HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 02/12/2013 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 023, 2013, AMENDINGDATE: February 12, 2013
STAFF: Susie Gordon
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 3
SUBJECT
First Reading of Ordinance No. 023, 2013, Amending the City Code to Prohibit the Disposal of Cardboard in the
Community's Waste Stream and to Amend Requirements for Recycling Applicable Solid Waste Collection.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Ordinance will prohibit placing corrugated cardboard boxes/packaging in trash containers for disposal in landfills
by any type of waste generator in Fort Collins, including commercial, industrial, and residential customers.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The proposal to restrict cardboard from being placed in the waste stream originated as a strategy in 2005 to increase
the Fort Collins community’s ability to meet our goal of diverting 50% of trash from landfill disposal, as well as to help
meet goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Over time, as waste diversion rates in Fort Collins have risen,
so has public interest in recovering even more materials of value that continue to be discarded, and the idea of taking
a regulatory approach continued to be discussed.
The City’s 2008 Climate Action Plan included the regulation of cardboard disposal as an implementation strategy that
will reduce trash by an estimated 12,000 tons/year, which represents 9% of the waste stream that Fort Collins sends
for landfill disposal. These 12,000 new tons of recycling per year will also eliminate the emission of 42,000 short
tons/year of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), a greenhouse gas, based on the emissions factor for cardboard
recycling used in US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Waste Reduction Model (WARM). This ordinance is
estimated to quadruple the amount of cardboard (currently 4,200 tons/year) captured through the community’s
recycling efforts.
Two main issues drive the discussion towards cardboard restrictions. First is the long and active history of education,
outreach, and incentive programs already conducted by the City to increase recycling. For twenty years, local efforts
have been abundant and varied, from publicity campaigns and advertising, requirements for trash hauling companies
to offer curbside recycling, to a City-sponsored drop-off facility and community recognition for businesses that integrate
recycling as part of their Climate Wise membership. With only about 25% of the cardboard in the community currently
being recycled, arriving at a decision to place a ban on cardboard in the waste stream is a logical “next step” for local
government to realize community goals and values.
The second issue is the relative magnitude of cardboard in the waste stream. Despite being a highly recyclable
commodity, many trash dumpsters around town are routinely full of cardboard boxes and packaging. Landfill
managers concur, stating they observe that cardboard seems to continue to stream into local landfills. Waste
characterizations conducted by Larimer County every 5-10 years measure cardboard and other discarded paper at
35% of the Larimer County landfill’s contents. Among all the recyclables that are collected in the City’s programs,
cardboard is perhaps the most easily recognized. It doesn’t require lengthy explanations about “chasing arrow” code
numbers to identify cardboard, and it is also one of the most ubiquitous discards that are generated by nearly every
type of business, or residence.
Local Building Code Green Amendments that became effective in 2012 now require cardboard recycling at building
sites; awareness and successful implementation by the Fort Collins construction industry has grown steadily.
Disposal of cardboard is banned by nine states, a number of communities and counties in the U.S., as well as
Washington D.C. Fort Collins has had the experience of enacting a local disposal restriction, with a ban on electronic
waste that was adopted in 2006.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
From an economic standpoint, restrictions on cardboard disposal will add more state and local revenue from the sales
of cardboard for recycling and by creating more jobs in the collection/processing industry. Burying discarded
February 12, 2013 -2- ITEM 3
cardboard in landfills, on the other hand, permanently squanders a resource that is valued at $50/ton or more in
today’s commodity markets.
Diverting more discarded material into the recycling system avoids filling up local landfills unnecessarily, including the
Larimer County Landfill, which is partly owned by the City. Lengthening the life of Larimer County Landfill is a prudent
financial approach that will save taxpayers, at minimum, an estimated $35 million in construction costs for a new
landfill in the future.
Costs to implement a cardboard disposal ban are not anticipated to be excessively burdensome. No-cost recycling
opportunities exist that allow both residents and businesses to recycle. Due to Fort Collins’ Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT)
Ordinance, residential customers do not pay extra for curbside recycling – which includes cardboard – because the
cost for recycling services is required to be bundled into the costs for trash service. Residents and businesses alike
utilize free public drop-off recycling centers operated by the County (co-located at the Larimer County Landfill), and
the City of Fort Collins (1702 Riverside; open seven days a week during daylight hours).
