
Serious gardeners can't fit all their waste into a compost tumbler by the side of the garage, that's a
joke. This waste could stay out of the landfill and make great compost for people to use if we had a
community place for such a thing.
July 15, 2013 – on-line comment
Patty Watson Please keep in mind that not ALL people are zealous recyclers. Some choose not to recycle at all.
Personal choice, as it should be. STOP making so darn many laws about everything that controls our
lives.
July 16, 2013 – Community Conversations – Composting – comments from cards at meeting
Janice
Oldemeyer
As we develop outlets and solutions working towards zero waste, we should ensure we consider
where things are recycled and how (in an environmentally sustainable manner). While some things
may need to go to China, what can and should be kept local? Implemented market development
programs ease permitting, create local jobs.
Mike Pruznick Why is Economic Office/Board not here? Education of chemistry of landfill vs. compost (all types of
technologies in both processes) – TBL not a balance 3-leg stool – Murphy center - “is it fiscally
viable”; type 4 recycle, - “only those economically viable”, Hendee Energy Board July TBL and
Maslow’s should be priority. – Does it honor human rights? If no, stop. Does it honor environmental
protection? If no, stop. Is it economically viable? If yes, ?? If no, government does it directly or via
business assistance package.
Addy Elliott Please consider compostable plastics as a source and/or contaminant.
Liz Pruessner We don’t have existing composting services. Existing waste/trash haulers pricing structure does not
incentivize composting or reducing waste stream enough. People want to do what is easiest – mostly
– except for those who are already incentivized.
I think the City needs to keep pushing on the throttle to keep this issue working. More education
and outreach and work to provide opportunities or pilot projects to help demonstrate that this can
work in Fort Collins.
Michael Baute I’m interested in partnering with composting initiatives as a CSA pickup/drop-off location.
Erin Nuckols Encourage 1:1:1 ratio (compost, recycling, trash) containers; cost – to encourage diversion;
community-based social marketing; end-user education and engagement.
Anonymous Recently I drove by the landfill after the 4th of July and was horrified by the line of trucks packed up
along Taft Hill Road with furniture, perfectly good mattresses and other items that could be reused.
We need to disincentivize at the landfill and infuse education into the businesses and citizenry so
that composting/recycling is done correctly. Climate Wise can help with connections, too. Need to
change composting regulation and look at close community composting for the region.
Bob Mann Possibility of City partnering with Hageman’s, even if just a transfer facility, to create a local/regional
1.3
Packet Pg. 50
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
5
composting facility? Whether or not a Class 1 facility.
Tim Warfield need more detail
July 16, 2013 – Conversation at Chamber of Commerce – Comments on Cards at meeting
Sean Dougherty I think good info came out, but cost is still a big piece to this. Also, we should set a goal that is
attainable, not 100%.
Greg Woods Upfront costs to businesses (and residences) for change in policy and implementation;
Regional solution for recycling facility? And who pays for it?
Bob Yost Help us create an efficient transfer option in Fort Collins to collect clean food waste to compost or
digest. Digestive project will need a large volume.
July 17, 2013 – Community Conversations – Waste to Energy – Comments on Cards at meeting
Stacy Baumgarn Perhaps we should just be collecting questions, comments, feedback, and not try to answer/respond
to each on the spot. It seems more defensive and less a “listening” session. To the degree we are
responding, we are NOT listening and planning. Not sure how to do this.
Diversion/reuse idea/suggestion: CSU residence halls and surplus do an annual “Leave it behind”
project/program. Can the City help or create a “Leave it Behind” for off-campus students or any
community member. Isn’t August 1, a huge fruit basket upset of leases and moving, etc. Ask me for
more information.
How do we help citizens understand the COSTS? I live in a building where I pay an HOA fee. I do not
get an electric bill so I am not considered a “customer.” I do not pay a trash/recycle bill, so I am not
considered a “customer”. But I am a citizen and you need me to be engaged (to help, participate,
contribute, etc.) – Highest and best use – needs to be location (Fort Collins) specific. Given our
“waste” stream, given our weather, our availability of water, etc. “best practices” must be “localized”
– Why don’t we call it a resource recovery plan instead of a zero waste plan – Change it to focus from
waste to resource.
Caitlan May City requires waste companies to provide free recycling to all residential properties, but don’t’ for
apartment/condo/commercial businesses. The reason I have been told is due to lack of responsibility
to recycle proper items. How does the City plan to address the issue and to get these organizations
and groups engaged in recycling? If this truly is the reason, what studies have been done that show
the increase of waste in recycling containers in apartment/condos/businesses.
I would like to see the city require waste companies provide recycling services as a free or mandatory
program to all residential and commercial businesses.
Public usage areas should have a recycling container next to all trash bins and the signage needs to
be clear and precise so it is easy to know what to recycle.
Jenny Duer One thing I would like to see is more of a community outcry for reuse. I feel as though there needs
to be some discussion with the health department to allow restaurants and such to accept reuse
containers for leftovers, take out, etc. brought from home.
Phil Friedman The discussion and comments show both the challenges and opportunities to increase recycling
rates. Major issues I think I see: education; contamination; options and availability in public places;
bringing recycling to more businesses; creating a cradle-to-grave local model.
Dan Garvin Almost 600 tons of metal at landfill is way off! – Probably more like 100 tons or less. Until tip fees
are raised, recycling rates won’t go up. Exporting recyclables is good for the economy.
Jenny Geiger Great forum. Seems like we as a community need to walk before we run. People don’t even know
what is recyclable and that there is residential pay-as-you-throw service available. So it’s a big jump
to zero waste. But keep moving in that direction.
1.3
Packet Pg. 51
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
6
Mark
Houdashelt
Has any polling been done to try to determine why people do or do not recycle and what might
change their behavior?
Maureen
McCarthy,
Larimer County
I would like to be involved in some way and kept in the loop - Thanks
Mike Preznick Better advance notice – Sample plans should be on line – good opportunities for further public input
– Bag fee that was prepared gave money to business, not a fee – Interested in working group.
Jeff Schmid I feel there is a lack of education as to the effect of dull blades in kitchen processing equipment on
food wastes. We have done a number of formal and informal studies in this area and would love an
opportunity to share with you our findings and to help educate the general public as well as
restaurateurs about these effects. Always Sharp services kitchens state wide and has a number of
examples of reduction in food waste, but probably the most profound comes from CSU (we service
all their kitchens) where in just one of their kitchens we were able to reduce the amount of
compostable waste that went into the trash from around 60 gallons a day to around 10! I don’t
know what percentage of food waste in the landfills comes from restaurants and commercial
kitchens, but my guess it is significant. We are proud of the amount of food we have kept out of the
landfills to date, but know a lot more could be done and we want to help. Obviously, reusing and
recycling are extremely important, but as stated in the forum, reduction is even better.
With the City striving for “zero waste” there is obviously going to be the need for significant
education to the public and the area of food waste is one piece of the pie that we would love stay in
the conversation and help with that education. Thank you so much for your efforts and dedication to
our wonderful city.
Becca
Walkinshaw
Big thinking. PSD implements a zero waste curriculum in all schools with real life experiences;
thoughtful lessons; a variety of speakers. This can be funded by city or school? RFP for education
provide3r – involve students at all school levels on purchasing decisions for district. District sets zero
waste goals as well. Community drives for 12 sort/sites that come to community, like an E-waste
drive. 12 sorts are set up and community pays nominal fee or gets rebate to drop off. City staff acts
as liaison for such a program. Increase organics recycling in the City, which residents highly demand.
Need local market to sell back 100 pickups – City/schools/municipal, etc.
August 12, 2013 – on line comment
Lois Winegarner Lived here since 1979 and have witnessed the developers gobbling up the area with out of control
growth which has caused the immense amounts of trash of all kinds filling our landfill - we pay 20 a
month for Clean Air to come and pick up our yard waste and food waste too bad the city does not
provide this service and make compost for city home owners to use on their gardens. As well as
community gardens. More and more cities across the country are gathering household food waste
and yard waste let's get with the future before we have no future for our grandchildren's
grandchildren!
August 19, 2013 – on line comments
Arlene Archer I would to see the city provide dumpsters for yard waste, like they already do for other types of
recycling. This would allow us to drop off our own waste. My yard waste currently goes into the trash
for the landfill because that is normally all of the trash I have so I am not willing to pay more for
curbside waste pickup. Thank you.
Mark Creery Creating a commercial compost facility for all food waste and compostable materials and providing
residents with compost drop-off points would be a great step forward in reducing landfill waste and
provide a valuable resource for residents' gardening needs.
October 14, 2013 – on line comments
Mike Anderson In your report, under Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, you say reduce annual emissions 60,000 by
1.3
Packet Pg. 52
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
7
2020; then you say reduce 120,000 by 2020? Which is it?
On page 17 you say costs per household and businesses were estimated in another document. I
can’t locate that document on your website. All your goals are quire desirable, but we need to know
if we can afford them. It would have been nice if you had included the costs in the report.
October 15, 2013 – Community Conversation – Core Concepts – Comments from cards
Ana Arias What about including mobile home parks along with multi-family under the Universal Recycling
Ordinance with 2 years, with full Pay-as-You-Throw benefits and recycling opportunities?
Randy Van
Winkle
What about CHARM center – Porcelain, EPS, etc. Explore all opportunities for education – get a
listing of recycle/reuse business models that are successful and promote to entrepreneurs
Ariana
Friedlander
I didn’t hear much from people that are opposed to this effort. I’m curious what their concerns are
and how we’ll address them. I still think that the message around this is too complicated. We need a
succinct explanation as to why this is a worthwhile effort and that needs to be shared at the intro
and conclusion.
Also, awareness/education efforts should be engaging and target specific customer segments. A
one-size-fits-all approach won’t get us there. I agree that the relationship of private industry needs to
be managed closely and with consideration for win-win-solutions. I think we need to look at how we
manage these conversations.
Taylor Ramos Fort Collins is full of people who care for the environment and for future generations. However, a lot
of people are not concerned for the future. Need incentives.
Also, I think it would help to make a management plan for each individual goal. Simplify the plan and
don’t clump a bunch of goals together with one big management plan. It seems unrealistic. It may
also be helpful to make your core concepts (objectives) measurable and make this plan adaptable.
Maureen
McCarthy
My comments already been recorded but would like to say again that I’d love to be involved. Thanks.
Stacey
Baumgarn
Are job estimates realistic given our estimated volumes available?
Will the plan have numerous appendices? I would like to see the comparative cost of trash and
recycling in the neighboring communities and comparisons of area/neighboring landfills.
When Fort Collins went to single stream recycling and Pay-as-You-Throw, did recycling rates
(diversion) go up? Do we know how much? And do we have any data on contamination rates? How
are we doing? Are we recycling more or is there more contamination as more un-informed
participants are at play? When we make a change (in the past or future changes in this plan); can we
measure and verify our results?
Mike Pruznick
Include a statement that City should look into how to include fracking waste products in net zero.
Prohibit too strong, phase in prohibition at 10% per year. 20 mile limit – 50% - Loveland 75%; within
city 100%, discourage driving. Remove development from flood plains. Phase in composting.
Measure CSU move in/out waste. Phone in “events” – 1,000 = 50% compliance; 5,000 = 75%; 10,000
= 100%. Include residential gas emissions as waste and enable economic tools to better fund
residential solar/wind. Careful with single use, many people have found ways to recycle that you are
not measuring. What is energy cost of driving 150,000 reuse bags in my car 24/7 vs. just to or from
store?
Watch the fees “my expense sheet” – can only handle so much overhead. Roman Empire and Soviet
1.3
Packet Pg. 53
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
8
Union fell apart because infrastructure couldn’t be supported by tax base. Overhead killed US Steel
industry and caused California to suffer greatly during the “Great Recession” – Need lower overhead
solutions.
Reorder core concepts – Put culture change @ #1; reduce/reuse @ #2; Product stewardship #3, Econ
last. Page 17 – TBL – reorder social (constant with culture change at top), Environmental, Economic.
Consider options to “store” non-recyclables for future recycling since mining landfill difficult. People
who opt-out should not pay for service they don’t need (clippings with gardener). Don’t stifle the
innovator. Don’t force A to a B for 100% compliance.
October 22 – on line comments
Bill Shattuck We moved here from Thousand Oaks, CA, 6 years ago and FC trash service is still behind from where
we moved from. We used to have trash, recycling and green waste pick up. Here there is no regular
green waste, plastic bags dot the street and many in my neighborhood don’t set any trash out. How
can you get to zero waste when you allow people to not recycle and not have a green waste pickup?
FC is behind the times.
Don Tiller The EPA report on municipal solid waste generation, recycling and disposal in the US – Facts and
Figures for (see table 5 on page 12) shows the benefit of recycling in terms of # of cars taken off the
road. Expanding your table 1 listing the tons and value of materials discarded – here's an update
showing the # cars that recycling represents. I only included those categories that were listed on in
the EPA table, in order of impact:
Paper 34,800 tons = same as 21,230 cars removed from roads per year
Putrescibles 19,500 tons = same as 3,200 cars removed from roads per year
Metals 5,600 tons = same as 3,130 cars removed from roads per year
Wood 7,000 tons = same as 2,940 cars removed from roads per year
Textiles 5,600 tons = same as 2,800 cars removed from roads per year
Plant debris 22,200 tons = same as 195 cars removed from roads per year
Glass 2,800 tons = same as 185 cars removed from roads per year
This totals to over 33,000 cars per year. Seems like a large number. You should check my figures,
but if this is correct it provides a meaningful way to evaluate the opportunity to reduce impact on
our environment for the various categories. I was surprised to learn that US wide, the current textile
recycling volumes represents the equivalent of 1 million fewer cars on the road each year. Assuming
the estimate that only 15% of textiles are recycled in the US, the 85% that is not recovered
represents an opportunity to remove the equivalent of another 11 million cars each year.
Below is some feedback on the plan. It's a mix of personal opinion and things I see in the thrift/re-
use industry.
Section 2. Prohibited Materials section: I understand the reasoning behind adding to the prohibited
materials list and I know other municipalities have used this approach to reduce landfill waste. My
preference is to use this approach for hazardous materials (protect the public) but to look for other
options rather than regulation for the non-hazardous waste diversion. Find ways to encourage
recycling businesses to create offerings that consumers would want to take advantage of. For
example, I didn't realize that cardboard was a prohibited item. Given how convenient it is to recycle
the cardboard through Waste Management's recycling container, the convenience, not the
prohibition, is why I don't put cardboard in our trash container. As an option to prohibitions on the
consumer, create incentives for the trash haulers.
1.3
Packet Pg. 54
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
9
5. Reduce & Reuse. I don't believe a Reuse Warehouse allowing thrifts to have equal access to
incoming products and providing bulk sales to the public is feasible. I think collection and reuse is
better left to private industry. Each thrift has their own collection process. Trying to centralize that
for a city would be a massive undertaking and would require significant city staffing to operate and
properly administrate. If the city wanted to promote a program similar to the local food bank (or
even expand the food bank to include clothing) that could be a beneficial service to those in need. I
fully support eliminating liability for donation of food for disaster responses. I volunteered at
Timberline Church as part of the flood relief and was frustrated that we had to turn away food that I
know was edible and usable. I also support efforts by the city to prevent illegal dumping from
occurring at donation collection sites such as thrift stores and non-profits like the Habitat ReStore.
7. Culture Change. I like the idea of the city placing recycling containers next to trash containers,
particularly for compostable organics. While you might not collect a significant % of the compostable
organics, I think the containers will serve as great educational and awareness tools. Including
recycling at community events is a great way to increase awareness. I like educational materials on
recycling containers, I'm not as supportive of the city creating brochures for the trash haulers to hand
out. I don't know about you but I get so many brochures, door hangers, junk mail etc. that it all goes
directly to the landfill through my trash collector. The cost is also a factor.
9. Product Stewardship. I really oppose the fee approach. I don't have a problem with fee based
systems to mitigate cost impacts (e.g., tax on cars to reflect cost to maintain roads) but this would
feel more like a punitive tax. There must be better ways to accomplish the same end result.
10. Funding. This is a tough one. On one hand to launch a program like this funding is required. On
the other hand, I don't like the idea of raising taxes before examining the current funding available to
determine where this fits relative to the other city initiatives.
Two other ideas specific to the used clothing I'd suggest:
Add a requirement in the land use code to require multifamily developments to include a facility
for recycling items that are not good candidates for single stream curbside recycling. I think you
could also extend this requirement to neighborhood community centers (e.g., HOA pools). Two
examples of items are used clothing and books, which would be contaminated if included in
curbside recycling and probably wouldn't represent sufficient volume to put curbside containers
in place to prevent the contamination.
Adopt a used clothing collection bin ordinance to protect the community from unscrupulous
collection bin companies that (1) don't service their bins to prevent the bins from becoming an
nuisance, (2) don't request permission from the property owner prior to placing a bin, (3) don't
clearly identify who is benefitting from clothing left in the bin, and (4) place their bins in areas
creating public safety issues (intersection visibility, parking spaces, public sidewalks, etc.). I think
the draft ordinance that I gave you would be a great starting point.
John Burgeson Please drop references to "pseud-o-science" e.g., GHG, climate change, etc. I am not a "denier"/"flat
earther"/etc. A question: what earth temperature are you shooting for? The Plan is in many respects,
just restatement of old/earlier MSW management hierarchies from EPA. I see no economics/full cost
accounting of any plan alternatives, same for existing commercial composting operations and the
existing county landfill separation/landfilling. (residential/dairies/cattle feeders/etc.).
1.3
Packet Pg. 55
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
10
No linkage of MSW waste stream (County) and sludge (City); most viable compost system (if any)
would be undigested sludges with shredded MSW. Many people/studies indicate that food waste is
due largely to portion sizes served; how to manage/control?
Overall, the Plan is short on substance (particularly costs/revenues/subsidies), full cost accounting. It
represents another regulated/controlled government (tax payer) funded program with little else to
claim, except to say "it can be done".
Errin Henggeler Currently Drake Water Reclamation Facility flares methane gas that it is generated, as we are unable
to use all of it now, so why I like this idea it would need to include some capital improvements at the
plant to achieve a plant that can use all the methane that is produced.
I am also reading a lot of references to increase composting – as an area we need to get better at
regional cooperation – we cannot do this without Larimer County’s help.
October 28, 2013 – on line comments
Barbara
Nordstrom
I recently moved to Fort Collins. I broke down my boxes and took them to the Riverside recycling
drop-off. I was disappointed to find I could not put my boxes in the bin as one must climb stairs while
carrying the boxes. I am disabled and was not able to climb the stairs and deposit my boxes. No one
was in the vicinity to help. I suggest the recycle drop-off be more handicap accessible. A bin that can
be accessed from the ground or a helpful person at the site could be low-cost and effective solutions
to this problem. Recycling should be handicap accessible.
John Crystal Very disappointed in the Zero Waste "study". It starts with a conclusion and provides no discussion of
alternatives nor cost/benefit analysis. Basically it's a "Sales brochure". A few random points:
- Landfill, recycle/reuse, incineration are all options used in this country and in other countries.
Where's the quantitative assessment what mix of alternatives would be best for FC? After all we
want to try to keep this city an affordable place to live don't we?
- Not so many years ago there were horror stories in the local paper that insufficient quantities of
materials were going to the landfill - layoffs were imminent. At the same time, the bottom had
dropped out of the recycling market and materials were "piling up". What's the contingency plan
should those conditions recur?
- - As pointed out in the Coloradoan, there is rarely a "free lunch" in this world. As is, this brochure
is at least deceiving, at most, deceitful.
Patrick Question about the 2 truck system with alternating weekly pickup of for yard waste & recycling and a
2nd truck picking up food/organic waste weekly. Why can't the food/organic be picked up with the
yard waste since they both be composted. This would cut the number of trucks needed in half.
Additional
comments by
John Haudashelt
Overall, the “On the Road to Zero Waste” draft core concepts report is a very comprehensive and
ambitious plan which I fully support. However, I have some questions/comments about the report:
What is the expected rate of leakage if the zero waste plan is enacted? (i.e., how much waste
will avoid the city collection system?) Is this a significant amount?
Why are there three quantitative goals? Is the ultimate objective to reduce landfill waste to a
specific percentage of overall waste, to a specific tonnage of waste, or to an amount per capita?
The first and last are goals relatively independent of population growth, but they are not
consistent with one another. Moving from a 58% diversion rate in 2012 to a 90% rate in 2025
implies going from 5.12 tons per capita to 0.88 tons per capita, but the per capita goal for 2025 is
only 2.2 tons. On the other hand, the overall tonnage goal is population-dependent in that it
becomes more difficult to achieve as population grows, so it can only be made consistent with
the other two goals if population growth is known. Still, if Fort Collins achieves exactly 2.2 tons
1.3
Packet Pg. 56
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
11
of landfill waste per capita in 2025, it will only meet the total landfill waste goal (55000 tons) if
the population for Fort Collins is lower in 2025 than it was in 2012. This is highly unlikely, so the
tonnage goal also appears to be inconsistent with the other two for any reasonable scenario for
population growth in Fort Collins.
How is a household’s waste diversion rate determined? (This is more for my own curiosity but
could affect the ability of the city to achieve its waste goaIs.) Is waste that goes through the
garbage disposal, etc. included?
Why should low disposal fees (as at Larimer County landfill) be a goal? In the section on
“Benefits of More Waste Diversion,” there is an implication that one of the benefits of extending
the life of the Larimer County landfill is lower tipping fees. My impression is that lower fees
would encourage more waste going to the landfill, so I’m not sure this is a benefit.
The second GHG goal should be for 2025 (typo).
Do the potential GHG reductions (87,389 MTCO2e/yr.) for waste diversion represent GHG
reductions for waste diversion beyond the current level, or are the GHG reductions from current
waste diversion included in this number?
What kinds of penalties for non-compliance are being considered? Who would be responsible
for compliance in multifamily units – owners or residents?
Why only a 50% reuse/recycling goal for C&D materials? What is the current rate? It appears
to be higher than 50% because C&D is part of the industrial waste with a 70% diversion rate
today. Is this waste diverted without being reused/recycled? This diversion rate also appears to
be inconsistent with the C&D diversion potential in Table 2. Is the Table 2 tonnage based upon
the 50% reuse/recycle goal or a higher level of ambition?
Why is a composting opt-out allowed? (This was discussed extensively during the community
meeting. I interpreted this as an opt-out of diverting food from the landfill, but the consultants
explained that the opt-out was meant for yard waste only (not food waste) and that
citizens/businesses can only opt out of the commercial waste pick-up system, not the overall
waste diversion effort. This needs to be clarified in the report.)
What degree of mixed waste is acceptable to not contaminate an entire waste parcel? (i.e., the
waste diversion would be seriously compromised by putting more than x% of waste in the wrong
bin)? Can this degree of contamination be reasonably achieved?
What is the current plan for the Integrated Recycling Facility? This information is needed to
evaluate the extent to which it would need to be changed to become a Resource Recovery Park.
Finance/costs:
o Will lower landfill revenue affect the viability of the Larimer County landfill (pre- and
post-closure) or otherwise adversely impact Larimer County revenue streams?
o Is there a way to structure the fees so that “good actors” pay less than others?
o Cost information would help determine which of Table 2 programs should be included in
the city’s plan. For example:
The public waste diversion program is great but the cost and effort involved are
potentially high.
Product stewardship produces relatively little diversion, so if its cost is high, it
may not be worth pursuing.
1.3
Packet Pg. 57
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
12
Recommended additions to the plan:
o Explicitly include requirements for acquisition and reporting of waste data.
o If it doesn’t already exist, work with CSU to set up a program in deconstruction (a la the
Center on Sustainable Communities at Iowa Central Community College).
o Front Range Community College recently acquired funds to be used to train students in
industrial manufacturing disciplines – part of these funds should be devoted to training
students in manufacturing related to waste reuse/recycling to establish and work in
these industries in the city.
o A private company has contracted with the Larimer County landfill to collect its landfill
gas and use it to produce electricity. However, after constructing the collection system,
it was discovered that the quantity of LFG was much less than expected and made the
original plan for generating electricity economically unattractive. Thus, the LFG is
currently collected and flared. The zero waste plan should either include a beneficial use
for this gas (e.g., biofuel for local buses, small scale electricity production), or some
organics need to continue to be sent to the landfill to increase the quantity of LFG
produced to make the original power project viable (adding moisture to the landfill
and/or stirring the leachate to accelerate LFG production may be other options).
o Establish a WasteWise program (similar to ClimateWise) for early movers in waste
diversion.
Other potential additions to the plan:
o a specific tire disposal program
o a cellulosic ethanol plant (this is a really provocative and aggressive suggestion and may
not be feasible, but a plant recently began operation in Florida, and a similar plant in Fort
Collins would put this region at the forefront of the biofuels industry)
o a producer responsibility program for packaging and for recycling goods at the end of
their useful lifetimes.