Additionally, many entities already subscribe to recycling services. Any customer, residential or commercial, who
already receives recycling services that is described as “single stream” collection will be unaffected by new trash
restrictions because the single-stream recycling program in Fort Collins includes cardboard. For commercial types
of customers that generate large amounts of cardboard, such as grocery stores and “big box” retailers, it has been
standard practice for the past 15-20 years to subscribe to cardboard recycling services. Often these generators use
compacting units to save on costs, or even bale their cardboard themselves for delivery to buyers in Denver.
The PAYT Ordinance, however, does not apply to commercial or multi-family (MFU) accounts. While haulers are
obliged to provide recycling to these customers whenever it is requested, they are allowed to charge a fee for the
service. Prices vary among haulers and among types of clients; often the price is considered proprietary information.
City staff estimates it costs $15-30 per month to pay a hauler for cardboard recycling at a small or mid-sized business.
By separating cardboard from the trash dumpster or bin, however, customers may be able to reduce the size and/or
collection frequency of their trash dumpsters and therefore can offset recycling costs through lower trash bills.
Compliance with a new ordinance is the responsibility of the generator of the materials. However, hauling companies
will also be required to take initiative in meeting the intent of the Code by declining to remove trash from customers
when a trash container/bin is found to be more than 25% full of cardboard by volume. The City will rely on service
providers to inform customers about the ordinance and urge them to sign up for recycling services offered by the
hauler. Haulers’ employees are not expected to remove cardboard materials from trash containers, as a matter of
safety; this is a specific concern expressed to the City, in light of ever-rising insurance costs for the trash industry.
Enforcement will be carried out on a complaint basis or when City employees observe cardboard in a generator’s
waste stream. With an emphasis placed on warnings and education about the importance of recycling cardboard
during the first 12 months, enforcement will occur gradually, and only in the face of egregious or repeat offenses.
Costs that will accrue to the City as a result of establishing cardboard disposal restrictions largely fall into the
enforcement category; Code Enforcement staff will be trained to take appropriate enforcement actions by writing either
a warning ticket or citation for violation of the Code. However, no additional Code Enforcement staff hiring will be
necessary.
Environmental Services staff will expand outreach to businesses and MFUs through the City’s Waste Reduction and
Recycling Program (WRAP). Assistance will be available for new-to-recycling companies and MFUs in developing
their recycling capabilities. Analyses of MFU recycling programs were recently completed by staff showing that among
Fort Collins’ mid-to-large sized apartment complexes, 72% already provide recycling services to their tenants. This
leaves about 20 of the larger multi-family complexes that do not yet have recycling, which will be a priority group for
staff in conducting outreach activities. Staff will also actively work with those customers for whom physical barriers -
space constraints, too-small trash enclosures, and tight alley access – make it especially challenging to initiate
cardboard recycling.
Costs for expanded outreach services will be absorbed in WRAP’s existing program budget for 2013-14. After
conducting assessments for specific customers, staff will help prepare tailored on-site plans, offer training for business’
employees, and potentially locating funds to expedite the transition to recycling. For instance, if tenants at a cluster
of businesses are willing to collaborate, a good choice might be to lease compacting equipment that makes it easier
to store cardboard for collection/recycling.
February 12, 2013 -3- ITEM 3
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
An ordinance that prohibits disposal of cardboard in the community’s waste stream will reduce the amount of trash
that is sent to landfills from Fort Collins. An initial result, therefore, will be an extension to the life spans of several
landfills in the area. Of particular interest is the stewardship of the Larimer County Landfill, jointly owned by the City
of Fort Collins (50% of the original site of the Larimer County Landfill, located on the north half of Section 9, T6N,
R69W on South Taft Hill Road), Larimer County (25%), and the City of Loveland (25%). Postponing the need to
replace the aging landfill is an important consideration for regional taxpayers, who, in the future may be faced with a
decision whether to allocate money (minimum $35 million in today’s dollars) to construct new facilities for waste
disposal.
As the cardboard ordinance becomes fully realized, an estimated 12,000 tons/year of cardboard will be diverted from
the trash and into the recycling stream. This diverted material will reduce the amount of trash generated in Fort Collins
by 9% (from 130,000 tons, down to 118,000 tons per year). Fort Collins’ waste diversion will therefore rise by an
estimated 6%, accelerating our progress toward meeting the adopted goal of 50% diversion.
Additionally, using formulae provided by the US EPA for modeling greenhouse gases that are avoided through
recycling activities, the cardboard ordinance will have the ultimate effect of preventing 42,000 short tons/year of carbon
dioxide equivalents (CO2e) from being emitted to the atmosphere. By taking this action, Fort Collins will also
accelerate progress at meeting the community’s goals for greenhouse gas reductions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Support for cardboard restrictions was voted on by the Natural Resources Advisory Board, and by the Air Quality
Advisory Board at their respective meetings in November, 2012.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
During fall of 2012, meetings were held with members of the trash/recycling hauling industry, Chamber of Commerce
members and staff, and a variety of City staff to discuss the implications of new restrictions on cardboard disposal.
Newspaper articles and columns, television bulletins, and spotlights on City webpages and utility bill inserts were
published, and a public Open House was conducted on November 8, 2012, to introduce the proposal to the
community. Comments from citizens and from specially affected interests were reported during a work session with
the City Council on November 27.
A roundtable meeting was recently held in January that was attended by a cross-section of 15 members of Fort Collins’
business community, including small-to-medium-sized businesses, property management companies, the Downtown
Development Authority, and managers of multi-family housing. A summary of comments and questions raised by this
“focus group” is provided in Attachment 3.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Session Summary, November 27, 2012
2. Roundtable meeting with members of the Fort Collins business community, January 16, 2013
3. Air Quality Advisory Board minutes, November 19, 2012
4. Natural Resources Advisory Board minutes, November 27, 2012
5. Powerpoint presentation
Page 1 of 2
Environmental Services
215 N. Mason
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221-6600
970.224-6177 - fax
fcgov.com
MEMO
DATE: November 29, 2012
TO: Mayor Weitkunat and Councilmembers
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
FROM: Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner
RE: Follow-up from November 27 Council Worksession: Increase Cardboard Recycling
The City Council reviewed an initiative to increase the amount of cardboard that gets diverted from
the waste stream and into the recycling system at their November 27 meeting.
1. Staff was directed to prepare an ordinance for the Council’s review that would prohibit the
disposal of corrugated cardboard in the community’s waste stream (trash), including
requiring trash haulers to refuse collection of trash bins or Dumpsters that on visual
inspection are estimated to contain more than 25% corrugated cardboard, by volume.
2. Staff understands that current expectations for the program to enforce the new ordinance
would generally be as follows:
a. After an initial transition period of 12 months after Council’s adoption, Code
Enforcement staff would primarily use warnings to enforce the prohibition.
b. After 6 months of enforcement primarily by warning, Code Enforcement staff would
focus efforts on enforcement against persons who have received warnings, and
particularly those who have received multiple warnings.
3. The enforcement program would be accompanied by a robust education, outreach, and
assistance program for trash customers to help them transition to a cardboard recycling
program. Staff will explore opportunities to:
a. Provide zero- or low-interest loans or grants to commercial customers to assist them
in purchasing or leasing recycling equipment, and
b. Purchase specialized equipment such as cardboard collection bins that the City could
make available on loan to small businesses for up to 12 months.
4. Staff understands that it is important to recognize the role of the private trash/recycling
businesses in Fort Collins in helping their customers achieve compliance with the City
ordinance. The City would expect to support:
a. Economic development opportunities for Larimer County and for private businesses
that occur as a result of capturing more cardboard out of the waste stream, and
ATTACHMENT 1
2
b. Outreach to businesses that deliver large items such as appliances and furniture to
encourage them, after completing the delivery, to bring cardboard packing/boxes
from these items back to the store for recycling.
Staff will provide a draft ordinance for first reading at the first meeting in February for the
Council’s further consideration.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 1
Notes from a Round‐table Meeting – January 16, 2013
Comments on Proposed City Ordinance to Restrict Disposal of Cardboard in the Waste Stream
City of Fort Collins, CO
Attendees: Susan Kirkpatrick (Savory Spice Shop), Carrie Ann Gillis (owner of multi‐family complexes and business,
Northern Colorado Rental Housing Association), Derek Getto and Hannah Baltz‐Smith (Downtown Development
Association), Pat Purvis (Waste Management, Inc.), Becca Walkinshaw, Kari Gallegos‐Doering and Levi Gallegos (Gallegos
Sanitation, Inc.), Ray Meyer and John Puma (Ram Waste Systems, Inc.), Dwight Hall (Coopersmiths’s), Mark Mayfield
(Crescent Electric Supply), Scott McKelvey (Front Range Community College), Jamie Gormley (Centennial Recycling), and
Lucinda Smith, Caroline Mitchell, Susie Gordon, and Matt Gibbs (City staff)
1. What happens when contaminants are placed in the cardboard recycling by our tenants? It’s not easy when
you’ve got a 220‐unit complex that houses 700 people to get them to follow recycling guidelines.