Susan Kelly,
Food Bank
On behalf of everyone at the Food Bank, I wanted to express our thanks at being invited to join in the
City’s zero waste plan conversation last week. We are impressed with the City’s commitment to
bringing Fort Collins to zero waste and we know that we can be an important partner in realizing this
goal. These are the three areas that the Food Bank could play a significant role as a partner with the
city in achieving our community’s zero-waste goals:
Increasing City-wide Food Rescue – In Fort Collins, the Food Bank currently operates 3 food rescue
trucks and 3 food rescue drivers focusing our time primarily on grocery retail, farms, processors,
food service operations, distributors and manufacturers. The Food Bank could assist our
community in diverting a higher percentage of its existing food waste from the landfill with the
addition of another truck and driver who could provide timely and regular donation pickup for
new donors, especially increasing our capacity to rescue food from lower-volume donors more
often, which is currently cost prohibitive for us. Potential sites to grow our existing food rescue
program are farms, restaurants, manufacturers, and minimal processing facilities. Besides a
truck, associated fleet management costs and Driver at 1.0 FTE, other costs involved with adding
new food rescue locations include food-safe tins and lids and staff time for donor
relations. Another option would be a double duty truck that did mobile food pantry distributions
twice a week, the other 3 days it could join the Food Rescue program, presumably providing the
opportunity to seek more diverse funding options. A truck can run anywhere between $140,000
1.3
Packet Pg. 58
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
13
- $250,000 depending on the size and type. Additional costs (driver, supplies) would run approx.
$40,000/yr.
Decreasing Food Bank Food Waste – Due to the nature and perishability of the donated food we
receive, we have a need to divert our own food waste. Right now we are paying a private
company for an 8 yard dumpster to be picked up 6 days/week. We are also paying A1 Organics
$168/month to pick up 3 compost bins/week. In order to divert more of our own waste from the
landfill, we would like to see an 8 yard compost bin picked up 6 days/week that we could put all
soiled cardboard and organics in. An affordable, local composting option is needed. Partnering
with another organization with a large composter would be another option.
Food Bank/Incubator Farm – In addition to rescue, another avenue for the City and the food Bank to
partner is on the use of city open space for gardening, farming and composting. Currently CSU is
partnering on a feasibility study. A food bank farm/ incubator farm could provide opportunities
for large scale community composting and utilizing that waste to ultimately feed people again by
growing vegetables.
New Belgian
Brewing staff
comments
Current Waste Diversion
Benefits of More Waste Diversion
o The first paragraph of page 4 talks about the potential of the Larimer county landfill
closing. I think this could be expanded more with more dire explanation of the
pitfalls of the landfill closing. More explanation can be given about the fact a new
landfill will be far away from town, resulting in much higher tipping fees, increasing
residential trash costs. A quick explanation of tipping fees across the state and across
the nation. Environmental impact of closing down a landfill and taking land to create
a new one.
o Lower down the page, there is text saying ‘eliminating wasteful practices’. This is
always the cornerstone of zero waste plans, and I am not sure it is hit on enough on
exactly how we can eliminate these practices. Further in the document on page 11,
reduce and reuse is touched on, but not to a great enough extent.
The end note on page 3 gives a good definition of zero waste that I think
should be included in full text. This is at the core of the program and should
be clearly presented to people so they can get a handle on what’s trying to
be accomplished.
Goals and Objectives
Reduce tons to landfill
o The amount of trash going to landfill looks ambitious given the increased population
trends for northern Colorado. But, after looking through the document and seeing
where these gains can be made, it does seem possible. Great goal.
Add value to local economy
o How are the jobs being paid for, just through the city. There is a statement later on
about a recycling fee the hauler will collect and give to the city to support jobs, but
how else are the jobs being funded.
o Overall, what is the cost to the tax payer/city resident for this zero waste program?
Values and Principles
Universal Opportunities
o ‘More comprehensive and convenient access to reuse, recycling and composting
services will provide these services more universally to all sectors, including those
who self-haul materials’. This statement is huge, and very glad it is called out, maybe
even bold it. The commitment of the city to increase these services will be a huge
indicator of how successful the plan will be. Recycling all items needs to be easy. The
1.3
Packet Pg. 59
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
14
more options and locations to do this the better.
Recommendations
Universal recycling
o I love the idea of ‘Universal Recycling Ordinance’. It focuses on recycling as the main
aspect, not trash. Very nice.
o I love the idea of having compostable yard trimming service freely available to
residents (currently charged, so not many people use it) and the option for a
compost service. However, it sounds like the trash hauler is burdened with a lot of
new requirements. I can see all services relating to trash hauling increase because of
these new requirements. Is this the case, and should this be stated?
Prohibited Materials
o ‘Haulers may offer a premium service and charge an additional fee to cover the costs
of collecting glass of higher quality’. I don’t see many people opting for this higher
premium service to pay more to recycle glass. However, what it hopefully does is
opens people eyes to the fact that glass needs to be separated and recycled
separately. Again, more containers need to be situated around the city to collect
glass to make it easier on people.
o Under conventional recyclables, does this include glass bottles only or plastic as well?
C&D
o ‘Qualified recycling facility’ – is there a list of the qualified recycling facilities? If so,
there should be a link in this section to this list of all the facilities and what they
accept.
o ‘head of the line in permit review’ – this needs to be spelled out in much more detail.
I work a lot in the permitting realm, and just saying the permit review will be
expedited isn’t enough. There needs to be hard dates provided. Something along the
lines of, ‘If the building permit is submitted with material going to a certified
qualified recycling facility, permit will be reviewed within 15 days of submission.’
o I like the idea of the companies putting down a deposit to meet the City’s
requirement that may be refunded when the goals are met.
Composting organic materials
o ‘support the development of one or more composting facilities’ – what does
‘support’ entail. Tax incentives/breaks, quick permit review? Will tax money be used
for support? Will this development be a private facility or a city ran facility?
o Facility within 20 miles can still be quite the distance, which again leads to increase in
transportation costs by the hauler, which leads to increase cost on the resident.
o What is the incentive for residents to start composting? If they are getting charged to
have it picked up every week, I don’t see why many people wouldn’t opt out to
receiving this service. It would become a commodity if everyone participated, but
would residents receive any of this revenue?
Waste to Clean Energy
o New technology, very good. Investigating new technology, all good items.
Cultural Change
o All good items listed under this section
o ‘Require all venues and events with over 1,000 attendees to meet Zero Waste
standards’. I think this could be dropped to even 500 attendees. The items listed in
this section do not appear to be that difficult for an event to fulfill, and are all items
that the event can promote.
o I think the addition of some type of public forum to occur monthly would be
1.3
Packet Pg. 60
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
15
beneficial. This would allow the city to get feedback on their practices, gain new
ideas, and allow the public to feel more involved in this movement, which in turn
would result in willing compliance from the community.
o Documents should also be emailed and posted online to update residents on how
the city is doing. Seeing that the program is making a difference will be
reinforcement in itself.
Product Stewardship
o Fee for takeout containers, ban plastic containers on campus, both great ideas.
Would like to see more of these items enacted.
Funding
o Big question for his entire document is where the funding is coming from. ‘haulers
collect a city recycling education and investment fee’ – how much will this fee be?
How will the hauler recoup some of its cost? Will they implement a recycling fee
also?
Diversion Potential
o Zero Waste Associates is called out for the first time. I think this company should be
called out earlier in the document so people know that all these changes are not just
coming from the city, but that they are supported through this third party company.
Triple Bottom Line Impacts
Economic Impacts
o It is stated ‘The estimate costs for the programs were developed in another
document’. There needs to be a reference to this document so everyone knows
where the money is coming from.
Vara Vissa Monstrous electric poles have been erected; county land has been annexed for new developments,
all in a few years’ time. We had no power. I meant that we (community) didn't have any power in
these dealings and decisions. The City went ahead with their plans; the community discussions
seemed to be just that (a formality), not really a place where any of input would be taken.
I) The working relationship between the City's zero waste plan and the county landfill(s) is not clear.
2) Clearly the waste, whatever it is has to go somewhere: in any of the landfills that currently exist.
In this regard, what are the zero waste plans for the landfills: is there any more authority, interest or
will to sort /prevent recoverable waste from going up the hill?
3) The time lines of landfill life has shifted and this is disconcerting.
4) The destruction of the landscape, the top soil, the tall and wide and far blowing dust storms that
are now a regular feature. The steady stream of vehicles on the western horizon is continuously and
perhaps for many years to come continue this visually, environmentally destructive process.
For what? Is there now going to be more innovative, more aggressive, more careful separation and
acceptance of waste for burial? Will zero waste rules apply to the landfill?
5) Schools are teaching children recycling and composting: they have no real education about this: it
is a successful campaign: fabulous nutritious, white house recommended lunches get dumped
uneaten, unnecessary use of paper cartons and juice boxes. I have intimate view of several school
cafeterias.
6) new schools are attract students: choice schools that don't have school buses (e.g. Kinard), but
don't provide parking lots or drive ways, make parents come 15 to 20 minutes early in
the morning and late in the evening so as to avoid traffic: countless man hours and gallons of fuel are
being spent in pick-up lines at nearby neighborhoods. I am a parent that sends a kid to one of these:
our options were based on carpooling and school opening time. Clearly one mission, trumps another;
parents and students have limited choices, the costs of retro-fitting become high, the options are
1.3
Packet Pg. 61
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
Attachment 3 – Road to Zero Waste; Citizen Comments
16
few, habits get ingrained. Things are harder to change. What is the city's role in zero waste of time,
and energy in planning transit centers, walking lanes, park and ride, small golf car or van based
shuttles, etc. in areas where multiple schools are located and siblings /parents attend? All you see is
any open land is used for residential housing, adding to these burdens. There are no progressive
citizen or city based plans to alleviate these. Everybody wants individual freedom of choices.
Hope to see some changes in our behaviors and resources. Looking forward to a waste free way of
living.
Mark Creery I strongly believe the City needs to ban leaves from the waste stream and provide city-wide leaf pick-
up and free drop-off areas using tax money. At the moment there is no incentive for people to pay
money to dispose of leaves responsibly so by forcing people to pay through taxes it will lead to better
behavior. The City could then compost the leaves and use or sell the compost back to the public at a
discounted rate. Seeing leaves go in the garbage seems very wrong and garden waste should be one
of the first problems you fix to get to your goal of zero waste.
1.3
Packet Pg. 62
#1.3: Citizen Comments (Road to Zero Waste)
1
Fort Collins’ Road to Zero Waste
Fort Collins City Council Worksession
November 26, 2013
Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner
Attachment 4
ATTACHMENT 4
1.4
Packet Pg. 63
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
2
Now that our 1999 goal to
divert 50% of waste from
landfilling has been
reached, what should
be next?
June – Oct.: public meetings, site visits, interviews
Aug. – Sept.: Analysis, draft (Zero Waste Plan)
Nov. 26 – Worksession
Dec. 17 – Council Hearing
1.4
Packet Pg. 64
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
3
Proposed Goals and Objectives
Zero Waste Goal by 2030
– 75% waste diversion by 2020
– 90% by 2025
Reduce Per Capita Waste
Disposal
– from 5.12 lbs/person/day to
2.2 pounds by 2025
1.4
Packet Pg. 65
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
4
Purpose of Discussion
1. Does the Council support the goal of Zero
Waste by 2030 and per capita waste reductions
(2.2 lbs./person/day by 2025)?
2. Does the Council support the interim targets
of 75% waste diversion by 2020, and 90% by
2025?
3. Is the Council ready to have a resolution
adopting these goals brought forward Dec. 17?
1.4
Packet Pg. 66
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
5
Fort Collins Commodity Analysis
Categories
Annual
Tons
Annual Revenue
Lost ($)
1. Reuse 5,600 2,240,000
2. Textiles 8,300 664,000
3. Plastics 19,500 1,950,000
4. Metals 5,600 448,000
5. Glass 2,800 556,000
6. Paper 34,800 696,000
7. Organics (food, etc.) 19,500 136,500
8. Plant Debris 22,200 155,400
9. Wood 7,000 56,000
10. Soils 4,200 29,400
11. Ceramics 8,300 33,200
12. Chemicals 1,400 1,400
139,100 $6,465,900
1.4
Packet Pg. 67
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
6
Reduce/reuse then recycle, compost, and redesign
the rest.
Highest and best use of resources to:
• reduce greenhouse gases and conserve
resources
• protect the environment, extend landfill lifespans
• reinvest in local economy, create jobs, help local
businesses operate at reduced costs & liabilities
Zero Waste = Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
1.4
Packet Pg. 68
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
7
1.4
Packet Pg. 69
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
8
Road to Zero Waste Plan
Recommendations
1. Culture Change
• Place recycling bins in tandem with all City trash bins
• Enhance programs to educate residents, businesses
and visitors about how and where to recycle
2. Reinvest Resources in Local Economy
• Prioritize City economic development tools for new reuse
and manufacturing activities
• Train and hire employees in zero waste businesses
1.4
Packet Pg. 70
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
9
Recommendations
3. Universal Recycling
• Residential: add yard trimmings collected weekly (six
months/year). Add food scraps once composting system is
available and alternate weekly trash collection with recycling
collection.