2. The main issue is education, and being pro‐active is very important. Our hauling company goes to the managers
of complexes and works with them to achieve better recycling by their residents.
3. Illegal dumping is an issue for apartment managers because it increases trash costs, but also, because we see
contamination in our recycling bins from non‐residents dumping their trash on us.
4. At the Opera Galleria, recycling dumpsters are often over full. A cardboard ordinance could make this happen
even more frequently. Would we need to have more dumpsters in the alley, which is already crowded?
Merchants can’t fix the problem because the trash/recycling account is handled by the property management
company for Opera Galleria.
5. At my business, we changed the size of the dumpsters for both recycling and trash and changed the frequency of
how often they’re emptied. It ended up costing $15 less per month. But it’s true that if/when the recycling
dumpster is full, cardboard will end up going into trash.
6. Having enough space to add dumpsters is an issue, especially in alley ways.
7. Will it be appropriate to stay with single‐stream recycling, in which the cardboard is allowed (YES)? Businesses
many not yet be sure if it they will go to a cardboard‐only program or use the single stream option of putting
cardboard in with other recyclables. People are less likely to recycle if materials have to be separated rather
than go into a single stream recycling bin.
8. Why does the City want to jump to an ordinance? Should be looking at the additional opportunities that exist,
like providing more education. At Front Range Community College, we get dumped on regularly by the public
with trash, couches, mattresses, etc. We don’t want to be penalized for problems created by illegal dumpers.
9. Businesses are scared of anything “mandatory”; it creates the fear of costs being jacked up and new services
that are cost prohibitive for the business to absorb. One idea for a business is to put in dumpsters with a fixed
lid that have only a slotted opening, for putting in cardboard, and make it available for neighboring businesses to
use, too. Maybe the haulers could make it cheaper to provide cardboard recycling services if they know they’re
getting a reliably clean stream of cardboard.
10. Cardboard is a commodity that fluctuates in price. Lately prices have been stagnant because China has stopped
buying recyclables. Does the City plan to look at getting some share of the money for cardboard recycled in Fort
Collins (NO)? Is the City going to suggesting residents get another bin that would be dedicated to cardboard
(NO)? Sometimes it’s difficult to get cardboard into recycling carts.
11. Can haulers incentivize cardboard recycling by charging more for trash service and lowering costs for recycling?
12. If a cardboard ordinance is passed, our hauling company will have to go out to purchase new recycling
containers for cardboard, which affects prices. That means costs will go up for our customers. Plus, it’s going to
take a while for us to get new containers ordered and delivered.
13. Cardboard is a more valuable commodity when it’s collected separately, instead of mingled with other
recyclables in the single‐stream collection program.
14. We (haulers) see new buildings going up where the architects are still not doing a good job of making the
enclosures big enough to fit both trash and recycling containers. Recycling bins end up having to sit outside the
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 2
enclosures. Speaking for my company, we want to see cardboard recycling happen, and to respond to our
customers’ desire for more recycling. Increasingly, business customers want to be able to recycle as a way to
reduce their carbon footprint.
15. Taking this regulatory approach seems disappointing ‐ and worrisome that it will cost money for my small
business. The City’s Waste Reduction & Recycling program (NOTE: WRAP started in 2011) hasn’t had enough
time to let a program have an impact. The City needs to work with organizations like the DBA, DDA, and
Chamber to find solutions.
16. It’s surprising to hear that cardboard is being singled out ‐ I didn’t know it was such an issue.
17. Old Town merchants and businesses need to be able to have a place to recycle. When the DDA redeveloped the
Old Firehouse Alley and the Montezuma‐Fuller Alley, they installed new trash/recycling enclosures. Before, only
6 of 21 businesses on Firehouse Alley, and 19 of 37 businesses on Montezuma‐Fuller were recycling. Now all of
them have access to recycling stations; we’ve seen that if it’s there, businesses will use it. The hauler has
increased collection services to 7 days/week to keep up with the recycling. The DDA further supports recycling
by paying to lease privately owned spots in Old Town where there is space to place more recycling bins.
18. Why is the City again singling out MFU residents? Multi‐family residents don’t generate a lot of cardboard
except during move‐ins, and we provide an exchange program for boxes during move‐in, move‐out. As costs go
up, they get passed on to the residents, which contradict City goals for providing affordable housing. Dumpster
size is an issue; if we have to add a cardboard bin into the enclosure, it forces us to get a smaller trash dumpster
that has to be emptied more frequently. This creates more trash trucks in our parking lots and the extra wear
causes more repaving costs for the apartment manager. It seems like the City is targeting MFUs. Apartment
managers don’t want to have the vicarious liability of their tenants’ bad behavior. It seems punitive to us.
19. It’s too soon to pass an ordinance; the City should provide more drop‐off centers, especially in the neighborhood
of CSU.
20. What is the estimated cost per customer (NOTE: staff provided an estimate of $20/month for a small‐to‐mid‐
sized business to add regular cardboard recycling services)?
21. True, there will need be more containers out there for collecting cardboard, in a variety of sizes but from the
perspective of this hauler, there won’t be a lot more cost incurred for purchasing containers because they have
a good inventory of bins. Our accounts, like the community, are very culturally diverse; from one MFU to the
next, there is a different culture. The success of each MFU’s success at recycling differs depending on that
cultural among residents.
22. Education is the key, and “carrots” are better than sticks.
23. We have an electronics ban, but from the perspective of this hauler, folks don’t abide by it and 40% of the
population doesn’t know the e‐waste ban exists.
24. It would be best to give the community more opportunity to recycle cardboard without having to pay extra. For
instance, use grant money to buy large cardboard compactors and set them up around the community.
Businesses could host a bin at their location in exchange for advertising on the side of the bin.
25. The DDA can cite an example of a merchant that initiated recycling but didn’t see cost savings on their trash bill.
26. Buy‐in from the top of an MFU or biz makes a huge difference. If managers don’t want to do it, they won’t do
the education or make the recycling easy or part of the norm. Last summer a large student MFU worked with
the City’s WRAP program to successfully develop a hybrid recycling program – the same complex that had
discontinued its recycling program five years previously because of contamination problems.
27. Consider recommending businesses and homes look at installing built‐in compactors for trash or recycling.
28. Our restaurant tries hard to recycle. A neighboring business made progress by making it hard to thrown trash
away and making recycling easy. Need to make it easier for people to comply than to not.
29. Just because east and west coasts are using a punishment philosophy and bans, doesn’t mean we have to do it.
30. If we make recycling available and affordable, people will do it. Under the right conditions, 6 out of 10
businesses in Old Town will recycle, so there is no need to mandate it.
31. In Old Town, 35‐40% of downtown businesses recycle. But from the perspective of this hauler, people don’t like
to share dumpsters, they don’t want to lose parking spaces, and they don’t have space.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 3
32. It would be disappointing if the time we spent at this meeting today, providing our input didn’t get well reported
in staff’s AIS materials for Council at their February hearing.
ATTACHMENT 2
Page 4
33. (Written commenter, after the meeting) Stated barriers to the ban’s implementation are very real, but not
new…that includes everything from physical space to behavior change and education. Of course explicit
solutions will follow a decision on the ordinance, but it was obvious that people saw these as important enough
barriers to pre‐empt concerns.
The perception of punitive action by the City, especially on landlords/property owners (i.e., non‐users), needs to
be explored further. The range of responses fluctuated between, ‘no big deal’ and ‘deal breaker.’ Second, the
broad application of owner responsibility doesn’t appear to be properly applied in this case (e.g. , the owner
isn’t responsible for a tenant who has a car that leaks oil, so why should it extend to other types of negligence
out of the landlords control? I could be wrong here.) Exploring the application of punitive action further could,
for instance, include what steps need to be taken by a landlord (i.e. , supply education with support of the City)
to meet some requirement and get them off the hook for tenant incompliance. Bottom line for me is there
needs to be flexibility here or else there’s no chance of getting more recycling bins on the ground.
Three big questions I was left with: 1) The fostering of fear around increased cost was overblown. How can a
better message be crafted to address this? My two cents ‐ tenant lease increases would be fractional (if any),
hauler costs were unformulated & hyperbolic depending on the hauler, and individual cost assumptions of
infrastructure measures (totes, bins, space) were too subjective and imprecise to be taken seriously, at least
until further defined. 2) What does a carbon balance look like considering increased transport? See the graph
below...this could be used as a defense against an ordinance. The immediate climate impact of methane isn’t
understood by citizens and is currently under represented. 3) What are the economic impacts of an alternative
to the ordinance (i.e., the proposed non‐ordinance actions taken by the City)? For me, in the absence of an
ordinance, the use of tax dollars for some other (or enhanced) effort is still a ‘cost’ to all these businesses.