• Multi-Family: expand PAYT to MFUs in two years
• Commercial: expand PAYT to all businesses in five years
1.4
Packet Pg. 71
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
10
Recommendations
4. Prohibit Materials from Landfilling
• Build on existing bans (electronics and cardboard) by adding
materials to be prohibited from the waste stream
5. Promote Reduce and Reuse
• Increase use of reusable shipping containers, pallets
• Apartment move-in and move-out programs
• Food donations
1.4
Packet Pg. 72
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
11
Recyclables
• Paper
• Metals
• Glass
• Plastics
Other
• Re-usables
• Textiles
• Rock
Compostable
• Food-soiled paper
• Plant debris
• Food scraps
• Soil
What’s In Fort Collins’ Trash?
1.4
Packet Pg. 73
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
12
Recommendations
6. Composting Organic Materials
• Phase out landfilling of organics by 2018
• Help develop composting facilities for all compostable
organics (including food scraps and food-soiled paper)
7. Promote Reduce and Reuse
• Increase use of reusable shipping containers, pallets
• Apartment move-in and move-out programs
• Food donations
1.4
Packet Pg. 74
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
13
Recommendations
8. Product Stewardship
• Adopt fees on products or packaging (e.g., fee on paper or
plastic bags, retailer take-back programs for unused paint)
9. Waste-to-Clean-Energy
• Adopt hierarchy of highest and best use
• Partner with CSU to research/pilot innovative technologies for
different applications
1.4
Packet Pg. 75
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
14
Recommendations
10. Funding
• Adopt recycling investment fees on waste hauling services or
waste shipped for landfilling
11. Regional Cooperation
• Partner (public/private, intergovernmental) to establish
infrastructure for composting, C&D recycling, re-use
• Work with Larimer County and Loveland
1.4
Packet Pg. 76
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
15
If you’re not for Zero
Waste, how much waste
are you for?
1.4
Packet Pg. 77
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
16
• Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner
970-221-6265, sgordon@fcgov.com
• Caroline Mitchell, Environmental Planner
970-221-6288, cmitchell@fcgov.com
• Gary Liss, Zero Waste Associates
More information:
http://www.fcgov.com/zerowaste/
1.4
Packet Pg. 78
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
17
Review: Purpose of Discussion
1. Does the Council support the goal of Zero
Waste by 2030 and per capita waste reductions
(2.2 lbs./person/day by 2025)?
2. Does the Council support the interim targets
of 75% waste diversion by 2020, and 90% by
2025?
3. Is the Council ready to have a resolution
adopting these goals brought forward Dec. 17?
1.4
Packet Pg. 79
#1.4: Powerpoint presentation (Road to Zero Waste)
Project/Decision: Road to Zero Waste Evaluated by: Susie Gordon (Environmental Services), SeonAh Kendall (Economic Health)
SOCIAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL
Workforce Community
Strengths
Materials that are removed from the
waste stream and repurposed as
products, goods, or sustenance create
revenue and jobs.
More jobs are associated with locally
handling materials for recycling or re-use
when compared to the far fewer number
of jobs created by landfill disposal.
Strengths
Lower-cost options for home remodeling
projects are available when architectural
salvage occurs.
By increasing options for composting, more
local farming and home gardening projects
using compost as a soil amendment are
able to provide nutritious fruit and
vegetables for consumption.
With improved food recovery systems,
increased/more effective charitable
donations of high quality food can help
prevent hunger in the Fort Collins
community.
Implementation of plan will provide more
equitable access to recycling services.
Strengths
The materials landfilled by the Fort Collins community
each year are worth $6.5 M in value. The addition of a
composting facility permitted to accept food scraps and
yard trimmings alone could recover 50% of the
materials currently landfilled (70,000 tons/year of
organics are discarded). Additional materials could be
recycled, or re-used.
Although only 4% of the weight of materials being
landfilled annually, reusable items alone could be
worth $2.2M if they were re-sold rather than landfilled.
New revenues from sales of commodities diverted
from landfill disposal will stimulate the economy and
additional jobs will be created that provide local
employment.
The community’s investment to replace aging landfills
will be postponed or avoided through waste diversion
efforts (estimated to range from $20-85M per site).
Potential for 150 new “green” jobs by 2020.
Strengths
The ability to recover forest products, plastics,
metals, and manufactured goods and put them
to beneficial use dramatically reduces
“upstream” impacts caused by destructive
mining and logging practices, drilling and
resource extraction; and, industrial production
activities such as chemical treatment and
smelting. (For every ton of goods landfilled, an
average of 70 tons of waste was created
during the manufacture of those goods.)
Less energy and water is used when making
goods from recycled materials than when
actions (monthly $1 per household or
business) may meet with objections.
makes it difficult to justify costs of some Zero Waste
strategies, such as waste-to-clean-energy facilities that
may need to charge higher “tipping fees”.
The default option for the City to achieve greater
composting levels, whereby municipal sponsorship or
partnership on a new facility would occur, may be
perceived as a threat by private sector interests.
Access to financial capital.
Increased training costs (financial and time) for
businesses to implement greater diversion practices.
Opportunities
Work with local technical schools and
community colleges to train new workers
for waste diversion, recycling, and waste-
to-clean-energy programs.
Opportunities
Advance planning will increase the
community’s resilience to natural
catastrophes that create debris (e.g., fires,
floods, and tornedoes), whereby systems
are in place for safely and expeditiously
handling these materials.
Volunteers can help to provide extra
support for various elements of Zero Waste
activities (education, collection of food
donations).
Opportunities
New businesses have opportunities to fill niches such
as specialized collection services or cottage industries
that use locally-sourced materials in manufacturing.
Changes to the way glass is collected will create
higher-quality supplies of glass, of great usefulness to
manufacturers of glass bottles, and increase the value
of the remaining single-stream recyclables that are
collected without glass.
Local breweries may be able to participate in new
glass collection systems that create more efficiency
and greater recovery rates for glass.
Develop partnerships, such as working with local
breweries on glass bottle re-use or re-manufacturing,
and with Colorado State University on pilot waste-to-
clean-energy programs.
Collaboration and partnership with the Colorado Clean
Energy Cluster or like-kind businesses in a
demonstration project, similar to Fort ZED.
If known as a leader in sustainability, Fort Collins will
be able to attract more green businesses and start-
ups.
Opportunities
By creating a local system for recycling
organics such as food scraps, yard trimmings,
and wet or soiled paper, compost becomes
more widely used as a soil supplement;
landscaping and gardening efforts are
rewarded by increased water retention and
lower irrigation needs, healthier plants, and
less reliance on chemical fertilizers.
Development of Resource Recovery Park(s)
DATE: November 26, 2013
STAFF: Ginny Sawyer,Policy and Project Manager
Don Vagge,Police Captain
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Local Action Regarding Amendment 64
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to provide Council options to consider regarding recreational
marijuana as allowed in Amendment 64.
Amendment 64 allows persons 21 years-of-age or older to legally possess up to one ounce of marijuana
without a doctor’s recommendation and to grow up to six marijuana plants. Local jurisdictions have the
option to define and regulate home growing and enact local prohibitions on public consumption.
Under Amendment 64, Council also has three options in regard to retail operations: (1) adopt an
ordinance prohibiting retail marijuana businesses in Fort Collins; (2) refer a retail marijuana prohibition
question to the voters; or (3) allow retail marijuana businesses in Fort Collins and impose local restrictions
on the time, place, manner and number of retail marijuana operations.
Following the July work session, staff was asked to return for a follow-up Work Session with more
detailed options for regulating recreational marijuana in Fort Collins. Staff was also asked to conduct
public outreach on the issue.
The City of Fort Collins currently has a ban on all retail marijuana activity through March 31, 2014.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Retail Businesses
1. Does Council prefer to ban retail businesses? Ask the voters to decide in November 2014? Or
allow and regulate retail businesses?
2. If Council chooses to allow and regulate, which of the following regulations does Council support?
3. Are there additional regulations Council would like staff to pursue?
4. If Council chooses to allow retail marijuana stores, should there be a limit on the number?
Personal Possession and Consumption
5. Does Council support the proposed regulations?
6. Are there additional regulations Council would like staff to pursue?
Overall
7. Does Council support the proposed next steps?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
2
Packet Pg. 82
November 26, 2013 Page 2
Amendment 64
Amendment 64 was passed by Colorado voters in November 2012. In general, the Amendment allows or
requires the following:
People 21 years-of-age or older may legally possess, use, display, purchase, or transport one ounce
or less of marijuana without a doctor’s recommendation.
Anyone 21 years or older may possess, grow, process, or transport up to six marijuana plants. The
cultivation of marijuana must occur in an enclosed, locked space.
The State was required to adopt regulations implementing Amendment 64 by July 1, 2013.
The State was required to establish a system in which marijuana is regulated and taxed (similar to
alcohol) in a retail environment.
Allows for local governments to opt out of retail marijuana entirely or opt in and enact local
regulations.
Retail marijuana operations include and are defined as the following:
Retail Store
May purchase marijuana from cultivation facilities and marijuana products from manufacturing facilities
and sell to the public.
Manufacturing Facility
May purchase marijuana for the manufacture, preparation, and packaging of marijuana products.
Products can be sold to retail stores or other manufacturing facilities.
May not sell to the public.
Testing Facility
Entity licensed to analyze and certify the safety and potency of marijuana.
Cultivation Facility
May cultivate, prepare, and package marijuana for sale to a retail store or manufacturer.
May not sell to the public.
Council Options
With regard to retail marijuana businesses, Amendment 64 allows local governments to opt out entirely,
refer the question to the voters, or opt in and enact local regulations. Staff is presenting options for
allowing retail businesses to provide a better idea of the regulation options available.
Retail Businesses Options
Retail Stores:
At the State level, licensed medical marijuana centers will have the first option for obtaining retail
licenses. The State began accepting applications in October 2013 and will begin issuing licenses in
January 2014 for businesses in communities that currently allow retail businesses. Applications from
anyone other than a licensed medical marijuana center will not be accepted until July 2014.
State rules allow medical marijuana centers to convert entirely to retail or co-locate retail and medical by
either:
Having retail and medical in one storefront (prohibits medical sales to anyone under 21 years of
age.)
Having complete separation of retail and medical sales (allows medical marijuana sales to
medical marijuana patients between 18-21 years of age.)
In Fort Collins we currently have 10 licensed medical marijuana centers. There are 4 applications still
pending bringing the total potential number of medical marijuana centers to fourteen.
Option One:
Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers who wish to convert (whole or in part) to retail in their
existing locations. (Potential of 14 stores.)
Option Two:
2
Packet Pg. 83
November 26, 2013 Page 3
Only allow licensed medical marijuana centers that meet Initiative 301 location requirements to convert.
(Potential of 8 stores.)
Option Three:
Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers to convert but require they conform to location requirements
and allow them to relocate if necessary. (Potential number of stores difficult to predict.)
Additional Considerations:
In the original regulations (pre-Initiative 301) setbacks to residential zones were included. This
requirement is not in the Initiative 301 setbacks. This is a requirement that could be added for conversion
to retail.
Original regulations also required a 1000 foot separation between businesses. This was also not
included in Initiative 301 and could be an additional consideration.
If retail stores are only allowed through the conversion of licensed medical marijuana centers (now and
into the future), staff has concluded that option one (or option 2) could potentially result in fewer overall
stores (although in non-conforming locations) than option three.
2
Packet Pg. 84
November 26, 2013 Page 4
Chart of Existing or Pending Licensed Medical Marijuana Centers
Outside 1000 feet Outside 500 feet
Within
Permitted
Zone?
Schools
CSU
Public
Playground
Child
Care
Worship
Public
Park, Pool,
Rec Fac.
Halfway
House,
Rehab
Ctr.
Conforms
to 301?
1 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
3 Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
4 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
6 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
7 Yes No No Yes No No Yes No No
8 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
9 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
10 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
11 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
12 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
13 Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
14 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Manufacturing and Cultivation Facilities
These types of activities are currently regulated by both the State and local medical marijuana
regulations. In previous regulations (pre-Initiative 301) the City required that any cultivation or
manufacturing facility within the City had to be associated with a local medical marijuana business. The
intent of this regulation was to prevent people and businesses from outside our community locating here
strictly for the purpose of cultivating marijuana and manufacturing marijuana infused products. This is an
option that could be included in new regulations.
Testing Facility
These facilities would be considered a research laboratory by our current Land Use Code definitions.
Staff does not anticipate the need for additional regulations since these facilities will not be growing,
manufacturing, or selling any marijuana. The quantities on-site should also be minimal.