ATTACHMENT 3
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Mayor Weitkunat and Councilmembers
FROM: Greg McMaster, Chair, Air Quality Advisory Board
CC: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
DATE: November 19, 2012
SUBJECT: AQAB Cardboard Disposal Recommendation
______________________________________________________________________________
The AQAB has been aware of the idea of banning cardboard from landfill disposal since the
adoption of the 2008 Climate Action Plan. In 2012, the Board received a memo from staff in
October and a presentation on the topic in November. Keeping cardboard out of the landfill will
reduce the greenhouse gas emissions and support the City’s Climate Action Plan goals, and it
will increase the life of the landfill and deliver other environmental and air quality benefits. For
these reasons the Board voted unanimously to recommend that Council adopt an ordinance
banning cardboard from landfill disposal.
Please contact me if you have any questions or want additional detail on the recommendation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.
David Dietrich moved and Scott Groen seconded a motion to recommend that Council adopt an
ordinance to prohibit cardboard from being placed in the waste stream.
Vote 7-0-0; motion passed unanimously on November 19, 2012.
ATTACHMENT 4
2
MEMORANDUM
FROM THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
Date: November 27, 2012
To: Fort Collins Mayor and City Council
From: City of Fort Collins Natural Resources Advisory Board
Subject: Cardboard Recycling Initiative
At the meeting of the Natural Resources Advisory Board on Monday night, November 26, staff
provided a presentation on an initiative to prohibit the disposal of cardboard in Fort Collins’
waste stream.
Harry Edwards moved and Joe Piesman seconded a motion to make the following
recommendation to Council:
The NRAB supports prohibiting disposal of cardboard in the municipal solid waste
stream.
A vote was taken and Dr. Edward’s motion passed 4 – 1. Board member Paul Nastu explained
that he did not support the motion out of concern that paying for cardboard recycling services
would be too much of a financial hardship and resource burden on businesses.
Please feel free to contact me regarding the NRAB’s recommendation on this issue.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joe Piesman, Vice-Chair
Natural Resources Advisory Board
cc: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
1
City Council Adjourned Meeting
February 12, 2013
Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner
An Ordinance to
Restrict Disposal of
Cardboard in the Waste
Stream
ATTACHMENT 5
2
November 27, 2012: Council directed staff to
draft an ordinance for adoption
Prohibiting Cardboard from
Being Placed in the Trash
as a strategy to divert more discarded material
from being sent to landfills for disposal
3
As recommended in the City’s
2008 Climate Action Plan, regulations to
restrict cardboard in the trash would:
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions
• increase the life of the landfill
• help meet our waste diversion goals
4
Why Cardboard? Why Now?
• Even though cardboard is recyclable, a lot continues
to end up in landfills
– Cardboard makes up the bulk of the “paper fiber”
category of waste in landfill inventories (~35%)
• After 20 years of recycling education, outreach and
incentives, the logical next step in Fort Collins is to try
a regulatory approach for cardboard
5
Cardboard’s Significance
12,000 tons of cardboard discarded yearly in Fort
Collins; only 4,200 tons/year currently get recycled
• These 12,000 un-recycled tons represent:
– 9% of community’s overall trash stream
– potential to increase Fort Collins’ waste
diversion level another 6%, helping reach
adopted community waste reduction goals
6
Benefits of Cardboard Ordinance
• Recycling bulky cardboard reduces trash bills for
many customers (although not all)
• 42,000 short tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
(GHG) emissions avoided, contributing to
community goals to slow climate change
• Potential $500,000/year from sale of cardboard
commodities
– revenue benefits state, local economy
7
Benefits of Cardboard Ordinance
• Extends lifespan at landfills
– postpones $35+ million costs for future
replacement of Larimer County landfill (partly
owned by City of Fort Collins)
• Saves $216,000/year in landfill fees ($18/ton) that
will accrue to customers/haulers
• Creates > 10 times more jobs than handling
cardboard as trash for landfill disposal
8
Concerns Expressed by Businesses
• Recycling services average $15-30 per month;
new costs will get passed on to customers
• Property managers, landlords don’t want to be
penalized for tenants’ non-compliance
• Space constraints for recycling bins in alleys,
trash enclosures
• Before taking regulatory approach, City could
provide more education and incentives
9
Ordinance to Prohibit Disposal of
Corrugated Cardboard in Waste Stream
• Restrictions apply to all trash accounts
– Single-family and multi-family residential
– Business and commercial generators
• Compliance is responsibility of owner or occupant
of the property which generates the cardboard
• Relies on hauling companies to explain new
cardboard disposal restrictions to customers and
provide recycling services
10
Ordinance (continued)
• Haulers may not collect trash from customers
when containers hold > 25% cardboard by volume
– Haulers’ workers will not handle trash to
remove cardboard for recycling
– No lost payment for refusing to remove trash
containing > cardboard (Pay-as-you-throw
Ordinance)
• Compliance for 12 months after adoption oriented
to education/outreach; Code Enforcement will
primarily issue warnings to enforce the ordinance
11
Ordinance (continued)
• Environmental Services will actively provide
education and outreach to community as well as:
– Special assistance program for cardboard
recycling start-ups
– Training for businesses’ employees
– Help resolving individual sites’ unique barriers
to recycling
– Public recognition to businesses for successful
recycling efforts
12
“How to Collapse a Box”
video and other user-friendly
tools will be added to City
outreach materials, website
13
QUESTIONS?
ORDINANCE NO. 023, 2013
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
TO PROHIBIT THE DISPOSAL OF CARDBOARD IN THE
COMMUNITY'S WASTE STREAM AND TO AMEND REQUIREMENTS
FOR RECYCLING APPLICABLE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
WHEREAS, in 1964, the City first enacted licensure requirements for solid waste collection
services with the adoption of Ordinance No. 42, 1964, which licensure provisions have since been
modified, and repealed and reenacted, and are now set out in Chapter 15, Article XV of the City
Code; and
WHEREAS, in 1985, the City first began to investigate programs to educate the public about
recycling and solid waste reduction; and
WHEREAS, in December 1999, the City Council adopted Resolution 1999-139, which set
goals for diverting 35% of the community’s waste stream from landfill diversion by 2004, and 50%
of the waste stream by 2010; and
WHEREAS, in 2005, the City Council directed staff to develop comprehensive plans for
reaching waste diversion goals, during which the City calculated that 12,000 tons/year of cardboard
were entering local landfills from Fort Collins as part of the waste stream; and
WHEREAS, the disposal of 12,000 tons/year of cardboard material from Fort Collins’ waste
stream contributes an estimated 42,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, a damaging greenhouse
gas, to the earth’s atmosphere; and
WHEREAS, the City’s 2008 Climate Action Plan sets a goal of reducing Fort Collins’
greenhouse gas emissions by 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 80% below 2005 levels by 2050;
and
WHEREAS, the monetary value of 12,000 tons/year of cardboard that is sent to landfills for
disposal from the Fort Collins community is currently $600,000 in commodity markets; and
WHEREAS, the number of jobs in the recycling industry that it takes to process cardboard
is calculated to be ten times as great as the number of jobs that it takes to bury cardboard in landfills,
so that recycling results in economic benefit and greater revenue for communities, including Fort
Collins; and
WHEREAS, in addition to lost commodity rebates and fewer jobs, the landfill disposal of
12,000 tons/year of cardboard costs $216,000 in current landfill gate fees; and
WHEREAS, the disposal of 12,000 tons/ year of cardboard in landfills that could otherwise
be recycled reduces the lifespan of local landfills, including the Larimer County landfill; and
WHEREAS, the ownership of the Larimer County landfill is shared by the City; and
WHEREAS, the need to build a new landfill to serve the community’s future needs will
create significant new costs for taxpayers; and
WHEREAS, residential customers of trash hauling companies who live in single-family
homes or in multi-family complexes of fewer than eight units are able to receive curbside cardboard
recycling services at no additional cost on their trash bills; and
WHEREAS, all businesses and residential generators of waste cardboard may take cardboard
to be recycled at no cost at the City’s recycling drop-off facility; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the licensure provisions for solid waste haulers in Chapter 15 of
the City Code, Article II of Chapter 12 of the City Code also addresses generally the collection and
disposal of solid waste, currently referred to in those provisions as “garbage and refuse”; and
WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing, the City Council has considered the proposed
amendments to Chapter 12 and Chapter 15 described below, and has determined that the
amendments will promote the policy objectives and public purposes described above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated herein as findings of the
City Council.
Section 2. That Section 12-16 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of a new definition “Recyclable cardboard” which reads in its entirety as follows:
Recyclable cardboard shall mean corrugated cardboard, and shall include, but not be
limited to, materials used in packaging or storage containers that consist of three or
more layers of Kraft paper material, at least one of which is rippled or corrugated.
Cardboard shall be considered recyclable cardboard regardless of whether it has
glue, staples or tape affixed, but not if it is permanently attached to other packing
material or a non-paper liner, waxed cardboard, or cardboard contaminated with oil,
paint, blood or other organic material.