Public Engagement
On October 10, 2013, City staff in collaboration with the Center for Public Deliberation hosted a
Community Issues Forum. One of the discussion topics was retail marijuana. Those who attended
participated in both small table dialogues and individual clicker responses. Responses to two main
questions are as follows:
Chooseardless of your vote, what aspects, if any, of Amendment 64 do you
support? (Choose all that apply) (multiple choice)
Percent*
The decriminalization of possession of less than an ounce for adults over 21 78%
Allowing local municipalities to choose to ban or regulate marijuana businesses 71%
Collecting additional taxes for schools 69%
Allowing retail marijuana businesses 63%
Other 12%
November 26, 2013 Page 5
2. Choose one, if you had to choose right now: Percent*
I want Fort Collins to allow and regulate retail businesses 71%
I want Fort Collins to ban retail businesses 18%
I want this issue to go back on the ballot for local voters to decide next fall 10%
100%
Question number one was also asked on IdeaLab with similar results.
Forum participant concerns were categorized and then prioritized as follows:
Which concerns are most relevant to you? (Top 3 in order)
(multiple choice)
1st
place
votes
Misinformation 13
Providing Fair/Exemplary Regulations 9
Youth Access 4
Ban would lead to black market 4
Potential Ban 3
Quality of Community/Neighborhoods 2
Not Enough Regulations/Costly Regulations 1
Going to Referendum 0
Potential for Abuse 0
The full summary report of all table deliberations is included as an attachment.
Staff also worked with the Triple Bottom Line team and an interdepartmental training group to conduct a
Triple Bottom Line Analysis on retail marijuana. The map and the synopsis are included an attachment.
The synopsis demonstrates that this issue is largely a social/values issue with very little historical data,
research, or best practices to draw from.
Marijuana Growing and Personal Use
Amendment 64 allows adults 21 years of age and older to grow six plants “provided that the growing
takes place in an enclosed, locked space, is not conducted openly and publicly, and is not made available
for sale,” however, the law does not define these terms. Municipalities may consider better defining what
constitutes an “enclosed, locked space” and “open and publicly” in their municipal codes.
Growing
Fort Collins currently allows medical marijuana patients and caregivers to grow up to 12 plants in single-
family detached residences. Growing is prohibited in multifamily residences for health and safety
reasons. Staff has begun drafting an ordinance that would include the following:
No cultivation in two-family, multifamily, or single-family attached dwellings.
Cultivation could not occur in the open or be perceptible from the outside of a property.
The use and storage of compressed, flammable gases would be prohibited, as would all high-
intensity lighting.
The 12 plant limit would remain in place.
Additional options seen in other communities could include a square footage limitation. Staff did consider
the option of allowing growing in out-buildings since this could be safer than in a residence, however, the
opportunity for an out-building grow to be an attractive nuisance was considered a greater risk.
Possession and Consumption
Amendment 64 allows adults 21 and over to possess up to one ounce of marijuana. It prohibits “open
and public” use of marijuana. Staff is considering local language which would better define open and
public consumption to help with enforcement and allow violations to be written into our local municipal
court which would allow for the implementation of a local fine schedule. This language could address
2
Packet Pg. 86
November 26, 2013 Page 6
consumption on private property that is viewable from public property, like a front porch.
Other communities are also considering prohibitions on displaying or transferring marijuana on public
property. This is something Fort Collins could also include.
Next Steps
Staff is currently scheduled for another work session on February 11, 2014 should it be necessary. If
Council moves forward with regulations, staff will bring forward ordinances in the February-March
timeframe to ensure regulations and processes are in place prior to the expiration of the temporary ban
on March 31, 2014.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Retail Businesses
1. Does Council prefer to ban retail businesses? Ask the voters to decide in November 2014? Or
allow and regulate retail businesses?
2. If Council chooses to allow and regulate, which of the following regulations does Council support?
Retail Stores
Option One: Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers who wish to convert (whole or
in part) to retail in their existing locations.
Option Two: Only allow licensed medical marijuana centers that meet Initiative 301
location requirements to convert.
Option Three: Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers to convert but require they
conform to location requirements and allow them to relocate if necessary.
A) Add setbacks to residential zones?
B) Add 1000 foot separation between businesses?
Manufacturing and Cultivation Facilities
Require that any cultivation or manufacturing facility within the City be associated with a
local marijuana business?
3. Are there additional regulations Council would like staff to pursue?
4. If Council chooses to allow retail marijuana stores, should there be a limit on the number?
Personal Possession and Consumption
5. Does Council support the proposed regulations?
Personal Growing
No cultivation in two-family, multifamily, or single-family attached dwellings.
Cultivation could not occur in the open or be perceptible from the outside of a property.
The use and storage of compressed, flammable gases would be prohibited, as would all
high-intensity lighting.
No one growing for themselves would be allowed to sell marijuana or possess more than
allowed by State law.
The 12 plant limit would remain in place.
Personal Consumption
Prohibit displaying or transferring marijuana on public property.
Consider a local ordinance prohibiting open and public consumption.
Consider prohibition on marijuana consumption on private property if visible and obvious
2
Packet Pg. 87
November 26, 2013 Page 7
from public right of way.
6. Are there additional regulations Council would like staff to pursue?
Overall
7. Does Council support the proposed next steps?
ATTACHMENTS
1. #: July Work Session Summary (PDF)
2. #: Chart of Municipal Actions (PDF)
3. #: Raw Data From Issue Forum (PDF)
4. #: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (PDF)
5. #: Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
2
Packet Pg. 88
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 89
#2.1: July Work Session Summary (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
Municipality
Action Taken on Amendment 64
Medical
Marijuana
Growing
Regulations
Incorporation
Vote in Favor
of Amend. 64
Aurora Ordinance to Comply with Amendment 64 age, grow, and possession
provisions; Moratorium on applications until 5/5/2014
prohibited N/A Home Rule Adams 56%;
Arapahoe 52.8%;
Douglas (45.4%)
Berthoud Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
allowed N/A Statutory Town Larimer 54.6%;
Weld 50.2%
Boulder Evaluating retail marijuana establishments allowed N/A Home Rule 66.1%
Broomfield Prohibition of the operation of retail marijuana establishments prohibited N/A 52.8%
Carbondale Moratorium on the establishment of any new medical or retail
marijuana facility to 12/11/2013
allowed N/A Home Rule 56.8%
Castle Rock Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
prohibited N/A Home Rule Town (45.4%)
Centennial A moratorium to 09/30/2014 on the operation of marijuana cultivation
facilities, marijuana product manufacturing facilities, marijuana testing
facilities, retail marijuana stores, and marijuana clubs; Ordinance
regulating the manner in which marijuana is grown for personal use,
prohibiting the operation of certain marijuana enterprises, and
prohibiting marijuana on city owned or leased property
prohibited N/A Home Rule 52.8%
Colorado
Springs
Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
allowed N/A Home Rule City
Denver Moving forward in regulating licensure of retail marijuana
establishments
allowed Home Rule City
Dillon Moratorium on the submission, acceptance or processing of applications
and the licensing, permitting, establishment or operation of any retail
marijuana establishments to 10/01/2014
prohibited N/A Home Rule 69.2%
Eaton Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
Englewood Prohibition of the operation of marijuana establishments, put to a
citizen vote for the November 5, 2013 election as an advisory question
allowed N/A Home Rule 52.8%
Erie Moratorium on the submission, acceptance or processing of applications
and the licensing, permitting, establishment or operation of any retail
marijuana establishments to 12/31/14
prohibited N/A Statutory Town Boulder 66.1%;
Weld 50.2%
Estes Park Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
prohibited Statutory Town
Evans Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing prohibited Home Rule City
ATTACHMENT 2
Municipality
Action Taken on Amendment 64
Medical
Marijuana
Growing
Regulations
Incorporation
Vote in Favor
of Amend. 64
facilities and retail marijuana stores
Ft. Morgan Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
prohibited N/A Home Rule (42.3%)
Garden City Prohibition of any marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana product
manufacturing facility, marijuana testing facility, or retail marijuana
store.
allowed Statutory Town
Greenwood
Village
Prohibition of any marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana product
manufacturing facility, marijuana testing facility, or retail marijuana
store or marijuana club; Regulation of the personal cultivation,
possession, and use of marijuana; Banned marijuana on sidewalks and
public streets
prohibited Developing
ordinance
regarding
home growing
to
address mold &
fire
concerns
Home Rule 52.8%
Greeley Prohibition of any marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana product
manufacturing facility, marijuana testing facility, or retail marijuana
store
allowed Home Rule 50.2%
Gunnison Ordinance to comply with Amendment 64 age, grow, and possession
provisions; Prohibition of any marijuana cultivation facility, marijuana
product manufacturing facility, marijuana testing facility, or retail
marijuana store
prohibited N/A Home Rule City 67.3%
Johnstown Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities, and retail marijuana stores
prohibited
N/A Home Rule Larimer 54.6%;
Weld 50.2%
Larimer
County
allowed
Lafayette Moratorium on the submission, acceptance or processing of applications
and the licensing, permitting, establishment or operation of any
recreational marijuana business to 04/01/2014
allowed N/A Home Rule 66.1%
Lakewood Moratorium on the licensing, permitting, establishment, or operation of
any new marijuana enterprise to 02/01/2015
N/A Home Rule 53.7%
Longmont Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
prohibited N/A Home Rule City
Municipality
Action Taken on Amendment 64
Medical
Marijuana
Growing
Regulations
Incorporation
Vote in Favor
of Amend. 64
Louisville Moratorium on retail marijuana establishments until 12/31/14 allowed Home Rule 66.1%
Lyons Moratorium on the licensing, permitting, establishment, or operation of
any new marijuana enterprise to 10/01/2014; Moratorium on the
licensing, permitting, establishment, or operation of any new business
that sells, cultivates, or tests marijuana or any marijuana products, or
any marijuana enterprise to 10/01/2014
N/A Statutory Town
Northglenn Retail marijuana establishments are allowed but are limited to 3 in order
to allow for effective regulatory and law enforcement oversight of their
operations and to ensure their lawful and orderly operation, and to
regulate the time, place; and manner of the operation of retail
marijuana establishments
allowed N/A Home Rule Adams 56%;
Weld 50.2%
Pueblo Moratorium on the licensing, permitting, establishment, or operation of
any new business that sells, cultivates, or tests marijuana or any
marijuana products, or any marijuana enterprise to 03/01/2014
Prohibited N/A
Steamboat
Springs
Retail marijuana establishments are allowed but are limited to three
licenses in order to allow for effective regulatory and law enforcement
oversight of their operations and to ensure their lawful and orderly
operation, and to regulate the time, place; and manner of the operation
of retail marijuana establishments
allowed N/A Home Rule 62.9%
Timnath Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores, and marijuana clubs
prohibited N/A Home Rule Town
Vail Moratorium on the operation of marijuana establishments pursuant to
Amendment 64 to 01/21/2014
prohibited N/A Home Rule 66.5%
Westminster Prohibition on retail sale, distribution, cultivation and dispensing of
recreational marijuana through marijuana establishments and optional
premises cultivation operations; Ordinance to comply with Amendment
64 age, grow, and possession provisions
prohibited N/A Home Rule Adams 56%;
Jefferson 53.7%
Wellington Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
prohibited N/A Statutory Town
Windsor Prohibition of the operation of any marijuana business enterprise within
the meaning of Amendment 64; Prohibition of the establishment and
operation of private marijuana clubs
prohibited N/A Home Rule Larimer
54.6%;Weld
50.2%
2.2
Packet Pg. 92
#2.2: Chart of Municipal Actions (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
1
Community Issues Forum
Raw Data
Forum agenda:
6:35 Introduction
6:40 – 6:50 Purpose & goals
6-50-7:20 Session 1: Retail Marijuana – collection of concerns
7:20 – 7:45 Session 2: Bike Plan Update
7:45-8:00 Session 3: Expanded Smoking Regulations
8:00-8:15 Session 4: Downtown Train Noise
8:15-8:50 Session 5: Retail Marijuana – Discussion of Potential Regulations
SESSION 1: RETAIL MARIJUANA
Before we moved into small group discussions, participants answered two wireless keypad questions to get a
sense of the overall opinion of the room.
1.) Regardless of your vote, what aspects, if any, of Amendment 64 do you support?
(choose all that apply) (multiple choice)
Responses
%* (count)
The decriminalization of possession of less than an ounce for adults
over 21 78% 38
Allowing retail marijuana businesses 63% 31
Allowing local municipalities to choose to ban or regulate marijuana
businesses 71% 35
Collecting additional taxes for schools 69% 34
Other 12% 6
100% 178
* Percent of people who chose that option (out of 49 respondents)
2.) Choose one, if you had to choose right now: (multiple choice)
Responses
(percent) (count)
I want Fort Collins to ban retail businesses 18% 9
I want Fort Collins to allow and regulate retail businesses 71% 35
I want this issue to go back on the ballot for local voters to decide next
fall 10% 5
100% 49
ATTACHMENT 3
2.3
Packet Pg. 93
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
2
INITIAL LIST OF CONCERNS REGARDING MARIJUANA POLICY
Facilitators began the small group discussions by quickly going around the table and asking pa participants what
concerns they had regarding the opening, regulating, or banning of retail marijuana businesses. Facilitators
captured these “primary concerns” at each table on a large piece of paper, which then served as a menu to
organize the ongoing discussion. Below are the initial lists that were created at each table:
Table 1
Understand amendment 64
Education about influencing youth
Daily habitual use when not regulated (with youth)
US looking to CO (and WA) as models
Factual, non-bias information and education about marijuana
False/ negative connotations about marijuana users
Mass production
Black market when not regulated
Table 2
Spotlight on CO and WA, we need to provide good model
Availability to minors, DUI prevention
needs to be done correctly and economically feasible
Addiction problems, tax money treatment programs
Drug cartels moving in
Many people are uninformed about regulations
Needs to truly be treated like alcohol
Table 3
Increased usage of minors and more access
Regulation sufficient to prevent minors access
Proximity to youth communities
Have consistent regulations so that business isn’t off/ on again, closure- either do it or not
Ensure public understanding of what regulation brings to community/ do for community
Keep controlled substances out of hands of minors
Advertising/ marketing that targets youth
Having access to someone who is able to answer questions about what regulation actually consists of,
knowledgeable and cares, will answer questions
Regulation of kids (even with parents) walking into/ being exposed to stores/ proximity to marijuana
Clear/ transparent regulation
Table 4
Marijuana as doorway to other drugs
Education for people who do not know about marijuana
How to get people to understand marijuana better not as a gateway drug
Pot tourism and relocation to Fort Collins, driving under the influence
Aesthetics of signage, Foco as a beautiful place, regulation of signage
Use of marijuana will exist, regulated 8 safe vs. hidden, let’s have where we can see it
2.3
Packet Pg. 94
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
3
Table 5
Enforcement of age limits
Word choice of where the tax is going
Possibility of a local ban and local vote on retail sale
impact on kids
Tax distribution
Regulation of retail
Discrimination criminal activities
Table 6
Rather ban alcohol
Other problems
Indifferent, education/ enforcement
Decriminalization
Students smoking in neighborhoods
Under-age
Smoking in open
Table 7
Voting educationally decision made without emotions
Will be voted down again once everything has been established
Effects of marijuana on students/ youth
Education as a whole about the issue
The concern of the black market
Too many retail stores
Not giving through process quick enough from fear
Table 8
Regulation over black market
Public health concern
Too available
Becoming a social norm for all ages
Addiction and day-to-day functioning
Over regulation encourage decriminalization
Quality of community
Privacy
Misinformation
2.3
Packet Pg. 95
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
4
INDIVIDUAL POST-IT NOTES WITH PRIMARY CONCERN
After discussing the primary concerns people have as recreational marijuana is allowed and as the City Council
considers allowing and regulating or banning retail stores the table each participant was asked to complete the
sentence, “I am concerned that….” on a post-it note. Below are the post-it note responses broken down into
themes (themes were identified by CPD Associate Director.)
Another Referendum
Do not ban or send to another vote
We will continue to talk and vote, on and on and on
I am most concerned that there will be more tax payer funded referendums to clarify an already decided
issue
Ban = Black market spike
Dis-incentivizing criminal activity
We over tax it and still have an incentive for the criminal element
That the ban on marijuana retail will cause an increase in black market activity
Potential for Abuse
I am most concerned that people will abuse the legalization of marijuana
Vast increase in DUIs
Lack of understanding of medical issues that can result from marijuana use by general population
Using taxes for addiction counseling
Youth Access
I am most concerned that if this is put in action, availability to youth will rise
Exposure and access of marijuana to youth population and child-prevalent neighborhoods clear public
understanding of regulations and laws in effect
Sending youth the right message, informed choice, parental guidance, safe practice
I am most concerned that youth will have early engagement and their futures will be compromised
I am most concerned that children will have an increased access to marijuana with little to no oversight/
punishment for people over 21
Regulation might not be strong enough to prevent/ deter people who abuse the retail by purchasing too
much (shopping around to amass a stash) and the selling it to youth
Potential Ban
Retail stores being banned or delayed
A small (loud) group will sway the community or council to ban it, let’s know it and relocate it and tax it
I am most concerned about revoking ban marijuana retail
Minority voice outweighing majority
I am most concerned that the council vote will not be representative of the popular vote
My concern is the ability of a minority of people to dictate to the masses majority and take away choice;
I think there is a great deal of misinformation regarding this issue
I am most concerned that a vocal minority leads the conversation one way or another
Not Enough Regulation
That city will not have resources to enforce regulations, becomes a nuisance
I am concerned over the regulation and enforcement of laws
2.3
Packet Pg. 96
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
5
FoCo doesn’t have adequate regulations in place
Quality of Life/ Community
Most concerned about the quality of life diminishing because of the legalization of pot
I will have to move to a neighborhood farther from campus
Education of enforcement are not adequately addressed especially with respect to neighborhoods
around CSU
Reduced quality of life in Fort Collins
Quality of community
Fair/ Exemplary Regulation
I want to make sure that CO does a good job of handling legalization so that other states can look to us
as an example, we need to “do this right” and encourage other states to follow, the country is watching
I am most concerned that citizens will not know how much regulation will really do for Fort Collins
Marijuana coming from drug cartels! I want regulation and taxation
Treat like alcohol, banks must let companies make deposits, medicinal valuable post stress (soldiers),
can sleep, cancer patients can eat, pain killer
Over taxation
Misinformation
That the public be thoroughly informed about the regulations and nuances in the laws so people don’t
unwittingly get into trouble
Misinformation about amendment 64 which might increase marijuana use especially in youth
I am most concerned that people will have strong opinions with little to no facts or education to support
their opinion
The process not gathering adequate, factual information from all sides of the argument (no emotional
responses)
That mis-education will harm education
Mis-information and false reports could influence proper results
Improper education to the public and youth about marijuana and amendment 64. I am concerned those
who are not supportive will twist information to their liking/ advantage
Misperception and lack of education/ understanding
The city will be influenced by a select few citizens that still think “reefer madness” was factual and not
allow for regulation
This issue will end up going to the public and some crazy religious self-righteous group will spew rhetoric
and scare the shit out of everyone
2.3
Packet Pg. 97
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
6
SESSION 5: RETAIL MARIJUANA – DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL REGULATIONS
Participants were first provided a summary of the concerns expressed about marijuana as captured during
session 1 with the final post it notes, and then organized and themed by CPD associate director Katie Knobloch.
Ten themes were captured and reviewed, and then participants reacted to those themes with the clickers. Ginny
Sawyer then briefly reviewed the regulations that were part of Initiative 301 for medical marijuana dispensaries
as a baseline to consider for potential regulations for retail centers.
Which concerns are most relevant to you? (top 3 in order) (multiple choice)
Responses
1st
place
votes Pts.
Misinformation 13 50
Providing Fair/Exemplary Regulations 9 46
Quality of Community/Neighborhoods 2 23
Youth Access 4 25
Going to Referendum 0 9
Minority outweighing Majority 1 15
Potential for Abuse 0 8
Potential Ban 3 5
Not Enough Regulations/Costly Regulations 1 6
Ban would lead to black market 4 20
37 107
Participants were then given time in the small groups to react to the concerns and consider potential
regulations. They were also given worksheets organized by the key areas of regulation that were reviewed:
General regulations
Just be careful that the cost of regulation doesn’t drive “business” back underground…If we allow it and
regulate it, there must still be a price market must bear?
Like medical.
Ok, like liquor, in commercial areas, 14 medical centers.
Allow MJ business to sponsor community events and be advertised in those brochures, playbills, flyers,
etc.
Sting operations should be consistently held.
Default to state laws.
Sanitation and health regulations for any business selling or making food products (edible). Have a
balanced marijuana board in city for planning and public information.
Feel better knowing these regulations are in place.
Should be same as “medical.”
Smoking areas, just smoke in your own home.
Location Requirements
Strict Signage Regulations. No giant leaves in day-glow colors.
Not in Old Town.
In all areas of the city.
Not near schools, not in residential areas.
I like the 301 Regulations.
2.3
Packet Pg. 98
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
7
Laboratories do not pose risk of division or product so setbacks on zoning should not be as stringent.
I believe that location requirements should be the same as for liquor stores, for retail stores.
Manufacturing should be less regulated if at all. Labs not at all. Cultivation should the same as retail.
Zoning distance requirements away from neighborhoods, childcare, churches, schools, parks,
playgrounds. Perhaps even distance between facilities.
Cannot be within 1,000 ft of schools, playground, and religious facilities.
Grandfathering of current MMJ dispensaries at current locations.
Strict enough to limit sales location, larger setbacks will make no location eligible.
Agree with current.
Not w/in 1000ft to school.
Should be the same as “medical” pot stores.
Beware of places where there are a lot of young kids and around preschools.
Number Limits
Let the market determine the proper equilibrium.
0 through 2, Fort Collins is a small town, how many would we need.
Maybe per capita limits, but I don’t know how many exactly. No more than medical-allow no
competitive preference-if more players want to compete, make them smaller.
As market demands.
Start with current limits, then potentially expand.
At least the 14 allowed now medically to start then not to exceeds the number of under 21
residents/500 (same logic as number of medical dispensaries.)
Let those who were kicked out in 2012 have the first opportunity to re-open. Then allow capitalism to
let it grow sometime later.
Distance requirements will naturally limit the number of facilities.
No limits.
Distance requirements are so large, caps not required.
No. Distance setbacks will limit how many come in anyhow. A set number is silly.
Limit to existing stores.
Limit to existing shops.
That may be a good idea, too many weed stores was strange.
Other
No cash on premises overnight.
Suggest that a responsible retail marijuana group gets formed.
I would like a more common sense solution to combating DUI’s for Marijuana than blood testing on
arbitrary numbers.
Patrons to retail stores only be allowed to buy one ounce in a week.
Need to enforce public smoking prohibition.
Smoking areas, education especially for kids, we need to help them see the impact of use on their brains
as opposed to the adult brain.
2.3
Packet Pg. 99
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
8
Notes captured at the tables regarding the small-group conversations about potential regulations:
I like the regulated part about the retail stores. All those who were kicked out in 2012 should have the
first right to reopen. We should take it in a measured way. There should be no specific number. Demand
will dictate how many and where.
I am in favor of limiting the number, but not sure how to determine the number other than supply and
demand. Naturally, it will happen and determine the number with how far apart they need to be. The
city should not limit the number, but it will naturally happen.
I would like to see a limit, but I'm not sure how to determine that number.
We should start with the okayed medical shops (allow them to do retail until we figure out whether to
expand or not). We should then set up precedent similar to the 1 to 500 medical card holders. Maybe
we should not exceed adults over 21 divided by 500. There should be no less than 14, but no greater
than the residents over 21 divided by 500. Consistency is good, so maybe that would work.
We should allow the market forces to play out. We will not see a whole lot popping up all over. Demand
will drop if there are a ton of marijuana stores, so that would force closing of some.
It should be the same as it is for liquor stores.
Out of the businesses produced from marijuana, there should be no worries or regulations for the four
types of facilities (labs, retail, etc.) because they are all closed buildings. The regulation of retail stores
should be like liquor stores. This could be a problem around CSU campus, though, because it is such a
large area and demand may be high there.
Cultivation needs to be regulated. I am worried about the quality with large growing operations.
Distance regulations need to be kept.
Labs should not be taken into the location regulations. I'm not worried about kids coming into labs to
take a small amount that is used for testing it. Growing of marijuana needs to be the same regulation as
retail, though.
Will there be hours associated with retail stores?
It will be the same as medical. Council can't change that.
What did they decide about edible products like candy, drinks, sweets, etc.?* The packaging has to come
out of the sales establishment. It has to be tamper proof and not look like it is marijuana product or
appealing to kids in any way. Basically, it has to have invisible packaging. Packaging was a problem
before, but the outside of the package now cannot look appealing to a child. Once it is open, there isn't
a way to child proof it, but when it is sold, it can't look like it is appealing.
Would we need more regulation of other spots that we haven't covered such as advertising or other
areas?
No need to further regulate. It is like telling a baker you can only bake donuts.
Larimer County has already banned manufacturers. They didn't agree with the advertising of pictures of
edibles. Will council consider adding advertising back in?
Did they determine an acceptable THC level?
*100 milligrams per serving.
Taxes. The taxes currently in place are not enough to cover the regulation of it. Some of the cost is being
unaccounted for. I am worried about the taxes not being enough to pay for everything with
enforcement and regulation costs.
It hasn't been studied enough about taxes and costs. I hope some of the voters would look into that
before deciding.
There are a lot of banking restrictions for marijuana businesses, right? How are you affected by banking?
(question directed to the laboratory owners at the table.)
I just say that I am a laboratory. When they ask more specifically, I say I test organic plant materials. I
never use the word marijuana and it usually isn't an issue.
How does that work for retail, though? Or medical retail?
2.3
Packet Pg. 100
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
9
There are banking solutions being put together currently to allow banks to take the money and
recognize the cash.