Section 2. That Section 12-22 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Sec. 12-22. Required Recycling of Electronic Equipment.
(a) No person shall place electronic equipment in refuse containers for collection,
nor shall any person or bury or otherwise dispose of electronic equipment in or on
private or public property within the City. All electronic equipment must either be
-2-
stored and presented or delivered to a licensed solid waste collector for recycling in
accordance with the provisions of Subsection 15-413(e), or delivered directly to a
qualified recycling facility for electronic equipment.
(b) No person shall place recyclable cardboard in refuse containers for
collection, nor shall any person bury or otherwise dispose of recyclable cardboard in
or on private or public property within the City. All recyclable cardboard must either
be stored and presented or delivered to a licensed solid waste collector for recycling
in accordance with the provisions of Subsection 15-413(e), or delivered directly to
a qualified recycling facility appropriate for recyclable cardboard.
(c) It shall be the duty of any owner or occupant of any premises to ensure that
bags or containers do not contain materials required to be recycled under this Section
when such bags or containers are offered for solid waste collection.
Section 3. That Section 12-26 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by to read as follows:
Sec. 12-26. Violations and penalties.
Any person who violates § 12-18 of this Article, or who violates § 12-22(b), or § 12-
22(c) as it relates to § 12-22(b), commits a civil infraction and is subject to the
penalty provisions of Subsection 1-15(f). Any person who violates any other
provision of this Article also commits a misdemeanor. All such misdemeanor
violations are subject to a fine or imprisonment in accordance with § 1-15.
Section 4. That Section 15-411 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the addition of a new definition “Recyclable cardboard” which reads in its entirety as follows:
Recyclable cardboard shall mean corrugated cardboard, and shall include, but not be
limited to, materials used in packaging or storage containers that consist of three or
more layers of Kraft paper material, at least one of which is rippled or corrugated.
Cardboard shall be considered recyclable cardboard regardless of whether it has
glue, staples or tape affixed, but not if it is permanently attached to other packing
material or a non-paper liner, waxed cardboard, or cardboard contaminated with oil,
paint, blood or other organic material.
Section 5. That Section 15-412 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to add a new subsection (e), to read as follows:
(e) Refusal of recyclable materials. In the event that a collector refuses to collect
any bag or container because it contains materials required to be recycled under
Section 12-22, the collector shall not be required under this Section to credit the
customer for such refused bag or container. A collector shall not collect materials
required to be recycled under Section 12-22, except that, with respect to recyclable
-3-
cardboard, a collector may, but shall not be obligated to, accept any bag or container
that has reasonably been determined, based upon visual inspection, to contain no
more than twenty-five (25) percent recyclable cardboard by volume.
Section 6. That Section 15-413 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
by the deletion of subparagraph (e) as follows:
Sec. 15-413. Recycling requirement.
. . .
(e) Recycling only of electronic equipment.
(1) No collector shall collect for disposal any electronic equipment, regardless
of whether such electronic equipment has been placed or set out for disposal.
(2) Collection of electronic equipment for recycling shall be at each collector's
option; provided, however, that no collector providing collection services for
electronic equipment may dispose of any such electronic equipment. Instead, each
such collector must deliver any collected electronic equipment for recycling at a
qualified recycling facility for electronic equipment.
Section 7. That Section 15-414 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended
to read as follows:
Sec. 15-414. Designation of recyclable materials.
(a) The City Manager shall, on or before the 30th day of November of each year,
after consultation with the Larimer County Board of Commissioners, the Natural
Resources Advisory Board and representatives of the licensed solid waste collectors
operating within the City, determine which items shall be designated for recycling
collection based upon the following criteria:
(1) Local, state and federal laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, the
requirements of this Article;
(2) Potential for waste stream reduction;
(3) Availability of markets;
(4) Market price;
(5) Safety factors and risks of transportation; and
(6) Risks of commingling of liquid wastes.
-4-
(b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, collection for recycling of electronic
equipment shall be at each collector’s option; provided, however, that no collector
providing collection services for electronic equipment may dispose of any such
electronic equipment, but instead shall deliver any collected electronic equipment for
recycling at a qualified recycling facility for electronic equipment.
(bc) All collectors shall be responsible for notifying their customers of the items
identified to be recycled.
(cd) The City Manager is authorized to promulgate such rules and regulations as
are necessary to effectuate the implementation and enforcement of this Article.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 12th day of
February, A.D. 2013, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of February, A.D. 2013.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of February, A.D. 2013.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
-5-