Some owners may have had businesses in other industries before, so those sit on top of their marijuana
business and then they just always pay in cash. It isn't as much as a safety issue in Fort Collins, but in
Denver it can cause issues.
Dispensaries in the communities should be allowed to participate in the community. If they try to do
more in advertising than the state suggest, dispensaries should be able to sponsor events, put their
names on programs, hang banners at sporting events, and be treated like other businesses. They should
be able to sponsor 5Ks or whatever else they want to do for advertising.
You should still give a choice to universities and others whether they want to be sponsored by a
marijuana business or not, though. The choice should be up to others.
There should be a responsible marijuana retail group with responsible advertising policies. There is an
alcohol retail group that monitors responsible retail policies for them, so if there are marijuana retail
stores here, there should be a responsible advertising group for them, too. (much agreement from the
table on this thought.)
I think it should have a cap on the number of stores allowed.
Limit it to medical stores ONLY.
Establishments already allowed -- Turn into stores.
Some people don't know what they are doing when they grow.
I don't see a reason for limits... It's legal, so who cares about how many we allow there to be (as long as
they are in the zoning limits.)
It's all about perspective.
FoCo would add more regulation.
We are pretty highly regulated already.
We are a model, so we have to get it right.
It would be nice to see how it is done (growing.)
They should come up with a standard testing model that tests harmful things to marijuana (pesticides,
herbicides etc.)
Maximum of 2, do we really need more than that?
I mean probably because each patient is registered at one medical dispensary and they can't go
anywhere else.
We keep tabs on people so we know that they are not cheating the system. They have it heavily
regulated already.
There’s also a capacity each dispensary can provide.
It’s at capacity for medical then they need to figure out a certain percentage they can keep open for
recreation so each spot only has a certain amount of recreational capacity as well.
High regulations protect business.
But if there becomes too many regulations than people might get fed up and revert back to the black
market and we wouldn't benefit from the tax money.
The number of stores will drive down the cost of marijuana.
But from a business perspective it’s better to have less stores.
It’s easier to watch out for and regulate fewer stores.
There should be a limit by population or no a per capita amount. (Did not know directly what number it
should be.)
There would then be less competition for the existing stores: P3 à P4 agreed with this statement and
stated the reason for having a per capita amount of recreational stores was because the opposition to
recreational marijuana stores may not not want a large amount of marijuana stores.
2.3
Packet Pg. 101
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
10
There should not be a limit: the City should let the free market adjust because there is enough
regulation already.
There would be 2 spots within Fort Collins for stores to be created à would have to look at recorder and
data directly.
What should be the amount of retail marijuana regulation?
Maintain current regulation that 301 already established. Grandfather in existing medical marijuana
dispensaries à by Grandfather in that would limit the amount that would be established and P5 agreed.
Participator question: Should retail and medical marijuana stores be the same?
The store would have medical inventory and recreational inventory.
There would be a difference in advertisement: marijuana focused on health for medical themes, and
“Get blitzed” over the weekend à this would attract different type of people and there would be a
different tax rate for the two.
Focusing on misinformation: is there a difference between medical and retail marijuana.
Input: for misinformation amendment 64 have a wide range of reasons to vote for and City Council
wants to have public feedback.
Regulate like alcohol: and even allow alcohol stores to sell it.
Liquor outlets would have an advantage: alcohol and marijuana are not the same: P4 and P3 both agree.
For Marijuana stores: have 1 owner to one store: keep large corporate firms out.
All 4 types of stores should have retail establishment if have cultivation.
No one should have more than one store à there should be a cap on the number of stores a person can
own.
Note; there was a good discussion here: I feel as though you should go over what was said to get very
detailed account. Very speculative and wide-ranging ideas.
What is the difference between retail and medical? How much can patients buy?
Depends on patient's condition etc.
What kind of balance? How many centers are needed?
Don't think there needs to be a cap. Free enterprise. Already a strict process.
Distance restrictions will dissuade business. Could effectively zone out a cap using zoning regulations.
Use the same regs. Don't want a MJ district.
No monopolies allowed.
State supports vertical integration.
We don't want our property values to decrease as a result.
This round of discussion was one of the more fruitful discussions of the night, there was a tension about
regulation details that got many people thinking.
Some participants at the table believed that this issue, since it is so new, must be dealt with slowly, and
that the transition between our current system and retail stores must be done slowly and correctly to
ensure economic success. They also believed that there shouldn't be more retail stores than medical
stores, and that stores should operate under the per-capita system that medical systems currently
operate under. There is too much prohibition in place to jump straight into the economy. D.U.I's are still
a problem that need to be dealt with.
Others at the table believed that too many laws and regulations on the store-cap are pointless, and that
these laws would treat us like irresponsible kids. We are adults that should be able to make our own
choices. Other commodities aren't capped. We are the guinea pigs that could lead the way, attracting a
great deal of tourism. We should make small barriers to entry into the retail marijuana market, to
ensure small-business success. There are close to no car accidents attributed to marijuana intoxication.
But it’s legal across the whole state so maybe Fort Collins wouldn't be the designated spot for marijuana
tourism.
2.3
Packet Pg. 102
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
11
Lots of other states are ready to jump on legalizing it because it’s about money and business and it has
the potential to boast economies.
Politicians look at it as a way to raise money for the state and can say that without actually supporting
smoking marijuana.
What do we think about putting a cap on retail stores?
Less concerned about capping it. I don't say this often but let the market take care of it.
If sketchy people try and open up stores they will most likely fail on their own or won't be able to
compete with the legit operations.
What if Fort Collins didn't have a store front?
We could manufacture it here but not actually sell it?
I'm not sure how that would work out and not sure if we would benefit from the money it raises without
having a storefront.
The nation is watching CO.
We need to model good behavior and figure out what exactly that means for this to work.
Could there be certain zones where marijuana could be smoked?
No, you don't do that with alcohol. Alcohol is only allowed in a designated facility or in the privacy of
own home. There can't be marijuana zones.
Should there be a different level of discipline?
Maybe. But what level of penalty would really make them quit?
Extremely Strict enforcement.
The police reaction time is not quick enough after people are reported for smoking weed outside of
homes. Not urgent or strict enough.
CSU can discipline for students behavior off campus.
There is a fundamental lack of respect from CSU students for the people living nearby. Residence halls
are the number one problem, the students are a nuisance when they leave dorms to come to the
neighborhoods to smoke.
The 21 and up law wouldn't even affect the neighborhood situation because the problem is the students
that are under 21 in the dorms
The medical use of marijuana was when the issue of students in the neighborhoods became an issue.
Maybe it will evolve to be understood that it is similar to alcohol and is illegal to smoke underage and in
public as time goes by.
Once regulations are put in place, will the situation improve?
No because it’s part of CSUs culture. There are new freshman every year, and it will be relayed to them.
It will never change.
Colorado is the go-to state for incoming college students due to marijuana legalization.
Dangerous grow ops.
Smoking becomes even more harmful if FoCo ban retail.
Final Post It Note: At the end of the event, facilitators asked participants to write down the main thing they
wanted to tell Council from the whole evening. (Only marijuana comments included.)
Regulate marijuana retail like alcohol establishments.
Keep up the good work as to bringing issues to your public. Never forget that we the people put you in
your job. Regulate and help show we are compassionate.
Marijuana- The city needs to continue taking resident/member input, while increasing education on the
topic not only to the general public, but also with the city officials. Make sure that everybody has
received the same info.
We must open retail stores ASAP!
2.3
Packet Pg. 103
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
12
Back yard grows: detailed regulations.
Regulate it!! Marijuana will always be (?). Let’s decide where it comes from: Cartels or licensed
businesses.
Implement now.
Most important thing… the 64 question is important & complex. This level of deliberation & discussion is
essential! Thanks!
Marijuana regs: limit ownership of MJ retail outfits to one per natural person (regardless of legal entity)
as we do for retail liquor licenses.
This open forum works and should be expanded.
Regulation of marijuana can lead to lack of access to (?) and youths.
Regulate retail marijuana ASAP! It will provide a safe and regulated environment that follows the will of
the people that voted in the last election.
Please regulate marijuana sales carefully.
The passing of Amendment 64 is more dangerous than Colorado understands.
Very organized, very hot topics.
Opinions are great, but please stay with the facts. Labs, mdg, grows, and retail are all different and
should be treated and regulated differently.
There should be stricter than alcohol regulations/consequences when of age people buying or gifting for
children.
Marijuana Regulation: Regarding placing limits on the # of marijuana locations, my worry is that this will
result in anti-competitive behavior down the line. Whenever the govt. restricts entry into a market,
existing businesses will always fight to keep out competition. We must balance the interest in restricting
proliferation with the interest in having a competitive market.
Become better informed about the facts about MJ. Ask yourselves, if not from a retail establishment
then where will adults get MJ?
To respect the wishes of the voters and get a system for retail marijuana in place.
I want the council to educate people more about Amendment 64, so that people would understand the
regulations and that marijuana use has not been completely legalized.
The most important thing I would want city council to know is the need to look at the facts and decide
what is true and what is not.
City council often gets hijacked by a vocal minority on issues despite the large effort staff makes with
outreach. All issues discussed tonight are subject to that effect. These typed conversations are crucial to
promote understanding of issues & good public discourse… Wish you had chance to have more people
involved. These discussions became part of staff’s outreach on individual issues.
Information & education is surrounding what is legal & illegal and what would be allowed with respect
to retail & medical marijuana.
Please listen to voters and pass A64.
I think the most important thing would be to realize that when Amendment 64 is put in action there will
be a drastic change and there will be backlash no matter what.
Don’t panic re: marijuana – it is a medicine- need to allow. Hemp.
We need to have a community wide convo about legally allow. Thanks.
2.3
Packet Pg. 104
#2.3: Raw Data From Issue Forum (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ANALYSIS
Derived from a TBLAM Brainstorm on
Retail Establishments for Recreational Marijuana
In Collaboration with the FC Moves
Purpose: To extract key triple bottom line (TBL) information from a brainstorming session, and use
that information to offer observations, recommendations, and future actions for recreational
marijuana establishments in Fort Collins.
I. General Observations from TBL Analysis Map (TBLAM):
A. The TBLAM was well populated by more than 20 participants.
B. Common themes appeared across social and economic considerations.
1. Crossing columns was common, indicating excellent depth of discussion and debate.
2. Crossing of rows was uncommon, and would have indicated a potential for conflicting values.
C. Environmental feedback was not as heavily populated in the TBLAM as social and economic feedback.
D. Beneficial impacts (strengths and opportunities) were nearly identical in social and economic columns.
E. Detrimental impacts (limitations and threats) overlapped between social and economic.
1. Numerous social limitations and threats were identified.
2. Conflict may arise from social limitations.
II. Conclusions Offered:
A. The TBLAM exercise indicates the recreational marijuana topic is a socio-economic challenge.
1. Recreational marijuana appears to be a strongly social issue.
2. Economic impacts tend to be secondary to social issues to the current group.
a. Further analysis is needed from an economic standpoint to remove conjecture from the topic.
b. More details in the Recommendations section.
B. Social issues dominated the discussion.
1. There is clearly a stigma around recreational marijuana for staff and public (as reported by staff.)
2. Serious concern was levied over petty crime and law enforcement impacts of marijuana sales.
C. Financial issues were also a primary topic of discussion.
1. Key topics included tax revenue generation potential and energy consumption potential.
2. Secondary topics included the impact of recreational dispensaries on adjacent property values, and on
the solar power generation potential that may be created by growing operations.
D. More expertise is needed from Environmental Services personnel to explore the benefits and detriments
of this issue.
III. Recommended Next Steps:
A. Law enforcement concerns need to be explored early and in detail.
1. Impacts on petty crime and break-ins must be explored.
a. Could use medical marijuana dispensary information as a benchmark.
b. Must look to other benchmark communities nationally and globally for a complete analysis.
2. Impacts to law enforcement must be summarized by law enforcement personnel.
a. Expected response from State and Federal partners must be known.
i. Will recreational marijuana exempt the community from certain types of incident or disaster
assistance?
ii. How will State and Federal agencies address the narcotics issues when larger crime cases
overlap into recreational marijuana?
b. Cost of crime management and enforcement management must be quantified.
i. Will more police be required?
ii. Special training and experience required?
iii. Will this divert resources from other law enforcement actions?
3. A clear distinction must be drawn for enforcement protocols for recreational marijuana from
established dispensaries, and that which may be acquired on the black market.
B. An economic analysis is needed.
ATTACHMENT 4
2.4
Packet Pg. 105
#2.4: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
1. Some of the current conjecture of potential economic impacts can be removed with a sound fiscal
analysis.
2. Benchmark communities across the nation and the globe should be identified and analyzed.
3. Any limitations in available financial data should be disclosed at the onset.
a. These may be an immediate threat to the discussion.
b. Not a fatal flaw, but likely a community concern with no reconcilable outcome.
C. The community stigma should be evaluated from a Public Relations standpoint.
1. A panel of experts should explore the PR impacts and relate them back to economic impacts.
2. It is recommended a citizen panel (or panels) of stakeholders from various backgrounds be assembled
as a focus group to address social issues.
a. Focus group feedback must be synthesized into fundamental community indicators.
b. These fundamental indicators should be compared against national and global benchmark
communities.
D. More expertise is needed from Environmental Services personnel to explore the benefits and detriments
of this issue
2.4
Packet Pg. 106
#2.4: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
Form Completed Sept. 23, 2013 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map (TBLAM)
Project or Decision:
Recreational marijuana – permit retail businesses to
open in Fort Collins (retail stores, cultivation,
manufacturing, and testing facilities serving retail
stores)
Evaluated by: TBL Brain-Trust
Social Economic Environmental
STRENGTHS:
Local sales will provide tax revenue to community –
revenue can be applied to the community
Reduces the social detriments of the criminal component
associated with MJ
Could decrease the use of alcohol in the community
Community would like to be a leader in inspection and
product quality, and in model ordinance implementation
STRENGTHS:
Closer than other communities; Shop FC First
Local sales will provide tax revenue to community
Some in the community would like to be a leader in inspection
and product quality, and in model ordinance implementation
Selling more power generates revenue at Utilities
Tourism-bringing in outside customers
Could create job opportunities
Could lead to sales of related items
STRENGTHS:
Closer than other communities, so no travel necessary
Reduces vehicle miles traveled for customers locally
Additional green plants releasing O2
LIMITATIONS:
Could be construed as a detriment to social structure of the
community
Some public health impacts are unknown at this time
Could affect federal support for law enforcement
Risk of targeting business for break-ins
Use of MJ in community could be detrimental to personal
image or professional standing
Higher use of water and electricity for growing ops is
contrary to the Utility ethos of conservation
Experience in other communities indicates MJ will divert
law enforcement resources (from medical MJ)
Some residents and businesses do not want to be near MJ,
but may be forced to be = affects property value
LIMITATIONS:
Could affect federal funding for certain grants or law
enforcement
Risk of targeting business for break-ins
Use of MJ in community could be detrimental to personal
image or professional standing
Experience in other communities indicates MJ will divert law
enforcement resources (from medical MJ) and may need to
divert resources
Some residents and businesses do not want to be near MJ, but
may be forced to be = affects property value
LIMITATIONS:
Growing MJ requires a substantial volume of water,
electricity, and chemicals
Increase vehicle miles traveled for outside customers
OPPORTUNITIES:
Form Completed Sept. 23, 2013 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
THREATS:
Some public health impacts are unknown at this time,
others are known to be detrimental
Could lead to illegal sales to underage community
members
Could impact reputation and branding of community
Use of MJ in community could be detrimental to personal
image or professional standing
Retail sales could lead to smoking ordinance conflicts
Could decrease tourism ops
Some residents and businesses do not want to be near MJ,
but may be forced to be = affects property value
THREATS:
Could impact reputation and branding of community
Use of MJ in community could be detrimental to personal
image or professional standing
THREATS:
Growing operations use more water and electricity,
inconsistent with Utilities conservation ethos
Improper growing creates mold and fire hazards
Impacts of second hand smoke both for health and
nuisance
Creates disposal needs for by-products and packaging
NOTES:
2.4
Packet Pg. 108
#2.4: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
1
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Ginny Sawyer, Project and Policy Manager
Don Vagge, Police Captain
Amendment 64
and Local Implications
City Council Work Session
November 26, 2013
ATTACHMENT 5
2.5
Packet Pg. 109
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
2
Direction Sought
Retail Businesses
• Does Council prefer to:
– Ban retail businesses?
– Ask the voters to decide in November 2014?
– Allow and regulate retail businesses?
• If Council chooses to allow and regulate, which of
the proposed regulations does Council support?
2.5
Packet Pg. 110
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
3
Direction Sought
• Are there additional regulations Council would like
staff to pursue?
• If Council chooses to allow retail marijuana stores,
should there be a limit on the number?
2.5
Packet Pg. 111
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
4
Direction Sought
Personal Possession and Consumption
• Does Council support the proposed regulations?
• Are there additional regulations Council would like
staff to pursue?
2.5
Packet Pg. 112
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
5
Direction Sought
Overall
• Does Council support the proposed timeline?
2.5
Packet Pg. 113
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
6
Background
Amendment 64 allows banning, opting in and
regulating, or putting question to vote.
Four types of retail businesses:
Stores, Manufacturing Facilities, Cultivation
Facilities, Testing Facilities.
Outreach to date shows preference to allow and
regulate.
2.5
Packet Pg. 114
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
7
Retail Marijuana Stores
Option One: Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers who
wish to convert (whole or in part) to retail in their existing
locations.
Option Two: Only allow licensed medical marijuana centers
that meet Initiative 301 location requirements to convert.
Option Three: Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers to
convert but require they conform to location requirements and
allow them to relocate if necessary.
2.5
Packet Pg. 115
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
8
Additional Considerations
• Add setbacks to residential zones?
• Add 1000 foot separation between businesses?
• Other?
2.5
Packet Pg. 116
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
9
Manufacturing and Cultivation
• Require that any cultivation or manufacturing
facility within the City be associated with a local
marijuana business.
2.5
Packet Pg. 117
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
10
Testing Facilities
• Considered a research laboratory by our current
Land Use Code definitions.
• Staff does not anticipate the need for additional
regulations.
• Facilities will not be growing, manufacturing, or
selling any marijuana.
2.5
Packet Pg. 118
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
11
Outside 1000 feet Outside 500 feet
Within
Permitted
Zone? Schools CSU
Public
Playground Child Care Worship
Public
Park, Pool,
Rec Fac.
Halfway
House,
Rehab Ctr
Conforms to
301?
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Yes No No ? * No No Yes No No
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
2.5
Packet Pg. 119
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
12
Personal Growing
• No cultivation in two-family, multifamily, or single-
family attached dwellings.
• Cultivation could not occur in the open or be
perceptible from the outside of a property.
• Compressed, flammable gases would be
prohibited, as would all high-intensity lighting.
• The 12 plant limit would remain in place.
2.5
Packet Pg. 120
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
13
Personal Use and Consumption
• Prohibit displaying and /or transferring marijuana
on public property.
• Consider a local ordinance prohibiting open and
public consumption.
• Consider prohibition on marijuana consumption
on private property that is viewable from public
right of way.
2.5
Packet Pg. 121
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
14
Next Steps
• Temporary Ban expires March 31, 2014.
• Work Session February 11 (if needed)
• Bring ordinances based on direction starting in
February.
2.5
Packet Pg. 122
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
15
Direction Sought
Retail Businesses
• Does Council prefer to:
– Ban retail businesses?
– Ask the voters to decide in November 2014?
– Allow and regulate retail businesses?
• If Council chooses to allow and regulate, which of
the proposed regulations does Council support?
2.5
Packet Pg. 123
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
16
Direction Sought
Retail Stores
1. Allow licensed medical marijuana centers to convert in their
existing locations.
2. Only allow licensed medical marijuana centers that meet
301 location requirements to convert.
3. Allow all licensed medical marijuana centers to convert.
Require they conform to location requirements and allow
relocation.
2.5
Packet Pg. 124
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
17
Direction Sought
Retail Stores
Additional Considerations:
• Add setbacks to residential zones?
• Add 1000 foot separation between businesses?
• Other?
2.5
Packet Pg. 125
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
18
Direction Sought
Manufacturing and Cultivation Facilities
Require that any cultivation or manufacturing facility
within the City be associated with a local marijuana
business?
2.5
Packet Pg. 126
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
19
Direction Sought
• Are there additional regulations Council would like
staff to pursue?
• If Council chooses to allow retail marijuana stores,
should there be a limit on the number?
2.5
Packet Pg. 127
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
20
Direction Sought
Personal Growing
No cultivation in two-family, multifamily, or single-
family attached dwellings.
Cultivation could not occur in the open or be
perceptible from the outside of a property.
2.5
Packet Pg. 128
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
21
Direction Sought
Personal Growing, con’t.
The use and storage of compressed, flammable
gases would be prohibited, as would all high-
intensity lighting.
The 12 plant limit would remain in place.
• Does Council support the proposed regulations?
• Are there additional regulations Council would like
staff to pursue?
2.5
Packet Pg. 129
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
22
Direction Sought
Personal Use and Consumption
Prohibit displaying and/ or transferring marijuana on
public property?
Consider a local ordinance prohibiting open and
public consumption?
2.5
Packet Pg. 130
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
23
Direction Sought
Personal Use and Consumption, con’t.
Consider prohibition on marijuana consumption on
private property that is viewable from the public right
of way.
• Does Council support the proposed regulations?
• Are there additional regulations Council would like
staff to pursue?
2.5
Packet Pg. 131
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
24
Direction Sought
Does Council support the proposed timeline?
• Work Session on February 11, 2014
(if needed?)
• Regular meetings in February-March, 2014
2.5
Packet Pg. 132
#2.5: Powerpoint presentation (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
Public health impacts may be beneficial, but current
research has some conflicts
Could impact reputation and branding of community
Could lead people to utilize solar power more extensively
Could increase tourism ops
OPPORTUNITIES:
Could impact reputation and branding of community
Experience in other communities indicates MJ will divert law
enforcement resources (from medical MJ) which may
ultimately create jobs
OPPORTUNITIES:
Could lead people to utilize solar power more extensively
2.4
Packet Pg. 107
#2.4: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
Loveland Prohibition of marijuana cultivation, product manufacturing, testing
facilities and retail marijuana stores
prohibited N/A Home Rule City
2.2
Packet Pg. 91
#2.2: Chart of Municipal Actions (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
2.2
Packet Pg. 90
#2.2: Chart of Municipal Actions (Local Action Regarding Amendment 64)
100%
* Percent of people who chose that option (out of 49 respondents)
2
Packet Pg. 85
creates a single destination for variety of
materials to be sent for remanufacturing,
reuse, composting, waste-to-clean-energy, etc.
Local Zero Waste activities helps “close the
loop” on commodity materials, keeping
resources from being transported overseas or
to distant plants and reducing fuel needs.
Reducing waste to local landfills postpones the
need to create new landfills and associated
environmental impacts.
Threats
Lack of local control over the flow of
materials in the waste stream could
displace local entrepreneurship, whereby
materials are directed in the future to
waste handling facilities outside the
region.
Threats
Changes in social norms such as
proliferating consumerism, and the stigma
sometimes associated with “second-hand”
goods will present great challenges.
Threats
Costs to construct new facilities such as anaerobic
digesters or pyrolysis conversion for discards are very
high, as are risks associated with shortages of
feedstocks/supply that could occur due to lack of
precedent in Colorado for controlling the flow of waste
materials.
Too much regulation could deter new businesses from
locating in Fort Collins.
Threats
Recyclables are commodities and their value
fluctuates as does the value of all
commodities. During times of low commodity
value, recycling businesses can be more
challenging.
Notes:
1.5
Packet Pg. 81
#1.5: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Road to Zero Waste)
using virgin materials, as well as less air and
water pollution.
Scarce forest and jungle ecosystems can be
conserved when minerals and elemental
metals that have already been removed by
mining are introduced back into manufacturing.
Greenhouse gas emissions are avoided by
taking a Zero Waste approach; it reduces
future landfill methane emissions, and reduces
“embedded” carbon dioxide by saving energy
compared to using virgin materials for
manufacturing purposes.
Limitations
New jobs will be low-to-medium pay
scale, not necessarily competitive with
higher paying jobs, so local work force is
not assured.
Fully implementing plan will likely create
need for more City staff position(s) and
funding.
Limitations
Education must be continuously reinforced
so people understand differences in grades
of materials; for instance, thrift stores suffer
extra costs when “midnight” dumping of low-
quality items (junk sofas, obsolete
televisions) occurs that may be
misunderstood to be charitable donations.
Fees that are identified in the Road to Zero
Waste plan to pay for “culture change”
Limitations
The combined cost to create new waste diversion
facilities to fill gaps in the local infrastructure
(composting, C&D sorting, re-use warehouse) is
estimated to cost $12-$17M.
Increased costs to customers, including low income
households, may result from new collection services
(such as curbside yard debris recycling).
Colorado’s low cost for landfilling, at $18/ton of trash
(compared to $60-100 in other parts of the country),
Limitations
New collection, distribution, and processing
systems could be perceived as an increase to
the way transportation of most waste now
occurs (currently limited to making a short trip
to local landfills).
Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map Attachment 5
ATTACHMENT 5 1.5
Packet Pg. 80
#1.5: Triple Bottom Line Analysis (Road to Zero Waste)